Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10  All

Author Topic: Revised versions of published cards  (Read 36842 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

silverspawn

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4302
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +1947
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #125 on: October 28, 2014, 04:32:59 pm »
0

Here is what I would change

Scout: add +1$
Adventurer: dig for 1 additional treasure
Rebuild: return cards to the supply instead of trashing them.
Transmute: add a +Action
Scrying Pool: Cut both the self-spy and the regular spy effect
All P3$ cards: make them 1$ cheaper
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7134
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9920
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #126 on: October 28, 2014, 04:40:11 pm »
0

So, continuing the conversation here.

I saw that change to rebuild, and I didn't even get it until I read that it was the previous card that would have been in the set if it weren't for Rebuild. But that's not a fix, it's a different card.

Mostly I feel that Rebuild is unsalvageable. The entire concept is turning Victory cards into better Victory cards. That makes you want to spend most of your $5 buys on Duchies, which sucks. It could be a better card instead.

How about making transmute non-terminal, and making adventurer dig for 3 cards? I mean, you can't think that Adventurer is fine and thief isn't.

I have made my feelings about Transmute known many times, even in this very thread. Transmute is fine—even good—as long as there are other Potion-cost cards on the board. And since I always play with 2 sets at once, there always are!

I think Adventurer digging for 3 cards sounds strong, but it does have the big advantage of the card being no more complex than it is now. The idea is growing on me. Previously I was thinking about having it topdeck one revealed Action, but that takes more words and is more complex, which is not great in the Base Set.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7134
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9920
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #127 on: October 28, 2014, 04:45:47 pm »
0

In addition to needing a boost, Thief's wording could really be more concise and clear.

Quote
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. If they revealed any Treasure cards, they trash one of them that you choose. You may gain any or all of these trashed cards. They discard the other revealed cards.

Quote
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck, trashes a revealed Treasure you choose, and discards the rest. You may gain any number of the trashed cards.

EDIT: Updated with Polk's suggested addition of "You may".
« Last Edit: October 28, 2014, 05:01:00 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

silverspawn

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4302
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +1947
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #128 on: October 28, 2014, 04:47:51 pm »
0

Quote
I have made my feelings about Transmute known many times, even in this very thread. Transmute is fine—even good—as long as there are other Potion-cost cards on the board. And since I always play with 2 sets at once, there always are!
well I get that. But if you're making the changes, then you're offering it to the community, right? So, it's not about how you play, because most people just play all random, because goko pretty much forces you to. And if you do play all random, then it is weak, because you never buy it. that's what weak means.

Quote
Mostly I feel that Rebuild is unsalvageable. The entire concept is turning Victory cards into better Victory cards. That makes you want to spend most of your $5 buys on Duchies, which sucks. It could be a better card instead.
Well it wouldn't be a fun card. But if we start replacing cards with largely unrelated cards, then there are immediately a dozen other cards that could be replaced. Wasn't the point to just tweak them a little bit?
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1748
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #129 on: October 28, 2014, 04:49:54 pm »
+1

All P3$ cards: make them 1$ cheaper

I don't like that one bit. The rest seem fine, though I feel a better fix for Transmute would be making the gains optional. I would also add +Buy to Counting House given that it is both narrow and likes +Buy.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4302
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +1947
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #130 on: October 28, 2014, 04:51:54 pm »
0

Quote
I don't like that one bit.
why? I mean, I get why you could think it isn't necessary, but not how you can think it's bad. Why do you think it's bad?
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1708
  • Respect: +1786
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #131 on: October 28, 2014, 04:52:09 pm »
+1

In addition to needing a boost, Thief's wording could really be more concise and clearer.

Quote
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. If they revealed any Treasure cards, they trash one of them that you choose. You may gain any or all of these trashed cards. They discard the other revealed cards.

Quote
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck, trashes a revealed Treasure you choose, and discards the rest. Gain any number of the trashed cards.

Perhaps "and discards the rest" should be "then discards the rest".

Also, isn't it pretty standard Dominion wording to say "You may" when 0/not doing something is a choice? "Gain any number of the trashed cards" reads too much like it is forcing you to gain at least one of the trashed cards.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7134
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9920
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #132 on: October 28, 2014, 04:55:59 pm »
0

Quote
I have made my feelings about Transmute known many times, even in this very thread. Transmute is fine—even good—as long as there are other Potion-cost cards on the board. And since I always play with 2 sets at once, there always are!
well I get that. But if you're making the changes, then you're offering it to the community, right? So, it's not about how you play, because most people just play all random, because goko pretty much forces you to. And if you do play all random, then it is weak, because you never buy it. that's what weak means.

Quote
Mostly I feel that Rebuild is unsalvageable. The entire concept is turning Victory cards into better Victory cards. That makes you want to spend most of your $5 buys on Duchies, which sucks. It could be a better card instead.
Well it wouldn't be a fun card. But if we start replacing cards with largely unrelated cards, then there are immediately a dozen other cards that could be replaced. Wasn't the point to just tweak them a little bit?

Well, I like to offer stuff to the community, but really this thread was more, "This is stuff I'm thinking of doing; it's here for you if you want it." I even say that right in the OP. Can me selfish, but I'm not interested in improving (and maybe overpowering) a card that's already fine in the games I play. Likewise, maybe there are a dozen cards you'd like to replace, but for me there are only a handful. My goal is to make my IRL games more fun with as few changes as possible. The scale of those changes—tweaking a card vs. replacing it entirely—isn't really a concern for me.

But by all means, continue to suggest other changes you'd like to use. I don't have a monopoly on card change suggestions. If you want, I can even mock up some images for you.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7134
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9920
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #133 on: October 28, 2014, 04:59:15 pm »
+1

Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck, trashes a revealed Treasure you choose, and discards the rest. Gain any number of the trashed cards.

Perhaps "and discards the rest" should be "then discards the rest".

Noble Brigand says, "and discards the rest." I think that's pretty standard wording, although I'm sure your wording would also be fine.

Also, isn't it pretty standard Dominion wording to say "You may" when 0/not doing something is a choice? "Gain any number of the trashed cards" reads too much like it is forcing you to gain at least one of the trashed cards.

Yes, I considered that, but was going for maximum concision. I think you're right that I should add it, though. It's only two words and it eliminates a common rules confusion.
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1748
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #134 on: October 28, 2014, 05:00:52 pm »
+3

why? I mean, I get why you could think it isn't necessary, but not how you can think it's bad. Why do you think it's bad?

It would make Alchemist an autobuy almost all the time and Familiar almost all the time. They are already good enough. I think the possibility of not getting $3P on each shuffle is part of the risk assessment you need to make. Sea Hag, Ambassador and Swindler's swingyness is comparable, and I don't mind them either.

And it is completely false that you lose the game immediately if you fail to get $3P on the first shuffle, because Familiars tend to miss shuffles and luck may even out, and Alchemists may always find a Potion to be topdecked, or never, so you can also have a swing of luck. Minimizing luck is good when you can do it without altering other variables. Making Familiar super-powerful because you can buy it everytime the Potion comes up would reduce the variety of the game, and consequently, the fun.

Can me selfish

I don't think I want to call you selfish, though I don't mind if that's what you really want, but I sure won't be canning you no shellfish. Go to the supermarket if you want some.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7134
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9920
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #135 on: October 28, 2014, 05:04:34 pm »
0

And it is completely false that you lose the game immediately if you fail to get $3P on the first shuffle, because Familiars tend to miss shuffles and luck may even out, and Alchemists may always find a Potion to be topdecked, or never, so you can also have a swing of luck. Minimizing luck is good when you can do it without altering other variables. Making Familiar super-powerful because you can buy it everytime the Potion comes up would reduce the variety of the game, and consequently, the fun.

I think missing $3P on your first shuffle is a level of magnitude worse than one (or more) of your Familiars missing a shuffle. The reason is that usually your $2P hand is an utter dud. But again, this problem can be solved by playing with more than one Potion-cost card at once, rather than lowering Familiar's cost. Buying nothing or e.g. Native Village instead of Familiar on turn 3 or 4 is gg. Buying an Apothecary or University instead means you haven't really fallen that far behind.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4302
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +1947
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #136 on: October 28, 2014, 05:05:45 pm »
0

Quote
but really this thread was more, "This is stuff I'm thinking of doing; it's here for you if you want it."
oh, you do say it in the op. if that's what it was meant to be, than that's what it is, you're of course not obligated to do anything. I just thought this was more targeted towards the community.

Quote
If you want, I can even mock up some images for you.
well Showdown is already doing cards for me, and I think he's pretty amazing at it (and he said he doesn't need more than a few min for a card if he has the image) so I wouldn't ask you for that. but thanks for the offer :)

Quote
It would make Alchemist an autobuy almost all the time and Familiar almost all the time.
It wouldn't. I mean, there is no point arguing about these kinds of things, but come on. Scrying pool and Apothecary aren't stronger because they are cheaper, they're stronger because of what they do.
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3005
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +3891
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #137 on: October 28, 2014, 11:47:34 pm »
0

Also, isn't it pretty standard Dominion wording to say "You may" when 0/not doing something is a choice? "Gain any number of the trashed cards" reads too much like it is forcing you to gain at least one of the trashed cards.

Actual Thief does say "you may gain any or all", but most Dominion cards actually don't say "you may" when 0 is a choice: cf. Cellar, Forge, Chapel, etc.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7134
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9920
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #138 on: October 28, 2014, 11:54:42 pm »
0

Also, isn't it pretty standard Dominion wording to say "You may" when 0/not doing something is a choice? "Gain any number of the trashed cards" reads too much like it is forcing you to gain at least one of the trashed cards.

Actual Thief does say "you may gain any or all", but most Dominion cards actually don't say "you may" when 0 is a choice: cf. Cellar, Forge, Chapel, etc.

Well, the difference is that with those cards, you wouldn't choose to play them at all if you didn't want to trash, discard, or gain at least one card. Yes, there's Golem, Conspirator, etc., but you know. Cards that you also have another reason to play (like Dame Anna and Thief) usually specify "you may".
Logged

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1853
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #139 on: October 29, 2014, 04:31:11 pm »
0

I think missing $3P on your first shuffle is a level of magnitude worse than one (or more) of your Familiars missing a shuffle. The reason is that usually your $2P hand is an utter dud. But again, this problem can be solved by playing with more than one Potion-cost card at once, rather than lowering Familiar's cost.

Yes, but not everyone abides by this recommendation, and when going full random online, I don't think this option exists at all.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7134
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9920
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #140 on: October 29, 2014, 06:12:57 pm »
+1

I think missing $3P on your first shuffle is a level of magnitude worse than one (or more) of your Familiars missing a shuffle. The reason is that usually your $2P hand is an utter dud. But again, this problem can be solved by playing with more than one Potion-cost card at once, rather than lowering Familiar's cost.

Yes, but not everyone abides by this recommendation, and when going full random online, I don't think this option exists at all.

I agree; it's a shame that full-random is the de facto standard, especially when it comes to Alchemy.
Logged

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2818
  • Respect: +1527
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #141 on: November 02, 2014, 11:20:13 pm »
0

Infiltrator - $4
Action - Attack
+$2
Each player (including you) reveals the top 5 cards of his deck and puts them back in an order you choose.

This looks like an insane amount of AP.
Eh maybe, but it's terminal, so it won't happen much more than once per turn. I can't see it overall being much worse AP-wise than cards like Cartographer and Apothecary. Although, to be fair, those cards are pretty heavy on AP if you want to play fully optimally.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2014, 11:21:31 pm by blueblimp »
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1748
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #142 on: November 03, 2014, 08:27:10 am »
0

The huge difference is rearranging oppnent's cards. Since you usually don't know their hand, you have to estinate and track, and that takes a lot of extra work.
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1570
  • Respect: +1196
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #143 on: November 04, 2014, 05:39:14 pm »
+2

Feast
Action - $4
Trash a card that you have in play. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.

Not a huge change, but makes the card much more interesting.

Alternatively, leave Feast as is and have it cost $2. I can't think of any $5 cards that make opening Feast/Feast too powerful, it would be a big deal on boards with +buys and it would be handy in a slog.
Logged

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3836
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2407
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #144 on: November 04, 2014, 06:04:12 pm »
+2

Feast
Action - $4
Trash a card that you have in play. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.

Not a huge change, but makes the card much more interesting.

Alternatively, leave Feast as is and have it cost $2. I can't think of any $5 cards that make opening Feast/Feast too powerful, it would be a big deal on boards with +buys and it would be handy in a slog.
This would let you open $5/Feast. That might still be okay.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7134
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9920
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #145 on: November 04, 2014, 06:05:34 pm »
0

Feast
Action - $4
Trash a card that you have in play. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.

This is a cool idea, but it causes tracking issues with Durations. I guess you could leave the Feast itself in play to remind you of the Duration.
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1748
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #146 on: November 04, 2014, 06:12:12 pm »
0

Feast
Action - $4
Trash a card that you have in play. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.

This is a cool idea, but it causes tracking issues with Durations. I guess you could leave the Feast itself in play to remind you of the Duration.

It also has infinite-loop potential. You could do a scheme-like wording and have the trash and gain happen on discard-from-play of the chosen card.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11304
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12063
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #147 on: November 04, 2014, 08:14:40 pm »
0

Feast
Action - $4
Trash a card that you have in play. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.

Not a huge change, but makes the card much more interesting.
But this would suck with Procession.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The Twitch channel where I stream DominionThe YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's albums for free

NoMoreFun

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1570
  • Respect: +1196
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #148 on: November 05, 2014, 06:35:06 am »
0

Feast
Action - $4
Trash a card that you have in play. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.

This is a cool idea, but it causes tracking issues with Durations. I guess you could leave the Feast itself in play to remind you of the Duration.

It also has infinite-loop potential.

How?
Logged

theblankman

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 461
  • Respect: +382
    • View Profile
Re: Revised versions of published cards
« Reply #149 on: November 06, 2014, 09:27:54 am »
0

Feast
Action - $4
Trash a card that you have in play. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.

This is a cool idea, but it causes tracking issues with Durations. I guess you could leave the Feast itself in play to remind you of the Duration.

It also has infinite-loop potential. You could do a scheme-like wording and have the trash and gain happen on discard-from-play of the chosen card.

I'm not immediately seeing the infinite loop, but I am seeing a very interesting payload to an engine built around KC.  Also you usually can't use it on treasures, but it becomes yet another card that does neat things with Black Market. 
Logged
it's a shame that full-random is the de facto standard
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10  All
 

Page created in 0.09 seconds with 21 queries.