DominionStrategy Wiki
Nobody is asking the important questions yet.How are we going to include these in the Qvist community card rankings?
I'm going to say that there is probably 7 Debt cards.
Anyway, ugh, Possession is already a messed up card. And, now the VP thing. Well, I guess you should never buy Bishop if Possession is on the board. Banning the card might not be such a bad idea.
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way
Quote from: Watno on May 09, 2016, 12:44:43 pmQuote from: Seprix on May 09, 2016, 12:42:03 pmCalling a Debt cost VP card.Debt cost VP card would be broken assuming you don't need to pay off the debt of the player you possess. You'd just need enough buys and could buy them all.I guess you're right. Maybe it's $2 [4] for 3 VP then or something like that. But that's not incredibly unique. I feel like it would have to also do something extra.I also love that Possession is getting a nerf. It's not the best card in the world to begin with, but now it's even not as good.
Quote from: Seprix on May 09, 2016, 12:42:03 pmCalling a Debt cost VP card.Debt cost VP card would be broken assuming you don't need to pay off the debt of the player you possess. You'd just need enough buys and could buy them all.
Calling a Debt cost VP card.
Guys: be careful with Royal Blacksmith. If your deck is mostly Coppers, it can end up decreasing your handsize.
Quote from: Seprix on May 09, 2016, 12:55:52 pmQuote from: Watno on May 09, 2016, 12:44:43 pmQuote from: Seprix on May 09, 2016, 12:42:03 pmCalling a Debt cost VP card.Debt cost VP card would be broken assuming you don't need to pay off the debt of the player you possess. You'd just need enough buys and could buy them all.I guess you're right. Maybe it's $2 [4] for 3 VP then or something like that. But that's not incredibly unique. I feel like it would have to also do something extra.I also love that Possession is getting a nerf. It's not the best card in the world to begin with, but now it's even not as good. Um, this is a buff, not a nerf. Previously, Possession couldn't steal a person's VP when Monument, etc was played on the possessed turn. Now it can.
How can you all already determine whether it is a buff or nerf for Possession? So far, we have three cards that generate VP. Maybe this set has twelve debt cards, then it's clearly a nerf. Probably it doesn't have that much, and it maybe has some other VP generating cards which would buff Possession but it's definitely too early to determine the new strength of possession.
Quote from: GendoIkari on May 09, 2016, 01:34:29 pmQuote from: Seprix on May 09, 2016, 12:55:52 pmQuote from: Watno on May 09, 2016, 12:44:43 pmQuote from: Seprix on May 09, 2016, 12:42:03 pmCalling a Debt cost VP card.Debt cost VP card would be broken assuming you don't need to pay off the debt of the player you possess. You'd just need enough buys and could buy them all.I guess you're right. Maybe it's $2 [4] for 3 VP then or something like that. But that's not incredibly unique. I feel like it would have to also do something extra.I also love that Possession is getting a nerf. It's not the best card in the world to begin with, but now it's even not as good. Um, this is a buff, not a nerf. Previously, Possession couldn't steal a person's VP when Monument, etc was played on the possessed turn. Now it can.I read the post wrong. The possessed and the possessor previously were the possessor and the possessed, but now they are the possessed and the possessor. Reading all of that dialogue is complicated.
Quote from: drsteelhammer on May 09, 2016, 01:17:16 pmHow can you all already determine whether it is a buff or nerf for Possession? So far, we have three cards that generate VP. Maybe this set has twelve debt cards, then it's clearly a nerf. Probably it doesn't have that much, and it maybe has some other VP generating cards which would buff Possession but it's definitely too early to determine the new strength of possession.I don't think you can call it a nerf when it never existed that you could use Possession + Debt that way (except maybe in early playtesting). It's only a nerf versus a theoretical interaction that doesn't and never has existed. That's like saying that Smithy being +3 cards is a nerf vs if Smithy were +4 cards.
Quote from: drsteelhammer on May 09, 2016, 01:00:23 pmSo, I assume Debt, VP and Coin Tokens work this way, then. What about Pirate Ship tokens?Yes, you also get those tokens.
So, I assume Debt, VP and Coin Tokens work this way, then. What about Pirate Ship tokens?
Not to be the one coming with negative comments in such a jolly occasion, but I really wish the artists could find something a bit more original than "Still Life with Coins on Table #6" for Treasure cards.
So I can use their Pirate Ships to thin my deck and mine as payload? Miser is so 2015, guys.
Admittedly, there are plenty of ways to get to $14 on a turn, but do you think it could be possible that we will get a new treasure that gives you $6 or 7$ similar to Platinum coming out with Colonies?
Quote from: GendoIkari on May 09, 2016, 01:40:10 pmQuote from: drsteelhammer on May 09, 2016, 01:17:16 pmHow can you all already determine whether it is a buff or nerf for Possession? So far, we have three cards that generate VP. Maybe this set has twelve debt cards, then it's clearly a nerf. Probably it doesn't have that much, and it maybe has some other VP generating cards which would buff Possession but it's definitely too early to determine the new strength of possession.I don't think you can call it a nerf when it never existed that you could use Possession + Debt that way (except maybe in early playtesting). It's only a nerf versus a theoretical interaction that doesn't and never has existed. That's like saying that Smithy being +3 cards is a nerf vs if Smithy were +4 cards.No, but the way Debt interacts with Possession is a counter to Possession. Buying a debt card before my opponent possesses me looks pretty strong.
Quote from: Accatitippi on May 09, 2016, 01:32:20 pmNot to be the one coming with negative comments in such a jolly occasion, but I really wish the artists could find something a bit more original than "Still Life with Coins on Table #6" for Treasure cards.Like this?
Quote from: drsteelhammer on May 09, 2016, 01:45:46 pmQuote from: GendoIkari on May 09, 2016, 01:40:10 pmQuote from: drsteelhammer on May 09, 2016, 01:17:16 pmHow can you all already determine whether it is a buff or nerf for Possession? So far, we have three cards that generate VP. Maybe this set has twelve debt cards, then it's clearly a nerf. Probably it doesn't have that much, and it maybe has some other VP generating cards which would buff Possession but it's definitely too early to determine the new strength of possession.I don't think you can call it a nerf when it never existed that you could use Possession + Debt that way (except maybe in early playtesting). It's only a nerf versus a theoretical interaction that doesn't and never has existed. That's like saying that Smithy being +3 cards is a nerf vs if Smithy were +4 cards.No, but the way Debt interacts with Possession is a counter to Possession. Buying a debt card before my opponent possesses me looks pretty strong.But buying Debt cards while you Possess somebody is even stronger. In both cases the possessee is left deep in debt, but in the second case the possessor gained a card.The net result would be very heavily pro-possession. (it's essentially a coin-production pin)
Quote from: Accatitippi on May 09, 2016, 01:50:23 pmQuote from: drsteelhammer on May 09, 2016, 01:45:46 pmQuote from: GendoIkari on May 09, 2016, 01:40:10 pmQuote from: drsteelhammer on May 09, 2016, 01:17:16 pmHow can you all already determine whether it is a buff or nerf for Possession? So far, we have three cards that generate VP. Maybe this set has twelve debt cards, then it's clearly a nerf. Probably it doesn't have that much, and it maybe has some other VP generating cards which would buff Possession but it's definitely too early to determine the new strength of possession.I don't think you can call it a nerf when it never existed that you could use Possession + Debt that way (except maybe in early playtesting). It's only a nerf versus a theoretical interaction that doesn't and never has existed. That's like saying that Smithy being +3 cards is a nerf vs if Smithy were +4 cards.No, but the way Debt interacts with Possession is a counter to Possession. Buying a debt card before my opponent possesses me looks pretty strong.But buying Debt cards while you Possess somebody is even stronger. In both cases the possessee is left deep in debt, but in the second case the possessor gained a card.The net result would be very heavily pro-possession. (it's essentially a coin-production pin)I think you missed Donalds post on Page 2. If you buy a card on a Possession turn, you get the debt.
I thought you were still talking to Possession-as-is rather than Possession-as-it-will-be. They should get different names or something.Speaking of which, Donald, when will the change take effect? Immediately, as soon as MF implements it (few months), 2017...?Also, while I'm Possessing, does my opponent use my token like their own in full (under my direction) or do they spend theirs and whatever they gain goes to me?
Speaking of which, Donald, when will the change take effect? Immediately, as soon as MF implements it (few months), 2017...?