Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 14  All

Author Topic: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages  (Read 100557 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ChocophileBenj

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 504
  • Respect: +575
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #250 on: September 27, 2013, 08:36:11 am »
0

Here is the second half !
First half is on page 8.

Quote
Astral Conqueror
Types: Action – Attack – Looter
Cost: $5
+$2. Each other player gains a Curse and a Ruins Each other player gains a Spoils from the Spoils pile. This cannot cause a player to gain the last Curse or Ruins in the Supply.
Woow ! You give'em many cards ! Too many, according to me !


Quote
Smelter (A)
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $3
+1 Action. Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card of equal cost, putting it on top of your deck.

When you would gain a Silver, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead, gain a Spoils from the Spoils pile.
I miss the point of the action part, except it looks much like "trash a card from the supply and put  card from your hand on top of your deck". OK, it may change dead Sea hags and cursers into something... but let's hope it's not a victory card because topdeck !
And the reaction is too specific.

Quote
Junkyard (B)
Types: Action – Victory
Cost: $5
Choose one: Trash a card from your hand; gain up to 2 cards from the trash with a total cost of up to $5 and trash this.

Worth 1 VP for every 3 Victory cards in the trash.
You need 6 victory cards in the trash (starting estates at 2 players) to make it worth 2 points ? No !
In fact, I don't really like victory cards depending on things in the trash.

Quote
Alehouse
Types: Action
Cost: $3
When you trash a card this turn, +1 Action, discard a card, +1 Card, and you may gain a card costing less than the trashed card. Trash a card from your hand or from play.
Wordy, but fun. What if you stock several of them ? Do you gain several times the bonuses ? And do you gain several cards ?

Quote
Ignoble Brigand
Types: Action – Attack – Looter
Cost: $4
+$1. You may trash a Treasure from your hand. Each other player may discard a Treasure. If he doesn't, he gains a Ruins.
Funny name. And nice card, too. Looks like ambassador (I trash, you're junked) but is original and not too complicated.

Quote
Junkyard (C)
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it, putting it into your hand.

When you trash this, trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing exactly $1 less than it.
Not sure about the action part, which still seems legit to me.
But about the on-trash part, you shouldn't be forced to trash.

Quote
Heretic
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $5
Trash a card from your hand. Choose one: +1 Card per $ it costs; or +$ equal to its cost.

When one of your cards is trashed, you may trash this from your hand. If you do, put the trashed card into your hand.
A Salvager/Apprentice choice with +buy/+action remplaced by an interesting reaction. I think I like this !

Quote
Iron Maiden
Types: Action – Attack – Looter
Cost: $4
+$2. Each other player with 5 or more cards in hand discards a card. If it is an…
Action card, he gains a Copper; Treasure card, he gains a Ruins; Victory card, he gains a Curse. He puts the gained card into his hand.

When you trash this, you may trash up to 2 cards from your hand.
Hey, interesting, too bad I don't like the idea of gaining copper into hand for opponent. Maybe I'll vote for this, though.

Quote
Satan's Workshop
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
Gain a card costing up to the number of Fire tokens in your Satan Pit. Each other player may reveal a hand with 2 or fewer Treasures. If nobody does, put a Fire token in your Satan Pit. Each other player gains a Copper, putting it into his hand.

When you would trash this, set it aside. If you do, at the beginning of your next Buy phase, +1 Buy, +$1 per token in your Satan Pit, and put this into the trash.

Setup: Each player puts 2 Fire tokens in his Satan Pit.
I guess the attack part is "Each other player gains a Copper, putting it into his hand.", right ?
It's really hard to get it boosted to 5 Fire tokens and making it interesting. Just look at Pirate Ship, which is hard to boost, too.

Quote
Bargain
Types: Reaction
Cost: $1
When you would gain a card, you may discard this. If you do, instead, gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it.
Pure reaction ? I'm afraid it's  bad way to go.

Quote
Soldier
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $3
+1 Card. +1 Action. Each player trashes a Copper card from his hand (or reveals a hand without Copper). You may trash this. If you do, gain a Mercenary from the Mercenary pile if there are 4 or more Treasues in the trash; or gain a Madman from the Madman pile if there are 2 or more Soldiers in the trash.

Clarification: If there are 4 Treasures and 2 Soldiers in the trash, you choose whether to gain a Mercenary or a Madman.
I don't know how the actionpart looks like (trashing a copper may be either bad or good) so I agree with it.
The "you may trash this. If you do..." part has too many conditions !

Quote
Archaeologist
Types: Action – Looter
Cost: $5
+1 Card. +1 Action. You may trash the top card of the Ruins pile.

While this card is in play, when you play an Action card, play a copy of the top card of the Ruins pile.
Hey, classical !
Not sure how it would work.
But trashing from the supply and using the top cards of the ruins are usually said to be bad ideas...

Quote
Stronghold
Types: Victory
Cost: $6
Worth 1 VP for every 2 Spoils in your deck (rounded down).

When you gain this, gain 3 Spoils from the Spoils pile.
So you gain 3 spoils you don't even use. Nope.

Quote
Garrison
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $3
Trash a card from your hand. For each $2 that it costs (rounded down), gain a Spoils from the Spoils pile.

When a player trashes a card, you may reveal this from your hand and gain the trashed card. If you do, discard this.

Clarification: If multiple players reveal a Garrison, the Garrison of the player who trashed the card gets resolved first, the other players follow in turn order. Later players can't gain the card due to losing track; Garrison can only gain the card if it is still in the trash.
With the action part only, I think I would like this. (fine for starting estates, but who would trash a gold into 3 spoils ?)
I dislike the reaction part, as I dislike every card that allows to steal cards to opponent.

Quote
Raid
Types: Action – Looter
Cost: $3
Choose one: Play and trash up to 2 Action cards from your hand; or gain any number of Action cards from the trash costing up to $3 and play them in any order.

When you trash this, each other player gains a Ruins.
Action part is really worse than Village (except it may trash ruins) and on-trash part is boring. Would you buy this just to trash it ?

Quote
Surveyor
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $4
+1 Action. You may trash a Victory card from your hand. If you do, gain two Treasures each costing exactly $1 more than it, putting one on top of your deck.

When another player buys a Victory card, you may set this aside from your hand. If you do, at the start of your next turn, return this to your hand and gain an Estate, putting it into your hand.
Hey, at least a "victory into treasure" I like, even though it looks much stronger than trader (not terminal, and...) ! Should be $5 maybe.
The rection part is interesting too, because it grants you silver.
Okay !

Quote
Smelter (B)
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $3
You may trash a card from your hand. If you trash an… Action card, +2 Actions; Treasure card, +$2; Victory card, +2 Cards.

When you trash a card you may discard this from your hand. If you go, gain a card costing less than the trashed card.

EDIT: If you trash a Victory card with Smelter, it gives you +2 Cards, not +1 Card.
Simple, and fine. I think I like this.

Quote
Condottiero
Types: Action – Attack – Looter
Cost: $4
+2 Buys. +$2. Each player (including you) may discard a Treasure. If he does, he puts his deck into his discard pile and immediately reshuffles. Each other player gains a Ruins.

When you trash this, look through your discard pile. You may trash up to 2 cards from your discard pile or hand.

Clarification: Each other player gaining a Ruins is not contingent on whether or not he discards; it just always happens after the discard and shuffling effects.
Interacting action is weird.
The vanilla bonus + the attack together are fine.
I like the on-trash effect. Maybe it makes too many words.

Quote
Angry Mob
Types: Action – Attack – Looter
Cost: $4
+1 Action. +1 Buy. Each player gains a Ruins, putting it into his hand.

While this is in play, when you buy a Ruins, you may trash this. If you do, gain a Mob Boss from the Mob Boss pile.

Mob Boss
Types: Action
Cost: $0*
+1 Buy. Reveal your hand. For each Ruins revealed, +1 Card and +$1. You may return a Ruins from your hand to the Supply. If you do, +1 Action. (This is not in the Supply.)
I dislike the idea of buying ruins !

Quote
Charter (B)
Types: Treasure – Attack – Looter
Cost: $5
Worth $2. When you play this, each other player gains a Ruins, putting it into his hand.
Non-terminal junker, too much strong !
Even though I wish there were more "treasure attacks", they should be more calculated. Maybe "You may discrd a treasure. If you do, <opponents are junked>"

Quote
Danse Macabre
Types: Action
Cost: $4
You may play an Action from your hand for none of its effects. If you do, +4 Cards and +1 Action.

When you buy this, trash it.

When you trash this, gain 2 cheaper cards of different costs.
Here it is, the famous Danse Macabre !
I have nothing to say, except it's too weird to me to vote for it.

Quote
Garderobe
Types: Action – Looter
Cost: $2
+1 Action. +$2. Gain a Ruins, putting it into your hand. You may play an Action card from your hand costing up to $3.
Another French name !
Auto-junkers are always regarded as bad, and I don't think this one is finer.

Quote
Drug
Types: Action – Victory – Looter
Cost: $5
+1 Card. +1 Action. +$1. You may gain a Ruins. If you do, +1 Card. You may gain a Ruins. If you do, +1 Action.

Worth –3 VP if every other player has fewer Ruins than you.
Nice name.
And I think I would be able to buy this... with other looters in play. Otherwise it looks like an expensive Peddler.

Quote
Street Sweeper
Types: Action – Looter
Cost: $4
+2 Cards. +1 Action. Trash a card.

When you trash this, gain a Ruins.
Really too strong ! Just compare it to Spice Merchant !

Quote
Blood Feud
Types:
Action – Attack – Looter
Cost: $4
Choose one: +1 Action, +$1, and each player (including you) gains a Ruins, putting it in his hand; or reveal up to 3 cards from your hand, play the revealed Action cards in any order, then trash all the revealed cards.
Another auto-junker. It's *yawn* boring...

Quote
Barrister
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
+2 Cards. Each player (including you) reveals the top 2 cards of his deck; you may choose a revealed Treasure for him to trash. He discards the rest. You may gain a Treasure from the trash.

Setup: Replace one of each player's starting Coppers with a Claim.

Claim
Types: Treasure
Cost: $0
Worth $1. When you play this, look through your discard pile. You may trash a Claim from your discard pile or hand. If you do, gain a Gold, putting it into your hand.

Clarification: In a 6-player game, the starting player does not replace a Copper with a Claim.

EDIT: Added "+2 Cards." to Barrister.
I like Barrister (better noble brigand), but I dislike Claim.

Quote
Mendicant
Types: Action – Looter
Cost: $2
+1 Card. +1 Action. Gain a Ruins, putting it into your hand. You may play any number of Ruins from your hand. If you played two or more, +1 Card.
[/quote]
Auto-junker ? Hey, why ?
This one isn't better than the others.


Now I've finished.
Sorry, but I really dislike auto-junkers.
Logged
Chocolate is like victory points in Dominion. Both taste good but they'll hurt you if you eat too much of it instead of something else in your early days.

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #251 on: September 27, 2013, 09:36:01 am »
+2

Quote
Stronghold
Cost: $6
Worth 1 VP for every 2 Spoils in your deck (rounded down).

When you gain this, gain 3 Spoils.

If you never use your Spoils, each Stronghold adds 4 dead cards to your deck.  IIRC there are 15 Spoils total, so it can be worth up to 7VP.  Seems like you'd stall pretty quickly if you tried to make Stronghold worth anything significant.  This seems like it would be better used just for some quick cash injection, and then the Stronghold can be fodder for TfB.  The VP might be nice near the end of the game if you can quickly gain 2 or more Strongholds, making each Stronghold a Duchy or better.  It does other interesting things to end game Duchy dancing, in that you can grab Strongholds for potential VP as well as adding economy to your deck to give you a better chance of grabbing that last Province.

I really like this.  There is a surprising amount of strategy packed into a very simple card.

I want to discuss this card a bit more.  Almost everyone seems to have dismissed it.  The issue that people are bringing up is that it turns Spoils into dead cards.  But I can think of plenty of ways that Stronghold is useful.  There will certainly be times when you need an economic boost, where 3 Spoils and a dead card are better than just 1 Gold -- particularly in the end game when you're not likely to see that Gold more than once anyway.  Stronghold itself can be given over to TfB.

It's also interesting during end game Duchy dancing.  Instead of getting a Duchy, maybe you grab a Stronghold to greatly improve your Province-buying ability.  With various Spoils-gainers, you can maintain the number of Spoils in your deck so that Stronghold is still worth points.

Then there may be games where you can play a Stronghold-specific strategy, aiming to mega-turn and get a bunch of them at once.  A single Stronghold is just 1VP, but the second one makes them 3VP each, the third 4VP each, the fourth 6VP each (unless the Spoils run out, of course).  And even if you aim to get VP out of Stronghold, you can still use your Spoils because you can gain them back with future Stronghold purchases.

If it really is too weak, a simple price adjustment might be all that is needed.  Make it cost $5.  But here's something to consider -- with $6, you can buy Masterpiece and get 3 Silvers.  This gives Stronghold and 3 Spoils.  That's actually pretty close on par, I think.  Spoils and Silver are very roughly on par, and I think the potential VP and higher value for TfB make Stronghold itself better than Masterpiece, which is just a $3 Copper.
I agree with what you're saying here. It kind of annoys me that people are saying that it turns Spoils into a deal card. Who is forcing you not to play those spoils? They're only dead if you insist on powering these up, but you don't have to bother powering these up. Just being able to get 3 spoils for the same price as Gold sounds like a good deal. The Stronghold does become dead though, but that's 1 dead card instead of 4. Hopefully, you can trash it somehow.
3 Spoils can be much better than 3 Silvers if you don't what permanent treasure in your deck.


I think we're just going to get a community designed RfB card that improves on Hatter in the end.
That would make me very happy, actually. From the secret history, I get the impression that DXV had a card like that in mind when he created the Ruins. If we come out of this contest with a card that makes Ruined Village feel mechanically different from a Confusion, I'll consider this a success.
Yeah that would be okay by me. It could just be that Donald X. didn't want to waste too much time trying to get such an idea to work.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #252 on: September 27, 2013, 10:28:17 am »
+1

The problem with an Attack that makes an opponent gain a Copper into his hand is that it's such a wash. Sometimes it'll help your opponents and sometimes it'll hurt them. Look at Cache. Cache is a $5 Gold that makes you gain two Coppers. So it stands to reason that if I have $5 in hand, there are times I'd be willing to gain just one Copper in order to buy Gold for $6.

I think "each other play may gain a Copper, putting it into his hand" is a small penalty on a card, and in fact I have just such a card in my set.
Logged

Schneau

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1174
  • Shuffle iT Username: Schneau
  • Respect: +1461
    • View Profile
    • Rainwave
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #253 on: September 27, 2013, 11:35:23 am »
+2

Friday's Card:

Quote
Garderobe
Types: Action – Looter
Cost: $2
+1 Action. +$2. Gain a Ruins, putting it into your hand. You may play an Action card from your hand costing up to $3.

In general, I didn't like most of the Ruins-for-Benefit cards. This was my favorite, though I'm still not 100% sold on voting for it. First of all, it basically acts like an Action Silver, which is pretty strong for $2. Then, you gain a Ruins, which is bad. But, you can then play a card costing up to $3, which is cute, since you'll usually at worst have a Ruins to play at this point. This makes it a Silver-village that can only play cheap cards.

I guess the real question here is: How strong is the card considering it junks you up? Without the self-junking, this card is very strong. It seems that it would work best on board where you want to play a lot of cheap cards that *aren't* Ruins, and are able to trash the Ruins you gain. But, even here, it doesn't seem OP. Of course, it can self-synergize, but they you gain lots of Ruins. This could make it a beast in some alt-VP games, especially Gardens and Vineyard.

Anyway, this is my favorite and I think most interesting of the Ruins-for-Benefit cards here. Any other thoughts on it?
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
  • Respect: +2144
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #254 on: September 27, 2013, 03:45:14 pm »
+2

Unless anyone convinces me otherwise, these are the cards that I like the most and plan on voting for:

Quote
Mortuary
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Look through your discard pile. You may trash a card from your discard pile or hand.

While this is in play, when you trash a card costing $2 or more, +1 Card.

This card just feels very Dark Ages-y.  It's not great by itself, but it combos with everything that trashes, including itself.  I expect that it is expensive enough that it's not worthwhile to grab a lot of them in most games just to try to trigger themselves, but with scaling TfB that makes you want to trash expensive cards anyway, you could have so much fun.  It's just built for combos, especially trashing-based things, which is what DA likes.  The only thing I don't like about it is that it's "$2 or more" instead of "$1 or more"; it anti-synergizes with Shelters.  Like, literally the only time $2 or more is different from $1 or more is with DA interactions, so that doesn't make any sense to me, but hopefully that can be changed.  (I guess there's also highway/bridge/princess...)

Quote
Incendiarist
Types: Action – Attack – Looter
Cost: $5
You may trash a card from your hand. If it is an… Action card, each other player gains a Ruins; Treasure card, gain a Spoils from the Spoils pile; Victory card, each other player gains a Curse.

I know I've defended this card earlier, and I still like it a lot.  Some people are worried that it can cause problems handing out both Ruins and Curses but I think this fear is completely invalid as I and a few others have argued before.  I'm a little concerned that $5 is too expensive (it just seems so much weaker than Ambassador/Marauder/Moneylender, but maybe combining them onto one card makes it worth more?).  I like the interaction with Shelters, which make the Action clause much more relevant than it otherwise would be.

Honestly, the name is terrible (is Incendiarist even a word?) and I don't know how to pronounce it so maybe it was trying to follow in the footsteps of Feodum in that regard, and also you would want the name to include "Iron", but that could be changed if it won.

Quote
Charter (A)
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card. +1 Action. Trash the top card of your deck. You may gain a card from the trash.

When you trash this, +2 Cards.

I think this is most likely too strong as it is, and it has undesirable interactions with Saboteur and Swindler.  With a cap on the cost of the gained card I think it would be more reasonable.  Maybe you'll want to load up on them early on, but as soon as you start greening they become dead cards.

The reason I like this card so much is that it fits into Dark Ages very well.  There are so many on-trash effects that you could trigger, and then you gain the trashed card right back out of the trash, unless it's Rats in which case you're glad it's gone.  I think it could maybe use a weaker on-trash benefit though.

Quote
Bargain
Types: Reaction
Cost: $1
When you would gain a card, you may discard this. If you do, instead, gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it.

My initial thought on this card was that it's too situational, but the more I think about it the more reasonable it seems.  On the surface it sounds like a Copper that you can also apply to gainers, which I guess is mostly what it is, but there's so much you can do with that, especially in the context of Dark Ages.  Like, trash a Feodum for two Silvers and a Feodum, or play Rats to turn something into a $5 card, Procession a Catacombs into a Catacombs, or Procession an Altar into a Province (and if you have another Bargain, grab another Altar to replace it on the Altar play).

The other thing is that it "blocks" junking, but I'm not sure that I actually like how it does that, since it costs $1.  Basically you can turn a Curse or Ruins into a Bargain, which is generally better than taking a Curse or Ruins, but not enough to be worth buying a Copper in most cases, so I might advocate pricing it at $2.  Alternatively, it could maybe cost $5 and gain a card costing up to (or exactly) $2 more, but maybe that changes it too much.  Either way, I think this might be my favorite submission, just because it's unique, fits the "poverty" theme of Dark Ages, and interacts so well with so many Dark Ages cards.
Logged

Nic

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 138
  • Respect: +85
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #255 on: September 27, 2013, 05:11:49 pm »
0

Quote
Mortuary
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Look through your discard pile. You may trash a card from your discard pile or hand.

While this is in play, when you trash a card costing $2 or more, +1 Card.

This card just feels very Dark Ages-y.  It's not great by itself, but it combos with everything that trashes, including itself.  I expect that it is expensive enough that it's not worthwhile to grab a lot of them in most games just to try to trigger themselves, but with scaling TfB that makes you want to trash expensive cards anyway, you could have so much fun.  It's just built for combos, especially trashing-based things, which is what DA likes.  The only thing I don't like about it is that it's "$2 or more" instead of "$1 or more"; it anti-synergizes with Shelters.  Like, literally the only time $2 or more is different from $1 or more is with DA interactions, so that doesn't make any sense to me, but hopefully that can be changed.  (I guess there's also highway/bridge/princess...)
Yeah, that seems sensible. When If it wins, I'd like to see it playtested with "$X or more" replaced by "is not a Copper". I don't think it'd be overpowered, but it would be very interesting.

Quote
Incendiarist
Types: Action – Attack – Looter
Cost: $5
You may trash a card from your hand. If it is an… Action card, each other player gains a Ruins; Treasure card, gain a Spoils from the Spoils pile; Victory card, each other player gains a Curse.

I know I've defended this card earlier, and I still like it a lot.  Some people are worried that it can cause problems handing out both Ruins and Curses but I think this fear is completely invalid as I and a few others have argued before.  I'm a little concerned that $5 is too expensive (it just seems so much weaker than Ambassador/Marauder/Moneylender, but maybe combining them onto one card makes it worth more?).  I like the interaction with Shelters, which make the Action clause much more relevant than it otherwise would be.

Honestly, the name is terrible (is Incendiarist even a word?) and I don't know how to pronounce it so maybe it was trying to follow in the footsteps of Feodum in that regard, and also you would want the name to include "Iron", but that could be changed if it won.
I'm probably not going to vote for any junker, including my own, but this is definitely the best one by far. The name shows up on Google, and Wikipedia defines arson as 'malicious incendiarism', but that doesn't explain why they didn't just call it 'Arsonist'. Maybe it's a historical reference in their home country and/or they have a really awkward [language]-to-English dictionary. Neither this nor Iron Maiden had a +action/coin/card bonus, so I don't think it's that big of a deal. It resembles a backwards Transmute more than the two Iron- cards; maybe it's an archaic word for an evil alchemist.

Ehh . . . this Cursing is very self-limiting, the junking is almost purely defensive, and it puts the Spoils pile to good use. This card is actually growing on me; I think it's sufficiently different from the other Cursers in that it can't run out any pile without an absurd amount of help. Rather than lowering the cost, my fix would be to give it a small bonus to its usefulness. It came from a fix I thought up for Transmute: just add a line on the end saying, "If it is none of these types, +1 action." It could even be bumped up to +1 card, +1 action without too much worry, and gives the cursed player an incentive to buy Incendiarist if it's the only trashing around, and later an incentive to retaliate with their own Necropolis or Ruins or Estates.

Quote
Bargain
Types: Reaction
Cost: $1
When you would gain a card, you may discard this. If you do, instead, gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it.

My initial thought on this card was that it's too situational, but the more I think about it the more reasonable it seems.  On the surface it sounds like a Copper that you can also apply to gainers, which I guess is mostly what it is, but there's so much you can do with that, especially in the context of Dark Ages.  Like, trash a Feodum for two Silvers and a Feodum, or play Rats to turn something into a $5 card, Procession a Catacombs into a Catacombs, or Procession an Altar into a Province (and if you have another Bargain, grab another Altar to replace it on the Altar play).
Careful; that only works if there's an action card costing exactly $7 in the supply. It is much wonkier than a Copper.
Logged

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #256 on: September 27, 2013, 05:19:25 pm »
0

Quote
Incendiarist
Types: Action – Attack – Looter
Cost: $5
You may trash a card from your hand. If it is an… Action card, each other player gains a Ruins; Treasure card, gain a Spoils from the Spoils pile; Victory card, each other player gains a Curse.

I know I've defended this card earlier, and I still like it a lot.  Some people are worried that it can cause problems handing out both Ruins and Curses but I think this fear is completely invalid as I and a few others have argued before.  I'm a little concerned that $5 is too expensive (it just seems so much weaker than Ambassador/Marauder/Moneylender, but maybe combining them onto one card makes it worth more?).  I like the interaction with Shelters, which make the Action clause much more relevant than it otherwise would be.

Honestly, the name is terrible (is Incendiarist even a word?) and I don't know how to pronounce it so maybe it was trying to follow in the footsteps of Feodum in that regard, and also you would want the name to include "Iron", but that could be changed if it won.
Yeah, I don't think this card is going to be too strong (unless you get a whole bunch of Great Halls or something). I initially found it weird that it's not a true curser because it can't really give all 10 curses, but the same is also true for Jester. It's the treasure->Spoils thing that really makes me interested in this card.

Quote
Quote
Bargain
Types: Reaction
Cost: $1
When you would gain a card, you may discard this. If you do, instead, gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it.

My initial thought on this card was that it's too situational, but the more I think about it the more reasonable it seems.  On the surface it sounds like a Copper that you can also apply to gainers, which I guess is mostly what it is, but there's so much you can do with that, especially in the context of Dark Ages.  Like, trash a Feodum for two Silvers and a Feodum, or play Rats to turn something into a $5 card, Procession a Catacombs into a Catacombs, or Procession an Altar into a Province (and if you have another Bargain, grab another Altar to replace it on the Altar play).

The other thing is that it "blocks" junking, but I'm not sure that I actually like how it does that, since it costs $1.  Basically you can turn a Curse or Ruins into a Bargain, which is generally better than taking a Curse or Ruins, but not enough to be worth buying a Copper in most cases, so I might advocate pricing it at $2.  Alternatively, it could maybe cost $5 and gain a card costing up to (or exactly) $2 more, but maybe that changes it too much.  Either way, I think this might be my favorite submission, just because it's unique, fits the "poverty" theme of Dark Ages, and interacts so well with so many Dark Ages cards.
Yay, someone else who likes this card! I agree that this can cost $2. It's no worse than a Copper since you don't really draw this dead. It also lets this deal with junk better.

With that change, it's hard to decide whether this is a Dark Ages card or a Hinterlands card. It can really combo with DA cards, but DA cards can also be awesome with Cornucopia cards.
Logged

Compynerd255

  • Alchemist
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 39
  • Respect: +23
    • View Profile
    • Betafreak Games
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #257 on: September 27, 2013, 05:32:45 pm »
0

Quote
Danse Macabre
Types: Action
Cost: $4
You may play an Action from your hand for none of its effects. If you do, +4 Cards and +1 Action.

When you buy this, trash it.

When you trash this, gain 2 cheaper cards of different costs.
All right, with all its discussion, here's my take on Danse Macabre. It's probably my favorite card that's been submitted, simply because it's the one that's the most interesting without it being over- or under-powered, and the one with the most potential.

First, the trash-on-buy thing - where, if you buy the card, you trash it instead of gaining it, getting the Stonemason power. I can see why it's priced at $4, because if it were priced at $5 or otherwise allowed you to gather $4's, you could get really great engine components and end the game on piles. Perhaps so you aren't stuck with bad cards, you could either allow the cards to be the same cost (say, 2 Silvers) or allow the player to trash another card in hand and gain both a card costing less than Danse Macabre as well as it (for instance, I buy Danse Macabre as an opening, trashing it for a Silver and an Estate in hand for a Copper, shooting up my money density).

And then there's the on play effect, which you get from pure gaining. I really like that it also gets you to disable another Action card for its benefit, seems like a nice nerf. I agree that "set aside an Action card and discard at end of turn" is far, far better than play for no effects - it's less clunky, has clearer interactions, and keeps it out of the discard pile. As for the effect itself (two Labs), I think that it's pretty close to the effect we really want (since it has everything to do with plowing through cards and nothing to do with gaining them), but I would feel more comfortable if it was something like Level 1 City (+2 Cards, +2 Actions) rather than two Labs.

Quote
Bargain
Types: Reaction
Cost: $1
When you would gain a card, you may discard this. If you do, instead, gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it.
Oh, and I really like this card, too. I know that it's just a Reaction, but it's a Reaction that's so universally useful that it's not a problem to have in hand. What would probably serve this card best is a name and/or art that suggests this card's power.

Not to mention that it deals with junk well. Mitigating $0 junk and getting more of these is exactly the kind of thing I want to do (which, of course, means that this will pile out extremely quickly in the presence of junkers) - and, in that case, I'd probably want extra copies of this in the Supply.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #258 on: September 27, 2013, 07:03:10 pm »
0

OK, after considering the comments and discussion here, these are my favourites (which may or may not include my own).  They are in ballot order because I'm too lazy to rearrange them today.

Quote
Carpenter
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Trash a card from your hand and gain a cheaper card, putting it into your hand. +$ equal to the cost in coins of the gained card.

When you trash this during your Action phase, +1 Action.

Pros: I really like the idea of "downgrade into hand" as an effect that is extremely niche but potentially powerful.  The bonus money makes it an even better prospect.  Overall, I find the effect quite compelling and just different enough from existing cards.

Cons: The reaction is pretty boring.  It's also somewhat vanilla, and I kind of want to see crazier concepts. ;)

Possible tweaks: I definitely think the reaction should be dropped; it doesn't add much to the card.  If it's too strong, a possible tweak is to require that the cheaper card cost at most $2 less (like a self-Saboteur).  That prevents trashing $4s into $3s, for example.

Quote
Mortuary
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Look through your discard pile. You may trash a card from your discard pile or hand.

While this is in play, when you trash a card costing $2 or more, +1 Card.

Pros: Fits very well into Dark Ages.  Stacks in an interesting way.

Cons: Like Carpenter, it's still fairly vanilla. :P

Possible tweaks: I don't have any particular suggestions at this point.

Quote
Smelter (A)
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $3
+1 Action. Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card of equal cost, putting it on top of your deck.

When you would gain a Silver, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead, gain a Spoils.

Pros: I think the reaction is really interesting.

Cons: The action itself is not interesting.

Possible tweaks: Maybe if you put the gained card into your hand?  And if that's too good, maybe have it downgrade a la Carpenter?

Quote
Heretic
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $5
Trash a card from your hand. Choose one: +1 Card per $ it costs; or +$ equal to its cost.

When one of your cards is trashed, you may trash this from your hand. If you do, put the trashed card into your hand.

Pros: I actually find it fairly interesting to have the choice between Apprentice and Salvager.  The reaction has a purpose too, though it is somewhat narrow.

Cons: Possibly the choice is too strong, even though it lacks +1 Action or +1 Buy.  If that is the case, I can't think of any good tweaks.  I suppose the reaction could be more useful.

Possible tweaks: No great ideas.

Quote
Bargain
Types: Reaction
Cost: $1
When you would gain a card, you may discard this. If you do, instead, gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it.

Pros: Interesting function and potential combos.  Pure reaction is different and fun.

Cons: Dark Ages fit is questionable.  I think it still makes it because of potential combos and just the general "feel" of it, but it doesn't really hit the bullet points.  It's also potentially too weak and maybe not worth it even with its most prominent combos (various cost-constrained gainers).

Possible tweaks: A cost increase would actually (probably) make this stronger as a defense against junking.

Quote
Soldier
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $3
+1 Card. +1 Action. Each player trashes a Copper card from his hand (or reveals a hand without Copper). You may trash this. If you do, gain a Mercenary from the Mercenary pile if there are 4 or more Treasues in the trash; or gain a Madman from the Madman pile if there are 2 or more Soldiers in the trash.

Clarification: If there are 4 Treasures and 2 Soldiers in the trash, you choose whether to gain a Mercenary or a Madman.

Pros: Super thematic.  I like having more cards upgrade into Mercenary and Madman.

Cons: But maybe it's better not to reuse Mercenary and Madman like that (some people have expressed a dislike of that).  Scales strangely with number of players.  Probably the biggest complaint I have is just that it's so very wordy for an effect that is actually pretty simple, but I can't think of a way to make it more concise.

Possible tweaks: The number of cards needed to trigger the upgrades can be increased if it's too easy to activate them.  But there are those possible scaling issues.

Quote
Stronghold
Cost: $6
Worth 1 VP for every 2 Spoils in your deck (rounded down).

When you gain this, gain 3 Spoils.

Pros: I've already discussed it elsewhere, but I think it adds interesting choices for players that current cards don't offer.  It feels very novel and interesting to me.

Cons: I don't like the name, but that can be changed.  The strategic choices that this card creates may be too abstract for casual players to figure out, making this look like a worse card than it is.  Or possibly I am reading too much into its potential.

Possible tweaks: The Spoils-to-VP ratio could be tweaked, maybe?  But I think the easiest buff (if needed) is to lower the cost to $5 or have it grant 4 Spoils instead of 3.  Still, not sure it needs a buff at all.

Quote
Danse Macabre
Types: Action
Cost: $4
You may play an Action from your hand for none of its effects. If you do, +4 Cards and +1 Action.

When you buy this, trash it.

When you trash this, gain 2 cheaper cards of different costs.

Pros: The dual-purpose concept is really, really neat.  I'm still not convinced that the main action is too strong.  Someone mentioned that this is probably stronger than Palanquin, a card submitted to the Hinterlands contest and was poorly received.  As a reminder, Palanquin was like Apprentice except it discarded instead of trashed and it only worked on action cards.  I think DM is more reasonable for a few reasons -- the fixed draw means it can't go nuts by using expensive cards.  This is especially true because that card is not discarded but rendered unusable for the rest of the turn.  Having to gain it without buying it is also a significant check.

Cons: I personally like how different it can be on different boards (specifically on whether there is a card that can gain DM) but that might be confusing for casual players.  It's likely to cause confusion with Market Square because MS specifies one of your cards, but DM is technically not yours when it is trashed on-buy.

Possible tweaks: Collapse the on-buy and on-trash -- "When you buy this, trash this and gain..."  Yes you lose some extra interaction, but it's worth it to avoid the double lines.  I think the reaction should be buffed in some way (maybe just "two differently named cards costing less than $4, or less than this", so that you can gain two $3s and maybe combo with cost reduction), and I think lots of people would be happy if the main action were nerfed -- maybe only +3 Cards instead of +4?  Saying "set aside" instead of "play with no effect" is also a sensible change.
Logged

Schneau

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1174
  • Shuffle iT Username: Schneau
  • Respect: +1461
    • View Profile
    • Rainwave
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #259 on: September 27, 2013, 08:10:45 pm »
+3

Quote
Smelter (A)
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $3
+1 Action. Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card of equal cost, putting it on top of your deck.

When you would gain a Silver, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead, gain a Spoils.

Pros: I think the reaction is really interesting.

Cons: The action itself is not interesting.

Possible tweaks: Maybe if you put the gained card into your hand?  And if that's too good, maybe have it downgrade a la Carpenter?

Thinking about this card's Reaction, I think it might be even more interesting if it said:

"When you gain a Silver, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash the Silver and gain a Spoils."

This tweak won't likely make Silvers run out (unless it's a Masterpiece game). But, it makes the reaction combo in an interesting way with Dark Ages cards such as Forager, Rogue, and Graverobber. I see no reason not to make this tweak.

I still don't know if I'm sold on the card, since I'm not as interested in the Action part.
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #260 on: September 27, 2013, 08:40:57 pm »
0

Quote
Smelter (A)
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $3
+1 Action. Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card of equal cost, putting it on top of your deck.

When you would gain a Silver, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead, gain a Spoils.

Pros: I think the reaction is really interesting.

Cons: The action itself is not interesting.

Possible tweaks: Maybe if you put the gained card into your hand?  And if that's too good, maybe have it downgrade a la Carpenter?

Thinking about this card's Reaction, I think it might be even more interesting if it said:

"When you gain a Silver, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash the Silver and gain a Spoils."

This tweak won't likely make Silvers run out (unless it's a Masterpiece game). But, it makes the reaction combo in an interesting way with Dark Ages cards such as Forager, Rogue, and Graverobber. I see no reason not to make this tweak.

I still don't know if I'm sold on the card, since I'm not as interested in the Action part.

I agree with this.  "When you would... instead..." is a troublesome mechanic, and I think it is preferable to avoid it whenever possible.  Schneau's tweak provides a mechanism which has interesting interactions rather than frustratingly technical interactions, yet does not change how the card usually impacts the game.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #261 on: September 27, 2013, 10:12:17 pm »
+2

Quote
Smelter (A)
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $3
+1 Action. Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card of equal cost, putting it on top of your deck.

When you would gain a Silver, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead, gain a Spoils.

Pros: I think the reaction is really interesting.

Cons: The action itself is not interesting.

Possible tweaks: Maybe if you put the gained card into your hand?  And if that's too good, maybe have it downgrade a la Carpenter?

Thinking about this card's Reaction, I think it might be even more interesting if it said:

"When you gain a Silver, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash the Silver and gain a Spoils."

This tweak won't likely make Silvers run out (unless it's a Masterpiece game).

Trader!

AJD gains a Silver.
...AJD reveals a Smelter.
......AJD trashes the Silver and gains a Spoils.
.........AJD reveals a Trader.
............AJD gains a Silver instead of the Spoils.
...............AJD reveals a Smelter.
..................AJD trashes the Silver and gains a Spoils.
.....................AJD reveals a Trader.
........................AJD gains a Silver instead of the Spoils.

...and so on till the Silver pile is empty.

Smelter's reaction has to be would-gain, is what I'm saying.
Logged

Jack Rudd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1323
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jack Rudd
  • Respect: +1379
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #262 on: September 27, 2013, 10:25:22 pm »
+1

Trader!

AJD gains a Silver.
...AJD reveals a Smelter.
......AJD trashes the Silver and gains a Spoils.
.........AJD reveals a Trader.
............AJD gains a Silver instead of the Spoils.
...............AJD reveals a Smelter.
..................AJD trashes the Silver and gains a Spoils.
.....................AJD reveals a Trader.
........................AJD gains a Silver instead of the Spoils.

...and so on till the Silver pile is empty.

Smelter's reaction has to be would-gain, is what I'm saying.
And, indeed, it's why Trader itself has to be would-gain in the first place.
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!'

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #263 on: September 27, 2013, 10:31:39 pm »
0

Trader!

AJD gains a Silver.
...AJD reveals a Smelter.
......AJD trashes the Silver and gains a Spoils.
.........AJD reveals a Trader.
............AJD gains a Silver instead of the Spoils.
...............AJD reveals a Smelter.
..................AJD trashes the Silver and gains a Spoils.
.....................AJD reveals a Trader.
........................AJD gains a Silver instead of the Spoils.

...and so on till the Silver pile is empty.

Smelter's reaction has to be would-gain, is what I'm saying.
And, indeed, it's why Trader itself has to be would-gain in the first place.

There are plenty of other reasons Trader shouldn't trash the bought card.  An obvious one in retrospect is that Donald wanted to do on-trash effects later, and buying a Squire and then trashing him for a Silver and Mountebank is no fair.  But also, Trader would have let you run out piles and deny alt-VP rather aggressively.  If my opponent opened Workshop/Workshop, I would happily spend my buys on Gardens which are immediately trashed for Silver.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #264 on: September 28, 2013, 12:41:39 am »
0

Well, I'm doing it. Not all of them though. Just my favorites (my card may or may not be included).

Onto the cards!

Quote
Charter (A)
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card. +1 Action. Trash the top card of your deck. You may gain a card from the trash.

When you trash this, +2 Cards.
This is just so cute. It's basically discard the top card of your deck if it rocks, trash it otherwise and gain something decent from the trash. It has a few other tricks (most notably on-trash effects like Cultist and Squire), but that's the gist of it. It almost needs a $3-$6 clause, but then that almost defeats the purpose of it if you happen to trash a Province. It steps on Rats toes just a bit, but not enough that I don't think it shouldn't exist.  I think that if the on trash is too powerful, it could be reduced to just +1 Card. But then the similarities between it and Rats grow even similar.

Quote
Smelter (A)
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $3
+1 Action. Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card of equal cost, putting it on top of your deck.

When you would gain a Silver, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead, gain a Spoils from the Spoils pile.
I adore this almost purely for the Reaction. It's a novel idea, and one that looks sound (IIRC Donald said that a Spoils is roughly a Silver). Top part is...interesting. There is a couple of niche things you can do by essentially putting a card from your hand back on top of your deck, or playing a cantrip immediately after it to put the gained card into your hand, or activate on-trash effects, or for some weird three Smelter trick of playing one, trashing one for a Silver, raveling another Smelter from your hand, and then gaining the Spoils.

But actually, that gets me thinking. Would that smelted Spoils go on top of your deck? I'm thinking yes since you would be putting the Silver ontop of your deck and then instead putting a Spoils there. But I don't know. May be a blue dog thing.

Quote
Soldier
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $3
+1 Card. +1 Action. Each player trashes a Copper card from his hand (or reveals a hand without Copper). You may trash this. If you do, gain a Mercenary from the Mercenary pile if there are 4 or more Treasures in the trash; or gain a Madman from the Madman pile if there are 2 or more Soldiers in the trash.

Clarification: If there are 4 Treasures and 2 Soldiers in the trash, you choose whether to gain a Mercenary or a Madman.
Love this for the theme. I'll gladly +1 to whoever posted this after the contest is over. It really is a brilliant thematic implementation.

As for the card's effect, it has a bit of a scaling problem. But I really don't know a better way of handling it unless you put in some formula that has a different output depending on the number of players. But maybe it's fine. The exact numbers could also be tweaked as well as not making it a cantrip, but I mostly feel that this is a joke card.

Quote
Iron Maiden
Types: Action – Attack – Looter
Cost: $4
+$2. Each other player with 5 or more cards in hand discards a card. If it is an…
Action card, he gains a Copper; Treasure card, he gains a Ruins; Victory card, he gains a Curse. He puts the gained card into his hand.

When you trash this, you may trash up to 2 cards from your hand.
[/quote]
Awesome name. The effects seem just about right (and I don't mind that it gives out both Curses and Ruins, but I really do dislike Incendiarist), but it may need to cost $5. I can't tell if the bottom part is tacked on or not, but I have a feeling it is. Which I think is OK since I feel the same way about Catacombs. Cool card all around; not much else to say.

Quote
Smelter (B)
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $3
You may trash a card from your hand. If you trash an… Action card, +2 Actions; Treasure card, +$2; Victory card, +2 Cards.

When you trash a card you may discard this from your hand. If you go, gain a card costing less than the trashed card.

EDIT: If you trash a Victory card with Smelter, it gives you +2 Cards, not +1 Card.

I like both Smelters! This one gives a variety of <$2 effects for the price of $3, but you get to trash a card from your hand which I think makes up for it. The Reaction part is nifty with some self-synergy as well as fitting fairly well into the rest of the Dark Ages set. I don't think that it's effect fairly balanced. If you use it purely from this card, it's fairly weak. But against Knights or another Trashing attack or TFB, it could be really powerful, but not in a broken way. Overall, seems like a solid card.

Quote
Barrister
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
+2 Cards. Each player (including you) reveals the top 2 cards of his deck; you may choose a revealed Treasure for him to trash. He discards the rest. You may gain a Treasure from the trash.

Setup: Replace one of each player's starting Coppers with a Claim.

Claim
Types: Treasure
Cost: $0
Worth $1. When you play this, look through your discard pile. You may trash a Claim from your discard pile or hand. If you do, gain a Gold, putting it into your hand.

Clarification: In a 6-player game, the starting player does not replace a Copper with a Claim.

I really like this idea of fighting other people for their Claims. Thematic to boot! Balance-wise it seems all right. A couple of things could be tweaked post-contest, but it seems like its garnered mostly neutral opinions on it, so I doubt that it'll win. But I like the idea a whole lot!

Quote
Mendicant
Types: Action – Looter
Cost: $2
+1 Card. +1 Action. Gain a Ruins, putting it into your hand. You may play any number of Ruins from your hand. If you played two or more, +1 Card.


I'm a sucker for these $2 cards. I like this compared to the other Ruin-earning Looter submissions because of how straightforward the concept. Basically lets you amass a bunch of Ruins and play a whole bunch without having to spend an Action. And if you play enough, you get a +1 Card boost. My other quibble with it is that if you get unlucky with a Ruins Village ontop. I almost wish that the card had a You may gain a ruins... but then if this is the only Looter in the Kingdom, that Ruined Village will stay on top and this will just be a cantrip since know one would be willing to take one for the team. But it could be that the swinginess isn't THAT bad.

And that's it. I feel like there are a lot more duds this time around than from the Hinterlands submissions. Which I thought were worse than the Prosperity submissions. But I don't know, that could be just me.
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #265 on: September 28, 2013, 01:08:18 am »
+2

some weird three Smelter trick of playing one, trashing one for a Silver, raveling another Smelter from your hand, and then gaining the Spoils.

But actually, that gets me thinking. Would that smelted Spoils go on top of your deck? I'm thinking yes since you would be putting the Silver ontop of your deck and then instead putting a Spoils there. But I don't know. May be a blue dog thing.

No, this is a well-established thing. "When you would gain X... gain Y instead" replaces the entire "gain X" event, wherever its target is, with a "gain Y" event, which has no target specified and therefore goes to the discard pile. This is why you can play Explorer and then reveal Trader to replace the Silver-in-hand with Silver-in-discard-pile.

Quote
Quote
Mendicant
Types: Action – Looter
Cost: $2
+1 Card. +1 Action. Gain a Ruins, putting it into your hand. You may play any number of Ruins from your hand. If you played two or more, +1 Card.

I almost wish that the card had a You may gain a ruins... but then if this is the only Looter in the Kingdom, that Ruined Village will stay on top and this will just be a cantrip since know one would be willing to take one for the team.

I dunno, they might if it's the only village.
Logged

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #266 on: September 28, 2013, 01:28:05 am »
0

some weird three Smelter trick of playing one, trashing one for a Silver, raveling another Smelter from your hand, and then gaining the Spoils.

But actually, that gets me thinking. Would that smelted Spoils go on top of your deck? I'm thinking yes since you would be putting the Silver ontop of your deck and then instead putting a Spoils there. But I don't know. May be a blue dog thing.

No, this is a well-established thing. "When you would gain X... gain Y instead" replaces the entire "gain X" event, wherever its target is, with a "gain Y" event, which has no target specified and therefore goes to the discard pile. This is why you can play Explorer and then reveal Trader to replace the Silver-in-hand with Silver-in-discard-pile.

Huh. That does make sense. Thanks!
Quote
Quote
Mendicant
Types: Action – Looter
Cost: $2
+1 Card. +1 Action. Gain a Ruins, putting it into your hand. You may play any number of Ruins from your hand. If you played two or more, +1 Card.

I almost wish that the card had a You may gain a ruins... but then if this is the only Looter in the Kingdom, that Ruined Village will stay on top and this will just be a cantrip since know one would be willing to take one for the team.

I dunno, they might if it's the only village.
Aw, good point. For some reason I forgot that a Ruined Village would be played with an action. So yeah. It'd act as a Village.
Logged

Schneau

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1174
  • Shuffle iT Username: Schneau
  • Respect: +1461
    • View Profile
    • Rainwave
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #267 on: September 28, 2013, 09:07:16 am »
0

Quote
Smelter (A)
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $3
+1 Action. Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card of equal cost, putting it on top of your deck.

When you would gain a Silver, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead, gain a Spoils.

Pros: I think the reaction is really interesting.

Cons: The action itself is not interesting.

Possible tweaks: Maybe if you put the gained card into your hand?  And if that's too good, maybe have it downgrade a la Carpenter?

Thinking about this card's Reaction, I think it might be even more interesting if it said:

"When you gain a Silver, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash the Silver and gain a Spoils."

This tweak won't likely make Silvers run out (unless it's a Masterpiece game).

Trader!

AJD gains a Silver.
...AJD reveals a Smelter.
......AJD trashes the Silver and gains a Spoils.
.........AJD reveals a Trader.
............AJD gains a Silver instead of the Spoils.
...............AJD reveals a Smelter.
..................AJD trashes the Silver and gains a Spoils.
.....................AJD reveals a Trader.
........................AJD gains a Silver instead of the Spoils.

...and so on till the Silver pile is empty.

Smelter's reaction has to be would-gain, is what I'm saying.

Ugg, you're right. Well, mostly. You could hack it to say "Trash the Silver and put a Spoils from the Spoils pile into your discard pile", which gets around the whole gaining thing like Chancellor gets around the discarding thing.

This is (one reason) why Trader just shouldn't be.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #268 on: September 28, 2013, 09:09:16 am »
+3

Blasphemy! Trader is awesome.
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #269 on: September 28, 2013, 09:25:47 am »
+6

This is (one reason) why Trader just shouldn't be.

Would you like a Silver instead?
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

nopawnsintended

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +186
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #270 on: September 28, 2013, 09:58:06 am »
0

Well, I'm doing it. Not all of them though. Just my favorites (my card may or may not be included).

Onto the cards!

Quote
Charter (A)
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card. +1 Action. Trash the top card of your deck. You may gain a card from the trash.

When you trash this, +2 Cards.
This is just so cute. It's basically discard the top card of your deck if it rocks, trash it otherwise and gain something decent from the trash. It has a few other tricks (most notably on-trash effects like Cultist and Squire), but that's the gist of it. It almost needs a $3-$6 clause, but then that almost defeats the purpose of it if you happen to trash a Province. It steps on Rats toes just a bit, but not enough that I don't think it shouldn't exist.  I think that if the on trash is too powerful, it could be reduced to just +1 Card. But then the similarities between it and Rats grow even similar.

I agree that the card is so cute, but one of the neat tricks that I like the most is if you amass a bunch of these.  Sometimes Charter A will be the top card of the deck.  In that case, this is +3 Cards, +1 Action (practically).  That's Menagerie-like activation that would be fun to play, I think.  Combined with the trashing, and this can get pretty strong.  There's also a weird way to piece this reliably together with Watchtower.  Namely:

Play Charter A, trash the top card (Charter A), draw your stuff, gain Charter A, reveal Watchtower, put Charter A on top of the deck.  Play another Charter A (you have lots of them).

Thinking about it now, maybe it is strong at $4 (a non-terminal, indiscriminate-in-a-way trasher that can't hurt, plus Menagerie activation when you hit), but possibly costing at $5 will work, too.  On other tweaks, I don't like the cost restrictions on the gain.  Namely, it is unfun to trash your own Province as the card is written because this is essentially a Great Hall or a curselessFamiliar when good stuff is on top without the cost restriction.  For that reason, I don't think this card needs to be potentially dangerous to play.
Logged

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #271 on: September 28, 2013, 10:12:03 am »
0

Well, I'm doing it. Not all of them though. Just my favorites (my card may or may not be included).

Onto the cards!

Quote
Charter (A)
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card. +1 Action. Trash the top card of your deck. You may gain a card from the trash.

When you trash this, +2 Cards.
This is just so cute. It's basically discard the top card of your deck if it rocks, trash it otherwise and gain something decent from the trash. It has a few other tricks (most notably on-trash effects like Cultist and Squire), but that's the gist of it. It almost needs a $3-$6 clause, but then that almost defeats the purpose of it if you happen to trash a Province. It steps on Rats toes just a bit, but not enough that I don't think it shouldn't exist.  I think that if the on trash is too powerful, it could be reduced to just +1 Card. But then the similarities between it and Rats grow even similar.

I agree that the card is so cute, but one of the neat tricks that I like the most is if you amass a bunch of these.  Sometimes Charter A will be the top card of the deck.  In that case, this is +3 Cards, +1 Action (practically).  That's Menagerie-like activation that would be fun to play, I think.  Combined with the trashing, and this can get pretty strong.  There's also a weird way to piece this reliably together with Watchtower.  Namely:

Play Charter A, trash the top card (Charter A), draw your stuff, gain Charter A, reveal Watchtower, put Charter A on top of the deck.  Play another Charter A (you have lots of them).

Thinking about it now, maybe it is strong at $4 (a non-terminal, indiscriminate-in-a-way trasher that can't hurt, plus Menagerie activation when you hit), but possibly costing at $5 will work, too.  On other tweaks, I don't like the cost restrictions on the gain.  Namely, it is unfun to trash your own Province as the card is written because this is essentially a Great Hall or a curselessFamiliar when good stuff is on top without the cost restriction.  For that reason, I don't think this card needs to be potentially dangerous to play.
It could have a cost restriction on both the cards it trashes and cards it gains, no?
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #272 on: September 28, 2013, 10:34:20 am »
0

Well, I'm doing it. Not all of them though. Just my favorites (my card may or may not be included).

Onto the cards!

Quote
Charter (A)
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card. +1 Action. Trash the top card of your deck. You may gain a card from the trash.

When you trash this, +2 Cards.
This is just so cute. It's basically discard the top card of your deck if it rocks, trash it otherwise and gain something decent from the trash. It has a few other tricks (most notably on-trash effects like Cultist and Squire), but that's the gist of it. It almost needs a $3-$6 clause, but then that almost defeats the purpose of it if you happen to trash a Province. It steps on Rats toes just a bit, but not enough that I don't think it shouldn't exist.  I think that if the on trash is too powerful, it could be reduced to just +1 Card. But then the similarities between it and Rats grow even similar.

I agree that the card is so cute, but one of the neat tricks that I like the most is if you amass a bunch of these.  Sometimes Charter A will be the top card of the deck.  In that case, this is +3 Cards, +1 Action (practically).  That's Menagerie-like activation that would be fun to play, I think.  Combined with the trashing, and this can get pretty strong.  There's also a weird way to piece this reliably together with Watchtower.  Namely:

Play Charter A, trash the top card (Charter A), draw your stuff, gain Charter A, reveal Watchtower, put Charter A on top of the deck.  Play another Charter A (you have lots of them).

Thinking about it now, maybe it is strong at $4 (a non-terminal, indiscriminate-in-a-way trasher that can't hurt, plus Menagerie activation when you hit), but possibly costing at $5 will work, too.  On other tweaks, I don't like the cost restrictions on the gain.  Namely, it is unfun to trash your own Province as the card is written because this is essentially a Great Hall or a curselessFamiliar when good stuff is on top without the cost restriction.  For that reason, I don't think this card needs to be potentially dangerous to play.
It could have a cost restriction on both the cards it trashes and cards it gains, no?

If accidental Province trashing bothers people so much, that would be the best solution.  The thing is, this Charter is pretty absurdly strong.  When I last though about it I didn't really consider the on-trash.  Thinking about it now... Charter by itself pretty much enables a draw-your-deck engine.  It's so safe you can piledrive them without really hurting your deck.  When the junk is gone (or nearly gone), it becomes +3 Cards, +1 Action very easily.  Menagerie was mentioned, but this blows it out of the water.  With Menagerie, you have to actually build a diverse deck and gear it towards activating Menagerie.  With Charter, you just buy lots of Charters.  With Menagerie, there's finesse in how you play your hand to activate Menagerie.  With Charter, you just hope the card you trash is a Charter.

Gaining a card from the trash really needs that cost cap because otherwise you'll get really horrible games where all you can do is steal each others' VP.  Yeah accidentally trashing your own Province would feel bad, but at least you can play around that -- track your deck, don't play the Charter in the late game.  People get upset at Lookout too, but it's something you can easily mitigate with you own choices.  But Saboteur-Charter leaves you no good counterplay other than getting Charters of your own and hoping you're lucky enough to get your Province back before an opponent swipes it (and maybe steal some of theirs if you mirror).  Good luck if there are Highways too.  I can see games like this turning into Stalemates where players just keep stealing Provinces from each other and cannot otherwise end the game with a win.

So if the possibility of hitting your own Province is such a bad thing (it really isn't), then it's better just to put some other restriction on there so that the Province doesn't get trashed in the first place.  A cost restriction on the trashing would be one way.  Another option would be to have it discard Victory cards instead of trashing them.  Then the trashing also whiffs on Estates, which also helps mitigate how powerful Charter can be just on its own.
Logged

Schneau

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1174
  • Shuffle iT Username: Schneau
  • Respect: +1461
    • View Profile
    • Rainwave
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #273 on: September 28, 2013, 10:35:15 am »
0

Blasphemy! Trader is awesome.

Here's what Donald said:

Quote from: Donald X.
Old Silver Mine, if I made the set again I might just stick in Trader’s top with no bottom, the bottom is trouble and the top was a compelling card. You can’t squeeze every ounce of playability out of every card and still have a playable game; that’s the paradox of card text.
Logged

nopawnsintended

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +186
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages
« Reply #274 on: September 28, 2013, 10:37:13 am »
0

Well, I'm doing it. Not all of them though. Just my favorites (my card may or may not be included).

Onto the cards!

Quote
Charter (A)
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card. +1 Action. Trash the top card of your deck. You may gain a card from the trash.

When you trash this, +2 Cards.
This is just so cute. It's basically discard the top card of your deck if it rocks, trash it otherwise and gain something decent from the trash. It has a few other tricks (most notably on-trash effects like Cultist and Squire), but that's the gist of it. It almost needs a $3-$6 clause, but then that almost defeats the purpose of it if you happen to trash a Province. It steps on Rats toes just a bit, but not enough that I don't think it shouldn't exist.  I think that if the on trash is too powerful, it could be reduced to just +1 Card. But then the similarities between it and Rats grow even similar.

I agree that the card is so cute, but one of the neat tricks that I like the most is if you amass a bunch of these.  Sometimes Charter A will be the top card of the deck.  In that case, this is +3 Cards, +1 Action (practically).  That's Menagerie-like activation that would be fun to play, I think.  Combined with the trashing, and this can get pretty strong.  There's also a weird way to piece this reliably together with Watchtower.  Namely:

Play Charter A, trash the top card (Charter A), draw your stuff, gain Charter A, reveal Watchtower, put Charter A on top of the deck.  Play another Charter A (you have lots of them).

Thinking about it now, maybe it is strong at $4 (a non-terminal, indiscriminate-in-a-way trasher that can't hurt, plus Menagerie activation when you hit), but possibly costing at $5 will work, too.  On other tweaks, I don't like the cost restrictions on the gain.  Namely, it is unfun to trash your own Province as the card is written because this is essentially a Great Hall or a curselessFamiliar when good stuff is on top without the cost restriction.  For that reason, I don't think this card needs to be potentially dangerous to play.
It could have a cost restriction on both the cards it trashes and cards it gains, no?

I'd be happier with that.  I'd hate to trash a Province and not be able to gain it.  Seems like a reasonable tweak, to me, but I'm thinking about it quickly.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 14  All
 

Page created in 0.085 seconds with 21 queries.