Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 41  All

Author Topic: Asper's Cards  (Read 72993 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4130
  • Respect: +4525
    • View Profile
Asper's Cards
« on: August 24, 2013, 12:25:40 pm »
+25

"Asper's Cards" were created with the main goal to make original but relatively easy to understand cards by using existing game mechanics. As most mechanics of Dominion are visited, the collection also works as a Treasure Chest, with each official set up to Empires having at least 2 cards dedicated to it (let's call this 25-card subset "Dominion - Legacy"). The "set" currently has: A card you can spend more than one action on, a VP card that attacks to become worth more, a card that starts out in the trash, a $2 curser, a card that will cost you VP when you gain it, a Potion Event and at least one horrible pun. This list also includes my Spellcasters, which can cast Spells you previously bought, and Edicts, a new mechanic that allows more general rules changes than Landmarks or Events do. Furthermore, you'll also find the latest state of the Seasons set, which Co0kieL0rd and I started and which introduces cards that depend on the game phase, as well as 8 cards designed for use in Team Dominion.

Click images to embiggen.

Templates:



Normal Kingdom Cards:








Events:



Spellcasters & Spells (check for rules below):




Seasons (check for rules below, go here to check out the original thread by Co0kieL0rd and me):



Team cards (check for rules below):


Edicts (check for rules below):



Additional cards:



Split pile:



Outtakes:




Templates






Individual cards:

Normal Kingdom Cards



A very, very old idea that predates Dark Ages. Unlike Poor House, you don't mind gaining these so much, as they remove themselves from your deck. It has never been a problem and is surprisingly fun to play in my experience. Few tests with serious Dominion players but a classic with the family.





A Silver that forces you to topdeck cards. Making the topdecking optional would have created a boring old Silver+ for , so i went with mandatory. Not really inspired by any expansion, it's still kind of a Seaside-Treasure.





Guilds is the only expansion that doesn't have a junker which uses an expansion-specific mechanic. Sheriff is my attempt at one. I suggest to use Embargo Tokens for Sheriff, because they don't get enough love. Might be a bit too powerful even...





A Ruined Village or Village now, a Herald next turn. It might be a bit strong at , but its unreliability is quite some downside. Also i suggest you build your deck first if you want to turn over more than just Coppers.





The idea here was to have a split pile where players that did not get many of the first half actually have a higher incentive to get it than those that got them. And of course, the images belong into one picture. Not sure they aren't too strong. Curiously, both cards get weaker the more players there are, but are working against each other.





A Reserve-Island. I dropped the cost to 3$ for now, but may have to cost 4$ after all. Probably best with Workshop variants.





Similar to LastFootnote's Wanderer, in that it moves from player to player. However, I made my version give a nonterminal bonus so it's never harmful to a player, and increased the on-gain bonus to something that's always useful. Also allowed me to do the "coin token for pay" concept with a natural limitation on how often you can do it.





Based on GeeJo's Gambling Den, Sawmill is a Workshop that can gain cards and cycles, but trades reliability for that. It was called Mill before an official card took that name.





I wanted a card that uses Debt as a drawback. Originally this was a Lab+ (with +3 Cards), but somehow the smaller versions always seem easier to balance. I tried this at $2, but it was just too easy to pick up that way.





A card that exchanges one card from your hand for another card. It only gains differently named cards to make sure Well isn't abused to burn down the Province pile. The top part is just something that wasn't there at that time. +3 Actions on their own are hard to cost, but this version works decently. Was named Fountain before Empires came along.





Farmer is a Smithy variant that draws less, but better cards. Or at least they are better if your deck has a lot of variety. In case the wording confuses you: You don't have to pick up the duplicates, it can be any 2 cards revealed while searching for a duplicate. Less duplicates, more choice, more Cornucopia. One would assume it can go really bananas, but has worked out fine so far. Part of that is that, when your engine is fully set up, Smithy will likely draw the same cards, just more of them. It was called Blacksmith before Royal Blacksmith came up.





I'm giving this another shot because it used to be relatively popular. Will the Baron's and/or Duchess' kid finally break through?





Before Wine Merchant was revealed, i assumed a Reserve would need you to buy a Victory card so it could return from your Tavern Mat. When that didn't come, i made Hunter. As the play effect sifts, it counters the VP gain.





This is based on an idea eHalcyon had. It's a milder Swamp Hag that makes cards more expensive by adding debt to their cost.





Originally a kingdom card, Road has become non-supply to make sure there's always a Village to play it with, as kingdoms without one would really have made the card look bad. Also, as it's not in the supply, you can't put your +1 Action token on it, hooray! Champion still works, though.





Assemble had to be nerfed for the endgame by putting its cards on top. Originally it just allowed you to gain two cards that together costed 3$ more than the trashed card, but boy, was that hard to word. Also, nobody ever did it. It's now one of the few base-inspired cards.





Not much to say about this. I first wanted this to cost 4$, so I considered a version that gave each other player a Coin Token on buy. Maybe debt would also have been a solution. Or 5$, why not.





This started out gaining you Silvers, which usually couldn't compete. Now it has you gain any $3, which still includes Silver. Was called Paddock originally, then Artisan, until an official card... Well, i probably should get used to it. Also, it wasn't optional for a long time. Why the hell was that?





I wanted a Victory-Attack, so here it is. It's very, very simple, and the bottom part interacts ever-so-slightly with the top. I like it, even though it doesn't look as special on first glimpse. Fun fact: Maze in german is "Irrgarten", which translates to "Insane Garden". Just in case you wondered where the name comes from.





Werothegreat complained there was no card starting with Z, so i made Zombie. Obviously, you need a Necromancer first, who resurrects Zombies, which in turn kill your opponents' cards so they can again be resurrected by Necromancer. The fact that Necromancers can't play Necromancers is mostly to avoid a situations where several players trash each other's Necromancers, and the first to play one gains them all.





Used to be "Olympic Village" (designed to look like a promo), but I decided to make it a bit more Dominion-y. A tiny bit. Only thing I regret about this is that the image looks a bit too much like Maze's...





An attack that lets you choose whether your opponents can keep their hand or have to draw a new one. For a long time I was convinced that it enabled you to make your opponent's hand too much worse, so it had a complex second part to avoid pins. I'm trying it without that now. At least it cycles...





Yet another really simple one. Making a Werewolf card that you can reveal Silver to has been in my head a long time, but only recently it came together in the most obvious way.





Cost reduction and gaining on one card is good. So good i had to salvage my old idea from Vampire and make Minister a card that curses you. I'm happy to had a use for this idea, after all. For a while this gave out VP every time you gained a card, but uh, that wasn't fun and the VP on gain is already discouraging enough.





Being an optional cantrip trasher, Homunculus is slowed down in how you gain it. On a board without other cards, you practically buy this in two steps - first when you buy the Potion, and secondly when you exchange that Potion for the Homunculus. This went through a lot of versions, and at one point got nerfed by being set aside on buy to be gained after your next shuffle. Later i realized that i could avoid introducing a new mechanic by costing it at and trashing the Potion when you got it. The name just had to be - after all, it hatches from a bottle.





Alacazam! That Copper in your hand is now a Potion. Incantation "sacrifices" a card in your hand to call in another card. For Curses, it chancellors your deck and triggers all your Tunnels. Looks like those alchemists finally found a way to make Gold, after all.




Events



Trashers and junkers rarely are skippable. Let's make it a bit harder for them once in a while. This started out as an Event, then became an Edict, then went back to being an Event. Being an Edict means that buying order isn't important anymore, but it can be done as an Event, so I decided to stay with my principle of doing stuff with existing mechanics, if possible.





All Villages gone? Time to move to the City.





Allows you to buy a more expensive thing in two steps, hence the name.





The Remodel-Event... Didn't work. I mean, if you have 4$ in your opening, it's a no-brainer to use it on Estate, and 5$ seems a bit too much for that. The solution was to make it an Expand and cost it higher.





This started as an event that costed $2 and gave a buy as well as a coin token. It ruined the game. Not giving the buy helped, but not that much. This would work, as you can't just stack up tokens that easily without actually playing the game. Also, yes, I'm aware this is the fourth of my Events that allows gaining 5$ cards. Ah well.





Just a little thing I thought of when doing Edicts.





A cost Event, simply because i thought it would be something interesting to try. This one makes any card you played this turn behave like Alchemist, but of course you need to include that Potion in your deck. Will that be worth it? You tell me.




Spellcasters & Spells
When at least one Spellcaster card is in the kingdom, add 2 random Spells to the game and each player gets 5 Spell tokens. Spells can be bought like Events and take one buy to purchase. When you buy a Spell, you "prepare" it - this means you take one of your five Spell tokens and place it on the Spell card. Each Spellcaster allows you to "cast" a Spell. This means removing one of your Spell tokens from a Spell and then doing what the Spell says. Spells are not cards and can never be gained, and you can have a max of 5 prepared. Generally, they are relatively strong effects to add on your card, but you have to re-stock on them regularly - make sure to not run out of buys.


Trickster is the most basic one and seems balanced as is.
Sorcerer also seems decent.
Wizard might be too strong, especially with Glory.
Glory is probably too cheap.
Summoner can now immediately cast the Spell it summoned.




Seasons

Seasons is an expansion Co0kieL0rd and I did together. In it, you use the Season board above (left), which spans 4 Seasons wih 5 sections each. The Season Token starts on the first section of Spring, and is moved forward after the last player in order did their turn (if you want to be picky, it's actually right before the first in play order does their regular turn). Therefore, Spring marks the opening and early phase, Summer the buildup phase, Autumn the late phase and Winter the part where the game will probably end. The cards do different things depending on the current Season. Use the Season Reminder above (right) to make sure you don't forget to move the token.
The cards in this thread are my re-takes of Seasons. Check out the original cards (some of which are more similar to the current take than others) by following this link.


Sojourner returned to an older version, but the Winter effect has changed.
Snow Witch now gives the Curse in hand, to avoid player order mattering as much.
Peltmonger now gives more money all around, and the buy is also on-call.
Student, Ball Room and Sanitarium didn't change.
Restore now uses the wording that is best in Summer. Untested yet.
Timberland now gets progressively worse, though you can tfb it. Considering there are Castles around now, it might be a bit meh.
Plantation now can only move the token backwards and gives a more straightforward bonus.
Mistress is an older idea. Early and late in the game, it keeps your VP cards out of the shuffle. In the middle, it puts good stuff back in. Untested and maybe not that great.




Team cards
These cards are designed for players who'd like to try out team Dominion. Just seperate the players into teams before the beginning of the game, with the team with the most total points at the end winning. You can also have single players participate, so if your family thinks you're all too good a Dominion player and wants to gang up on you, by all means, let them. The single player may buy these cards, but won't get as much out of them. I know this isn't something everybody will want to play, but hey, here it is. Have fun.






Edicts
Edicts are rules changes that go further than Events or Landmarks, triggering at any possible time. Just treat them like Landmarks apart from that.



This first one makes Estates pseudo-Moats at the start of your game. You can only defend once with each Estate, but that should greatly increase your chances of keeping an early Militia or Witch at bay.





Ah well, it's an all-time Bureaucrat. Originally, this required another player to demand that you put the gained card on top of your deck, to avoid a situation where forgetting about this Edict would break the rules. The trigger is easy enought to remember, though, so going with simple mandatoryness seemed okay. I once considered this effect for a Duration attack, but as such an attack would be useless for the majority of most games, I don't regret going with an Edict.





Oh no, another one that punishes you for getting VP! How many of these are there? Just the two, actually. Punishing you for something is something you can't really do with Events (and you can only give -VP with Landmarks), while these specific triggers aren't really worth 10 cards to put them on a Duration-Attack. But one card for an Edict, you can do that.





Diplomacy gives you a bit of sifting during the entire game. Why is it called Diplomacy? Ah well, some just get the name because of fun interactions they have.





5/2 opening on a Mounteband/Chapel board? Don't mind if I do.





A simple take on Alt-Curses. Certainly not the best idea, but well, some people like that kind of thing.





A bit like ThetaSigma12's Landforms, this gives you a benefit if you take a little downside. However, you can use this the entire game. In this case, you won't have to worry about colliding terminals anymore. Just sucks if the Peddler in your hand drew a Village either way.





Do you have one of those relatives that ask you to play giga Dominion with more than 10 kingdom cards in the game? Make them happy with this Edict. Inspired by Nflicker, who suggested 2 additional cards. I went with 3, because if you are overdoing it already, overdo by a lot.





Nflicker also suggested to do an Edict that adds Platinum to the game, possibly without Colony. Well, why not? We already can have super-Colony without Platin thanks to Dominate, you see.





Oh well, these Dukes suddenly got a lot more time. And a few points more to challenge them. More turns = More time to build an engine = more junk to choke on = profit? Also, yes, in a hypothetical real edition this would come with 3 additional Provinces. Which still is just 4 cards, so I'm alright with that.





It's all really simple now, isn't it?





Maybe this should be mandatory? It might throw a bit too much of a wrench into engines, though. It still harms them quite a bit.





Finally you can open double-Throne-Room! Hurrah! Well, actually this goes quite a bit beyond opening. Maybe you want double-Baron, instead? Just, where did those Estates go?





Somebody needs to pay those Bishops and Chapels, pal.





Noo!! Not my money!! Aaaaaargh!!!

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 984
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +680
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #1 on: August 24, 2013, 12:29:45 pm »
+6

First!
Logged

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 984
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +680
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2013, 01:02:40 pm »
+2

Contraption: With the trash option, it may be a bit too strong. But the on-gain clause is unique and looks like it may help counter that. This one needs to be play tested to determine its strength.

Archive/Cryptograph: Interesting! I think the Crytograph should be 1$, 1 VP. I'd almost never let you keep it and Archive may be a bit too strong.

Hospital: Hm, I'm not sure I like this. Seems highly board dependent, which I don't really like. It may be too strong, but I personally would dislike playing with this if it were a printed card.

Parliament: This is so cool! I'd add another row: $5......play it once. Also, change the text to 'an Action card'. 'A card' is a bit too ambiguous.

Charter: This is pretty cool. Usually having the ruins go to players hand is useless, but it's a small nerf that may be needed. Nice one!

Clearance: I'm not exactly seeing the utility of this. I mean, it's good if you're falling behind someone who's rushing Provinces, but it really changes up the dynamic of the games it's in. But if you dont mind those kind of games, then I'd say use it. I can't think of any good replacements for the top, but the placeholder is good enough.

Swamp: So it's an alternate to Curses and Ruins, in a way.  Hm. I don't like that it has 3 sections, and I'm almost not sure you need that second part. And if not, then the third. I just think you need 2 different cards for each idea than trying to shove the two together. But if you don't mind the 3 spaces, then go for it!

Grand Vizier: Cool concept. I've never seen one like it before. 'Gain a Victory $6 or less' is a little clunky and I think you can get away with 'Gain a Duchy'. But you'd know better than me if you can. Really like the concept of having a small hand size, increasing it, but then discarding a card to fuel another one. The top part rocks so I think the only thing that can potentially be changed is the Victory part.

Hedge Maze: Name may need to be changed, but the idea is nice. To simplify it, I'd remove the "on top of your deck" clause.

Dragon: Nifty. Not sure what else to say.

Unicorn: Looks balanced. I'd remove the "Put your deck into your discard pile" and put in "+2 Buys"

Siren: Eh, it's a bit too similiar to Ghost Ship for me. But it's probably alright.

Chameleon: The Setup clause is interesting, but I think that a lot of people already play that way.

Overall, some cool cards here. My favorite has be Grand Vizior, but my least favorite is Hospital. Cool collection, thanks for posting!






Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4130
  • Respect: +4525
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2013, 01:47:13 pm »
0

Wow, thank you for your feedback. I'm glad you like most of them.

Contraption: Will do :)

Cryptograph: The choice is so cards like Thief and Pirate Ship can still trash it.

Hospital: I understand why you wouldn't like it printed - it takes pretty long to resolve it, especially when you have several cards to choose from. I'll playtest and reconsider it.

Parliament: Oops, is of course supposed to be "action card". I figured a 5$ card usually will be played directly, unless you go for Conspirators or handsize matters. I'm really glad you like it :)

Swamp: I put it together that way because both parts are pretty irrelevant on some boards. I'll playtest and rethink this, too. Maybe it's really better to split it for simplicity.

Grand Vizier: Thank you, though i stole the top part from Oasis... I'd really like to give a choice which victory card to gain, so that it interacts with Harem, Nobles and such... Hm...

Hedge Maze: There are not many situations where you'd want it on your deck (Outpost), so probably you're right and it's better without that part or even better directly putting the Curse in hand.

Unicorn: Hmm... Yeah, why not. Not a Trusty Steed bonus, but pretty nice. Thanks for the idea :)

scott_pilgrim

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 976
  • Respect: +1922
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2013, 07:22:28 pm »
+1

For now I'll just comment on the ones that jump out at me:

Hospital - Cantrip victory token gainers don't really work in general; I'm sure you've heard of the problems with it before.  So you gave it a drawback.  I'm not sure that any sufficient drawback for the cantrip victory token card exists, but I'm pretty sure that your solution won't be enough to balance it.  I mean, maybe on many boards it will be, but there's always going to be a board where none of the (non-Hospital) cards costing $4 or less are appealing, and then Hospital just becomes a normal cantrip victory token gainer.

Charter - Non-terminal junking is crazy good.  Familiar limits itself by costing potion (meaning you usually only get one once per shuffle at maximum).  Cultist is at least kind of terminal in that it can only chain with itself, and it can also be drawn dead by other cards.  Charter is a treasure so you can't draw it dead, and there's no restrictions on how many times you can play it per turn.  Gaining to hand is a nice nerf though.  It's probably a power card but maybe not worse than Cultist.

Dragon - I am totally baffled by what you are trying to say in that comment.  If you get to choose whether they discard one card or their whole hand, doesn't that make it stronger than if there was no choice?

Siren - Terminal gold with a plus for $5 probably compares too favorably to Harvest.  Also, the wording is a little weird.  I would say "Each other player sets aside cards from his hand until he has 3 cards in his hand..."  I agree that it's a lot of text for a not-so-exciting effect.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4130
  • Respect: +4525
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #5 on: August 24, 2013, 08:29:35 pm »
0

Thank you for your feedback too, scotty :)

Hospital: Yeah, i'm not really happy with it right now, and that both of you share this view shows it needs work. I'll try to think of something else, but i still like the idea of a cantrip VP card.

Dragon: You don't get to choose the card he discards, just how many. So if a player has a good hand, he will have to discard it, but if he has been hit by several Dragons and now has a terrible hand, he may still discard his worst card and draw a new one (you won't let him discard all those terrible cards). I assume the wording had you think you could choose the card to discard, so i'll make it a bit clearer. (Actually i wasn't sure whether the wording was clear enough and it shows it was not).

Siren: Wording changed and Vanilla placeholder added instead of +3$. I don't know what i was thinking there.

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4130
  • Respect: +4525
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #6 on: August 24, 2013, 08:45:57 pm »
0

So would Swamp look better this way, maybe?

Swamp
0$, Action
+2 Actions
Discard a card. If this is the first time you play a Swamp this turn: +2 Buys
----
In games using this, when you would gain a card and this is in the supply, you may gain this, instead

AJD

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2753
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +3219
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #7 on: August 24, 2013, 09:23:11 pm »
+1

So, I misread Hospital and thought it said you gain a card costing up to $4.

But I wonder how that would actually work out, on a cantrip VP-token earner? The problem with non-terminal token earners, right, is that you can just keep playing them and nothing else and never end the game. But having cantrip VP with mandatory gain solves both those problems: you can't just trash your deck down to those and nothing else, because they re-bloat your deck for you (though okay, if you're lucky you can get a bunch of Sages or Pearl Divers or something), and it definitely forces the game toward an end on piles.
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 976
  • Respect: +1922
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #8 on: August 24, 2013, 09:34:12 pm »
+1

Dragon: You don't get to choose the card he discards, just how many. So if a player has a good hand, he will have to discard it, but if he has been hit by several Dragons and now has a terrible hand, he may still discard his worst card and draw a new one (you won't let him discard all those terrible cards). I assume the wording had you think you could choose the card to discard, so i'll make it a bit clearer. (Actually i wasn't sure whether the wording was clear enough and it shows it was not).
That is a good explanation of how the card plays out (I didn't quite think through it upon first reading), although I'm still a little confused by the comment.  I guess I don't know what the one card choice was added to (if I've seen the original card it's been a while), so maybe that is the source of the confusion?

I was just thinking that the original must have read "+3 cards; Each other player discards his hand. He then draws the same number of cards he discarded." in which case the new version is strictly better.  But maybe that's not what the original card said.

Anyway, I think the wording was clear as it was.  It's a very interesting card, though it may be too weak for $5.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4130
  • Respect: +4525
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #9 on: August 24, 2013, 11:40:32 pm »
0

Dragon: You don't get to choose the card he discards, just how many. So if a player has a good hand, he will have to discard it, but if he has been hit by several Dragons and now has a terrible hand, he may still discard his worst card and draw a new one (you won't let him discard all those terrible cards). I assume the wording had you think you could choose the card to discard, so i'll make it a bit clearer. (Actually i wasn't sure whether the wording was clear enough and it shows it was not).
That is a good explanation of how the card plays out (I didn't quite think through it upon first reading), although I'm still a little confused by the comment.  I guess I don't know what the one card choice was added to (if I've seen the original card it's been a while), so maybe that is the source of the confusion?

I was just thinking that the original must have read "+3 cards; Each other player discards his hand. He then draws the same number of cards he discarded." in which case the new version is strictly better.  But maybe that's not what the original card said.

Anyway, I think the wording was clear as it was.  It's a very interesting card, though it may be too weak for $5.

Well, the former version was this:
+3 Cards
Each other player reveals his hand. You decide whether he has to discard it and draw 5 new cards.

The problem here was that you could keep playing Dragons until everybody had a terrible hand. The decision between two alternatives was a nerf. I'll add it to the comment for others. And yeah, it might be a bit weak because of it.

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4130
  • Respect: +4525
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #10 on: August 24, 2013, 11:44:07 pm »
0

So, I misread Hospital and thought it said you gain a card costing up to $4.

But I wonder how that would actually work out, on a cantrip VP-token earner? The problem with non-terminal token earners, right, is that you can just keep playing them and nothing else and never end the game. But having cantrip VP with mandatory gain solves both those problems: you can't just trash your deck down to those and nothing else, because they re-bloat your deck for you (though okay, if you're lucky you can get a bunch of Sages or Pearl Divers or something), and it definitely forces the game toward an end on piles.

The idea was to give others the choice of bringing the game closer to it's end. Obviously doesn't work out the way i wanted to.

AJD

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2753
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +3219
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #11 on: August 25, 2013, 12:39:19 am »
+1

So, I misread Hospital and thought it said you gain a card costing up to $4.

But I wonder how that would actually work out, on a cantrip VP-token earner? The problem with non-terminal token earners, right, is that you can just keep playing them and nothing else and never end the game. But having cantrip VP with mandatory gain solves both those problems: you can't just trash your deck down to those and nothing else, because they re-bloat your deck for you (though okay, if you're lucky you can get a bunch of Sages or Pearl Divers or something), and it definitely forces the game toward an end on piles.

The idea was to give others the choice of bringing the game closer to it's end. Obviously doesn't work out the way i wanted to.

Maybe not. But I wonder what a cantrip VP token card where you gain a card when you play it would be like? Say, "gain a card costing less than this"—so you must either block the cantrip chain or run piles out or both in order to use it. Not sure if it's a $4 or a $5 or what, though.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4130
  • Respect: +4525
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #12 on: August 25, 2013, 12:53:38 am »
0

Oh yeah, sorry, i got what you wanted but my answer didn't have anything to do with it...  :-[
I'll consider that approach for another version :)
Sorry, i'm very tired...

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4130
  • Respect: +4525
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #13 on: August 25, 2013, 12:10:07 pm »
0

So, I misread Hospital and thought it said you gain a card costing up to $4.

But I wonder how that would actually work out, on a cantrip VP-token earner? The problem with non-terminal token earners, right, is that you can just keep playing them and nothing else and never end the game. But having cantrip VP with mandatory gain solves both those problems: you can't just trash your deck down to those and nothing else, because they re-bloat your deck for you (though okay, if you're lucky you can get a bunch of Sages or Pearl Divers or something), and it definitely forces the game toward an end on piles.

The idea was to give others the choice of bringing the game closer to it's end. Obviously doesn't work out the way i wanted to.

Maybe not. But I wonder what a cantrip VP token card where you gain a card when you play it would be like? Say, "gain a card costing less than this"—so you must either block the cantrip chain or run piles out or both in order to use it. Not sure if it's a $4 or a $5 or what, though.

Hmm... 4$ or 5$, that's tough. I'll playtest it at 5$, it seems still too good at 4$.

Hospital
5$, Action
+1 Card
+1 action
+1 VP
Gain a card costing less than this.

Will also redo the upper half of Swamp, probably. Still have to think about how to push Dragon a bit, +1 Buy seems good, but is too similar to Margrave. And removed Siren for now.

AJD

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2753
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +3219
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #14 on: August 25, 2013, 12:17:50 pm »
+1

Hmm... 4$ or 5$, that's tough. I'll playtest it at 5$, it seems still too good at 4$.

Maybe, but note you might rather gain a lot of $4 cards than $3 card. But I suppose it... (wait for it...) depends on the board.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4130
  • Respect: +4525
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #15 on: August 25, 2013, 02:15:49 pm »
0

Hmm... 4$ or 5$, that's tough. I'll playtest it at 5$, it seems still too good at 4$.

Maybe, but note you might rather gain a lot of $4 cards than $3 card. But I suppose it... (wait for it...) depends on the board.

True, true. But at 4$ it's still a nonterminal cantrip Silver gainer with VP, at the least. The more i think about it, the more i feel it's even stronger than my original version... I'll playtest it at 5$ and, depending on the result, maybe at 4$ and/or 6$.

Edit: Ugh, just playtested it on a random kingdom... And that Kingdom mas Duchess, Develop, Shanty Town, Masquerade, Bishop, Monument, Mining Village, Hospital, Mountebank and Border Village, with Colony. That was soooooooo helpful in estimating the power level of 5$-Hospital...  :-\
(Hospital/Bishop lost to Border Village/Mountebank, but not by much... Probably also didn't help i played terribly. I guess it's too strong, too.)

scott_pilgrim

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 976
  • Respect: +1922
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #16 on: August 25, 2013, 03:35:27 pm »
+1

Dragon: You don't get to choose the card he discards, just how many. So if a player has a good hand, he will have to discard it, but if he has been hit by several Dragons and now has a terrible hand, he may still discard his worst card and draw a new one (you won't let him discard all those terrible cards). I assume the wording had you think you could choose the card to discard, so i'll make it a bit clearer. (Actually i wasn't sure whether the wording was clear enough and it shows it was not).
That is a good explanation of how the card plays out (I didn't quite think through it upon first reading), although I'm still a little confused by the comment.  I guess I don't know what the one card choice was added to (if I've seen the original card it's been a while), so maybe that is the source of the confusion?

I was just thinking that the original must have read "+3 cards; Each other player discards his hand. He then draws the same number of cards he discarded." in which case the new version is strictly better.  But maybe that's not what the original card said.

Anyway, I think the wording was clear as it was.  It's a very interesting card, though it may be too weak for $5.

Well, the former version was this:
+3 Cards
Each other player reveals his hand. You decide whether he has to discard it and draw 5 new cards.

The problem here was that you could keep playing Dragons until everybody had a terrible hand. The decision between two alternatives was a nerf. I'll add it to the comment for others. And yeah, it might be a bit weak because of it.
Okay, that actually makes a lot of sense now.  Thanks for clearing that up.

With the new Hospital gaining for yourself I would think it's way too strong, even at $5.  I don't think we've had a cantrip gainer before (except Upgrade, but that's dependent on trashing).  It does balance for the fact that it's a cantrip victory token gainer, but the benefit of gaining is probably greater than the amount of nerf it gives to the rest of the card (if that makes sense).  Actually, if there are any cantrips costing $4 or less, you can just spam them (presumably they slightly improve your deck, even if they are something like Spy or Pearl Diver), and that won't slow down your victory tokening at all.
Logged

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1066
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1121
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #17 on: August 25, 2013, 09:29:47 pm »
+1

Dragon: You don't get to choose the card he discards, just how many. So if a player has a good hand, he will have to discard it, but if he has been hit by several Dragons and now has a terrible hand, he may still discard his worst card and draw a new one (you won't let him discard all those terrible cards). I assume the wording had you think you could choose the card to discard, so i'll make it a bit clearer. (Actually i wasn't sure whether the wording was clear enough and it shows it was not).
That is a good explanation of how the card plays out (I didn't quite think through it upon first reading), although I'm still a little confused by the comment.  I guess I don't know what the one card choice was added to (if I've seen the original card it's been a while), so maybe that is the source of the confusion?

I was just thinking that the original must have read "+3 cards; Each other player discards his hand. He then draws the same number of cards he discarded." in which case the new version is strictly better.  But maybe that's not what the original card said.

Anyway, I think the wording was clear as it was.  It's a very interesting card, though it may be too weak for $5.

Well, the former version was this:
+3 Cards
Each other player reveals his hand. You decide whether he has to discard it and draw 5 new cards.

The problem here was that you could keep playing Dragons until everybody had a terrible hand. The decision between two alternatives was a nerf. I'll add it to the comment for others. And yeah, it might be a bit weak because of it.
Okay, that actually makes a lot of sense now.  Thanks for clearing that up.

With the new Hospital gaining for yourself I would think it's way too strong, even at $5.  I don't think we've had a cantrip gainer before (except Upgrade, but that's dependent on trashing).  It does balance for the fact that it's a cantrip victory token gainer, but the benefit of gaining is probably greater than the amount of nerf it gives to the rest of the card (if that makes sense).  Actually, if there are any cantrips costing $4 or less, you can just spam them (presumably they slightly improve your deck, even if they are something like Spy or Pearl Diver), and that won't slow down your victory tokening at all.
OIr you make it cost $3 so you have to take an Estate or Copper or something (Or a $2 action)
Logged
I currently imagine mail-mi wearing a dark trenchcoat and a bowler hat, hunched over a bit, toothpick in his mouth, holding a gun in his pocket.  One bead of sweat trickling down his nose.

"Behold, your sins are forgiven you; you are clean before me; therefore, lift up your heads and rejoice." - Doctrine and Covenants 110:5

Jack Rudd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1002
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jack Rudd
  • Respect: +909
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #18 on: August 29, 2013, 09:24:27 pm »
+1

*sets up five-card hand of Highway-Highway-Parliament-Parliament-some draw card*

EDIT: Ah, that doesn't work: it works on the printed cost, not the modified cost. Neat wording.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2013, 09:27:25 pm by Jack Rudd »
Logged
Centuries later, archaeologists discover the remains of your ancient civilization.

Evidence of thriving towns, Pottery, roads, and a centralized government amaze the startled scientists.

Finally, they come upon a stone tablet, which contains but one mysterious phrase!

'ISOTROPIC WILL RETURN!'

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4130
  • Respect: +4525
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #19 on: March 01, 2014, 05:11:40 am »
0

Figured i should actually use this thread for my card ideas.

I tried two other takes on my old idea, Hedge Maze. Do you think one of them is balanced? If yes, which is better?

Hedge Maze, Action - Attack - Victory, 5$ (1)
Each other player gains a Curse.
-----
Worth one VP per empty supply pile.


Hedge Maze, Action - Attack - Victory, 4$ (2)
Each other player gains a Curse in hand.
-----
Worth one VP per empty supply pile that is not Province's.


Also a second card: First i wanted to post this in the "Very bad card ideas" thread, but maybe it's not that terrible - might be overpowered when compared to Junk Dealer or Market, though:

Pony, Action, 5$
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1$
Gain a Silver



What do you think?

silverspawn

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3972
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • ♦ Twilight ♦
  • Respect: +1738
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #20 on: March 01, 2014, 06:39:17 am »
+1

Figured i should actually use this thread for my card ideas.

I tried two other takes on my old idea, Hedge Maze. Do you think one of them is balanced? If yes, which is better?

Hedge Maze, Action - Attack - Victory, 5$ (1)
Each other player gains a Curse.
-----
Worth one VP per empty supply pile.
Let's see, so it's usually either worth 2VP (curse and Province) or 3VP (3 piles). You'll want to buy it really early, like most junkers. You probably won't get more than 2 of them. So, compared to Witch, you'll lack the +2 card beneift early, but have 4/6 VP's more endgame. That seems weak to me, but I'm not sure. It's defintiely worse than Mountebank, but what card isn't, so that's not an issue.



Hedge Maze, Action - Attack - Victory, 4$ (2)
Each other player gains a Curse in hand.
-----
Worth one VP per empty supply pile that is not Province's.

I don't like this version. Firstly because, following the same logic, it's usually either worth 1VP or 3VP, very swingy. Second, I don't think we need another curser for $4. In games without trashing, it'll be must-buy, a duchy which deals out curses. In games with good trashing, it's an Estate with a slight attack, you'll often get rid of the curse right away. I don't see that being fun. Try the 5$ version.

Also a second card: First i wanted to post this in the "Very bad card ideas" thread, but maybe it's not that terrible - might be overpowered when compared to Junk Dealer or Market, though:

Pony, Action, 5$
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1$
Gain a Silver



What do you think?

I like the name. Aside from that, I think the card is fine. If it were in the game, it would probably be one of the most frequently missused cards, because it kills your engines. It's a BM card, you're flooding yourself with silver, not a card for engines. Because of this, comparing it to market or Junk Dealer doesn't make all that much sense. I think the closest comparison is Jack of all Trades. Both give you a silver, both have you back at 5 cards when playing them. JOAD also trashes your estates and curses and defends against discard attacks, this card simply provides +1$, and it isn't terminal. I could see them working fairly well together, not to the point where you ever buy it over gold, but you might buy it rather than another silver.

Despite what I said, it might be a good addition to some engines, but only after they're set up, to increase their buying power. In that way it'd work similiar to Explorer: if you draw the silver in the turn you get it, it's +3$ for your current turn, +2$ for every following turn, +1 card for your deck. Explorer is +3$ for your current turn, +3$ for every following turn, +1 card for your deck; but it's terminal and you need to already have a province. Explorer also doesn't draw, but it doesn't make you have to draw the gold either, so it's like +1 card in that way.

Might also be good for some other stuff. Anyway, I like it. Needs testing though.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2014, 09:05:59 am by silverspawn »
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4130
  • Respect: +4525
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #21 on: March 04, 2014, 05:18:49 pm »
0

Thanks for your feedback. The name of Pony comes from the fact that it gives each of Trusty Steed's bonuses, but in a weaker form. I can see why you like it, though ;)

I myself had the feeling that the 5$ version of Hedge Maze was more dull than the other one, so that's why i wanted to have the 4$. I can definitely see you concern about it, though.

I'd still like to have an Attack-Victory, but maybe i can come up with something more clever. Using Ruins seems an obvious choice, but probably that's not good, either.

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4130
  • Respect: +4525
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #22 on: March 15, 2014, 08:24:28 am »
0

Junk me, baby!

I noticed two ideas for alt victory cards i had some time ago went in very similar directions. So i combined them:

Demolition, 6$, Victory
Worth 2VP if you still own your Demolition token.
---
Setup: Each player takes a Demolition token. He removes it when he trashes one of his Victory cards.
---
When you gain this, gain a Duchy and an Estate and trash a Province from the supply.


Things worth noting:
This is a Province for 6$ that junks your deck and demands that you don't trash junk.
The Province trashed from the supply is none of your cards and doesn't remove the token or trigger Market Square.
The card is a Victory card that works horribly with Rebuild, maybe against it.
If it seems too weak, i could change Estate and Duchy for "two differently named VP cards costing less than this".

About the 2nd line i don't really know what to do. I feel the idea itself is sufficiently simple, but obviously 2 lines is a no go. If somebody has an idea how i could reach a similar goal with just one, i'd greatly appreciate it. Or do you think the rules allow me to put the first two together? Like: "Setup: Each player takes a Demolition token. He removes that token when he trashes one of his VP cards. This card is worth 2VP for players that still have their token."

I'm really uncertain of what to do with this, so please help me out a bit here :-\

clloxin

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32
  • Respect: +10
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #23 on: March 15, 2014, 12:45:26 pm »
+1

 
Junk me, baby!

I noticed two ideas for alt victory cards i had some time ago went in very similar directions. So i combined them:

Demolition, 6$, Victory
Worth 2VP if you still own your Demolition token.
---
Setup: Each player takes a Demolition token. He removes it when he trashes one of his Victory cards.
---
When you gain this, gain a Duchy and an Estate and trash a Province from the supply.


Things worth noting:
This is a Province for 6$ that junks your deck and demands that you don't trash junk.
The Province trashed from the supply is none of your cards and doesn't remove the token or trigger Market Square.
The card is a Victory card that works horribly with Rebuild, maybe against it.
If it seems too weak, i could change Estate and Duchy for "two differently named VP cards costing less than this".

About the 2nd line i don't really know what to do. I feel the idea itself is sufficiently simple, but obviously 2 lines is a no go. If somebody has an idea how i could reach a similar goal with just one, i'd greatly appreciate it. Or do you think the rules allow me to put the first two together? Like: "Setup: Each player takes a Demolition token. He removes that token when he trashes one of his VP cards. This card is worth 2VP for players that still have their token."

I'm really uncertain of what to do with this, so please help me out a bit here :-\
I'm not an expert, but it seems that it wouldn't be worth it to not trash when you have the option.
In games without trashing, it is a cheap province which junks your deck, but its a unanimous buy late game.
I might be wrong, but I don't think this card would fit it's purpose, and be just cheap victory points for $6, either a province or a duchy and an estate for $6.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9126
    • View Profile
Re: Asper's Cards
« Reply #24 on: March 15, 2014, 01:50:28 pm »
+1

@silerspawn -- Hedge Maze is not worth either 1VP or 3VP.  It's worth 1-4 VP usually, with a chance of being worth MORE than 4VP.  If the game ends in a 3 pile, Hedge Maze is worth a net 4VP because of the Curse.  It can be worth an intermediate value because games that end on Provinces often ALSO have another empty pile or two.  It can be worth more because there are sometimes games where more than 3 piles are emptied on the last turn.  For the version that counts the Province pile as well, it's worh a net 2-4VP (because there is a guaranteed empty pile at the end).

Also note that this is a curser itself.  That almost guarantees that the curse pile will empty, further lowering the variance.

Despite the variable VP, I don't think it is that swingy.  Before you buy it, you can reasonably predict how many empty piles there will be.  If it's a powerful engine board with Hamlet or Fishing Village as the only +actions, then you can be pretty sure that that pile will drain quickly.  If it's a dull BM board with no +actions or +buy or gainers, probably no pile will empty.



Despite defending the card on those fronts, I think a bigger problem is that it just wouldn't be that interesting or fun.  Players tend not to like attack cards that give no benefit (e.g. Saboteur, Sea Hag) on play.  I like the VP portion (there's a similar one in one of the mini-set design contests, I think?) but the cursing just isn't exciting at all.








On Demolition -- the double line is off-putting.  I like the general idea (cheap province that junks you a lot more) but I'm not sure about the implementation.  It makes trashing attacks even swingier than they normally are.  Swindler hits your Estate... now your Demolitions are all worthless.  I'm also not sure if it would be fun to feel constricted against trashing.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 41  All
 

Page created in 0.124 seconds with 20 queries.