Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Tweaking Diviner  (Read 14658 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #25 on: September 16, 2013, 01:30:22 pm »
0

I'm going to agree with Sir Peebles that this card doesn't need to stack, at least not in a see-8-cards-at-once kind of way. Of course, play testing can confirm or deny that. Either way, it gets really confusing if this stacks with the number of diviners in play, as opposed to stacking with multiple buys. If it only stacks with buys, you can say "if you have at least 1 diviner in play...".

Hmm... Still sounds weird. I cast my ballot fully expecting this to play out like spy when it hits cards you don't want to discard. That seems fine. Gosh, we should have talked about this one earlier if we noticed the rules confusion.
Logged

Schneau

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1174
  • Shuffle iT Username: Schneau
  • Respect: +1461
    • View Profile
    • Rainwave
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #26 on: September 16, 2013, 01:32:07 pm »
+1

I'm going to agree with Sir Peebles that this card doesn't need to stack, at least not in a see-8-cards-at-once kind of way. Of course, play testing can confirm or deny that. Either way, it gets really confusing if this stacks with the number of diviners in play, as opposed to stacking with multiple buys. If it only stacks with buys, you can say "if you have at least 1 diviner in play...".

Hmm... Still sounds weird. I cast my ballot fully expecting this to play out like spy when it hits cards you don't want to discard. That seems fine. Gosh, we should have talked about this one earlier if we noticed the rules confusion.

I think the rules confusion is only in LastFootnote's proposed tweak -- the original doesn't have any rules issues as far as I can tell.
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #27 on: September 16, 2013, 01:41:07 pm »
0

Duchess says: "In games using this". Looking at the FAQ, that means, "In games with Duchess in the Supply". In games where Duchess is not in the Supply, you cannot choose to gain a Duchess when you gain a Duchy. Sure, you'd fail to gain that Duchess anyway, but the "In games using this" avoids a meaningless decision.

Conversely, if Embargo and Diviner had "In games using this, their underline text would fail to function when the cards were bought from the Black Market deck.

I think that's a perverse interpretation of "in games using this". The job of the FAQ for Duchess is to clarify what Duchess does, not what the terms used on the card mean in general.

I'm getting more convinced that Duchess would behave the exact same way if it didn't say "in games using this".

Sure, because the decision would me meaningless. You could decide to gain a Duchess, but you would fail to do so.

Yes, that's why.

Quote
However, lets say you have another card that changes the rules of the game when its Supply pile is out. Maybe when a certain Supply pile is out, the game doesn't end when the Provinces are exhausted. How would you phrase that text? "When this card's Supply pile is in the Supply?" Yuck. Would that cease to function when they were bought out? No, you'd use "In games using this".

The thing is, if a card is in the Black Market deck, the game is still "using it".
Logged

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #28 on: September 16, 2013, 01:46:32 pm »
0

I'm going to agree with Sir Peebles that this card doesn't need to stack, at least not in a see-8-cards-at-once kind of way. Of course, play testing can confirm or deny that. Either way, it gets really confusing if this stacks with the number of diviners in play, as opposed to stacking with multiple buys. If it only stacks with buys, you can say "if you have at least 1 diviner in play...".

Hmm... Still sounds weird. I cast my ballot fully expecting this to play out like spy when it hits cards you don't want to discard. That seems fine. Gosh, we should have talked about this one earlier if we noticed the rules confusion.

I think the rules confusion is only in LastFootnote's proposed tweak -- the original doesn't have any rules issues as far as I can tell.
The original is fine so long as you can introduce a resolving order. I guess that's fine. Other cards require resolving order too (Watchtower, talisman, Royal Seal).
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #29 on: September 16, 2013, 02:25:13 pm »
+1

I've been convinced that the original wording is fine, or at least that it should be tested to see if my fears are founded. Part of my issue is that resolving the effect 6 times would be incredibly annoying in an online implementation, but perhaps that shouldn't be a consideration for these cards. In real life, you can obviously stop looking at the top 2 cards once you're happy with them.
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #30 on: September 16, 2013, 02:58:23 pm »
0

I feel like there are already too many cards with synonymous names like Oracle, Fortune Teller, and Soothsayer. Is there something less confusing (and more Hinterlandsy) we can call this than "Diviner"?
Logged

jamespotter

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 78
  • Respect: +45
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #31 on: September 16, 2013, 03:02:16 pm »
+1

Two things I missed when designing the card were the fact that it probably should be look at, not reveal, and it should say "While this is in play, when you buy a card, you may..." That would make it work with the online interface, too, addressing your concern, LastFootNote, as you could just click "no" a bunch of times, ending the sequence. I am totally open to a name change, I just lack the creativity to come up with something better.
Logged

Tables

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2816
  • Build more Bridges in the King's Court!
  • Respect: +3347
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #32 on: September 16, 2013, 03:35:58 pm »
+1

I've been convinced that the original wording is fine, or at least that it should be tested to see if my fears are founded. Part of my issue is that resolving the effect 6 times would be incredibly annoying in an online implementation, but perhaps that shouldn't be a consideration for these cards. In real life, you can obviously stop looking at the top 2 cards once you're happy with them.

The obvious online solution is just to have an extra 'don't look again' option if you put the two cards back which you look at, until something would change with regards to your deck. Whether the obvious solution is the best one, though, would remain to be seen.

[insert joke about obvious solutions and Goko here]
Logged
...spin-offs are still better for all of the previously cited reasons.
But not strictly better, because the spinoff can have a different cost than the expansion.

achmed_sender

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 234
  • Shuffle iT Username: achmedsender
  • Respect: +202
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #33 on: September 16, 2013, 03:41:43 pm »
+4

First read "Twerking Diviner" and was shocked that Miley Cyrus already arrived at the Dominion forum...
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #34 on: September 16, 2013, 05:20:11 pm »
+2

First read "Twerking Diviner" and was shocked that Miley Cyrus already arrived at the Dominion forum...

james did say he was open to a new name.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2005
  • Respect: +2109
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #35 on: September 19, 2013, 03:38:23 am »
+2

The card makes good use of +buy, but I'm worried that we've now exhausted the set's quota of cards with +buy.
Logged

Drab Emordnilap

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1832
  • Shuffle iT Username: Drab Emordnilap
  • Luther Bell Hendricks V
  • Respect: +1886
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #36 on: September 19, 2013, 08:10:51 am »
0

My issue with the proposed wording is, it's worded the exact same way as Goons, but works differently. With Goons, you follow the instruction once, separately, for each Goons in play, but for this, you're suggesting for an identical trigger condition to apply at different (or less in this case) times.
Logged

nopawnsintended

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +186
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #37 on: September 21, 2013, 10:40:26 am »
+2

I feel like there are already too many cards with synonymous names like Oracle, Fortune Teller, and Soothsayer. Is there something less confusing (and more Hinterlandsy) we can call this than "Diviner"?

Just throwing ideas until they stick.  Most of these are bad.  They come in 3 categories.

Ideas that capture the forecasting element of the card: Folksy Weatherman.  Fertilizer.  "See" Urchin.  Forecaster.
Ideas that capture the buy element of the card: Salesman. Tradesman.  Time Merchant. 
Ideas that take inspiration from elsewhere: Time Lord. Consulting Detective (world's only).  Man of Science.  Man of Faith.

Or, we could just go with "Tweaking Diviner."  I like that change.

Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5459
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #38 on: September 21, 2013, 10:53:29 am »
+2

After some thought,  I feel like Diviner fits Seaside more than Hinterlands.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #39 on: September 21, 2013, 11:37:08 am »
0

Ideas that capture the forecasting element of the card: Folksy Weatherman.  Fertilizer.  "See" Urchin.  Forecaster.
Ideas that capture the buy element of the card: Salesman. Tradesman.  Time Merchant. 

If Dominion weren't medieval in theme, I'd suggest something like Stock Trader: someone who buys things, and has to keep aware of upcoming trends in the market.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #40 on: September 21, 2013, 12:17:31 pm »
0

After some thought,  I feel like Diviner fits Seaside more than Hinterlands.

That's fair, but Seaside has Navigator, which is somewhat similar.
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
  • Respect: +2144
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #41 on: September 21, 2013, 12:25:21 pm »
0

After some thought,  I feel like Diviner fits Seaside more than Hinterlands.
I think it would be weird having two cards with identical on-play effects in the same set (Diviner and Wharf), even if they play out differently.
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9411
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #42 on: September 21, 2013, 12:48:03 pm »
+3

I feel like there are already too many cards with synonymous names like Oracle, Fortune Teller, and Soothsayer. Is there something less confusing (and more Hinterlandsy) we can call this than "Diviner"?

Just throwing ideas until they stick.  Most of these are bad.  They come in 3 categories.

Ideas that capture the forecasting element of the card: Folksy Weatherman.  Fertilizer.  "See" Urchin.  Forecaster.
Ideas that capture the buy element of the card: Salesman. Tradesman.  Time Merchant. 
Ideas that take inspiration from elsewhere: Time Lord. Consulting Detective (world's only).  Man of Science.  Man of Faith.

Or, we could just go with "Tweaking Diviner."  I like that change.



Time Lord conflicts with Doctor, though.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #43 on: September 21, 2013, 12:57:45 pm »
0

After some thought,  I feel like Diviner fits Seaside more than Hinterlands.

That's fair, but Seaside has Navigator, which is somewhat similar.

Anyway, most sets have cards that seem like they could fit into other sets. Scheme could be a Seaside card, Explorer could be a Hinterlands card, Knights could be a Cornucopia card, and so forth. The on-buy effect of Diviner makes it more Hinterlandsy than, say, Spice Merchant or Highway. (The only on-buy effect in Seaside is Embargo!)
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #44 on: September 21, 2013, 09:50:50 pm »
+3

A more modern version of "Diviner" could be "Consultant".  But that's too anachronistic, so shorten it to Sultan. ;)
Logged

nopawnsintended

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +186
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #45 on: September 21, 2013, 11:11:08 pm »
+1

I feel like there are already too many cards with synonymous names like Oracle, Fortune Teller, and Soothsayer. Is there something less confusing (and more Hinterlandsy) we can call this than "Diviner"?

Just throwing ideas until they stick.  Most of these are bad.  They come in 3 categories.

Ideas that capture the forecasting element of the card: Folksy Weatherman.  Fertilizer.  "See" Urchin.  Forecaster.
Ideas that capture the buy element of the card: Salesman. Tradesman.  Time Merchant. 
Ideas that take inspiration from elsewhere: Time Lord. Consulting Detective (world's only).  Man of Science.  Man of Faith.

Or, we could just go with "Tweaking Diviner."  I like that change.



Time Lord conflicts with Doctor, though.

Doctor?!?  Doctor Who?  Actually, the Time Lord card must have the ability to regenerate into an entirely new card... scratch that idea.
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1708
  • Respect: +1788
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #46 on: September 22, 2013, 10:19:19 am »
+5

I feel like there are already too many cards with synonymous names like Oracle, Fortune Teller, and Soothsayer. Is there something less confusing (and more Hinterlandsy) we can call this than "Diviner"?

Just throwing ideas until they stick.  Most of these are bad.  They come in 3 categories.

Ideas that capture the forecasting element of the card: Folksy Weatherman.  Fertilizer.  "See" Urchin.  Forecaster.
Ideas that capture the buy element of the card: Salesman. Tradesman.  Time Merchant. 
Ideas that take inspiration from elsewhere: Time Lord. Consulting Detective (world's only).  Man of Science.  Man of Faith.

Or, we could just go with "Tweaking Diviner."  I like that change.



Time Lord conflicts with Doctor, though.

Doctor?!?  Doctor Who?  Actually, the Time Lord card must have the ability to regenerate into an entirely new card... scratch that idea.

...Into a Madman with a box?
Logged

jamespotter

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 78
  • Respect: +45
    • View Profile
Re: Tweaking Diviner
« Reply #47 on: September 22, 2013, 12:29:46 pm »
+3

Here are my proposed changes: Raise the price to $4, add "you may" to the reveal clause, change reveal to "look at", and change the name to Adept (like a Temple Adept).

New proposed card to be playtested:

Adept
Action $4
+2 cards
+1 buy

While this is in play, when you buy a card, you may look at the top 2 cards of your deck, discard any number, and put the rest back in any order.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All
 

Page created in 0.051 seconds with 22 queries.