Dominion Strategy Forum
Dominion => Variants and Fan Cards => Topic started by: Dominion_Contests on August 26, 2013, 06:21:01 pm
-
Now Dominion has made its "last" expansion but I’m curious if any stone has been left unturned. To satisfy this curiosity I'm offering Prizes!
The prizes are as follows: and the winners are:
1st:Archetype with Artisan. Winner of $10 Amazon Gift Card and Governor Promo Card.
Most Original:Popsofctown with Halfpenny. Winner of either a Governor Promo Card or $3 Amazon/Paypal gift
Most Game Ready:RobertJ with Benefactor. Winner of either a Governor Promo Card or $3 Amazon/Paypal gift
Will the winners please PM me so we can send you your winnings.
Entrance
1. Each user may enter as many cards as they like.
2. The only restriction is once a card is submitted its final and no similar card can be posted.
3. Cards must be submitted as a reply to this post.
Card Guidelines
1. Cards should be compatible with all other official Dominion cards and Promos and should adhere to current mechanics as much as possible.
2. Cards must be, generally, unlike any other in official existence or any other submitted before your card. So if you have a new idea and put +2 Action +1 Cards on it, the card is acceptable if the idea is original.
3. Cards may not add new Tokens or Chips.
4. Cards don't need any art; just the text is good enough.
Contest Timetable
1. Once a card has been posted to this forum, I will determine if the card meets the Card Guidelines. If the card meets the guidelines I will edit it into the bottom of this post.
2. From this time until Saturday September 7th Midnight EST cards can be submitted.
3.From September 7th to 10/11th my family and I will deliberate/decide which card is the best.
4. September 11/12th I will post the winners and September 13/14th I will send out the prizes.
Winning
1. Each card will be judged by 4 top notch Dominion fiends.
2. The Judges will rate the cards as follows: 1-10 for Originality, 1-10 for how well the card interacts with the original Dominion cards (Play testing) and 1-10 for their opinion of the card.
3. Originality will be worth 50% of the cards rating and Playtested-ness and Personal Opinion of the card will each count for 25% of the rating.
4. I will judge the 10 best cards. Those cards will go on to the FAMILY ROUND where the other 3 judges will together determine which is the best card. In the event of a tie the 1st round score will be used to break the tie.
Fairness
1. I reserve the right to change these rules if necessary. I hope not but you never know.
**Have fun and I can't wait to see what is made!**
Changed the deadlines to allow users time to prepare for both contests
F i n a l R e s u l t s
In order of highest score
1.35.Name: Artisan
Originality: 9/10
Playtest: 7/10
Opinion:7/10
Overall: 32/40
8/10
Group Thoughts: We loved the originality of the concept and the only knock is Artisan’s minor similarity to knights (set random deck). To be honest the concept kind of surprised me and preformed much more unique and balanced than I previous thought. Just a few quibbles, many in our group thought the silver in the Artisan deck was unnecessary and many times the estates that were given out were benefit enough. Artisan should be an Attack card dropping the playtest score slightly
2.36.Name: Halfpenny
Originality: 10/10
Playtest: 3/10
Opinion: 7/10
Overall: 30/40
7.5/10
Group Thoughts: The card plays more like a condition, since you rarely find a viable situation to buy a halfpenny. Cool combination when playing with trashers (Remodel + Halfpenny, Remake+Halfpenny ). In our games Halfpenny was never bought and would have been rated higher if there were a way to justify buying it.
3.19.Name: Relay Rider
Originality: 8/10
Playtest: 7/10
Opinion: 6/10
Overall: 29/40
7.25/10
Group Thoughts: Liked the concept but the card just couldn’t win on our table. On just about every table we’d have to forego a better option. A key issue was with the order of the card’s effects, since you draw before going into your discard pile to get a Relay Rider, you have to shuffle your deck and lose the extra draw. Possibly you put that effect in there to slow the card down; it did too much.
4.8.Name: Benefactor
Originality: 6/10
Playtest: 9/10
Opinion: 8/10
Overall: 29/40
7.25/10 tie broken by my original score
Group Thoughts: Can be too strong with certain cards (duke dutchy, feodum, gardens). The issue is Benefactor is like a more useable talisman. There’s a reason talisman is so weak most of the time. In game with a special victory or need to gain a lot of cards (gardens vineyard etc) this out performs a lot of decks when you can put multiple in play. Over all a lot of fun to play, just a bit too similar to existing gain cards.[size]
5.31.Name: Riddling Witch
Originality: 5/10
Playtest: 9/10
Opinion: 8/10
Overall: 27/40
6.75/10
Group Thoughts: Plays a lot like other curse givers, and similarly the only real playtesting knock was in too many games you had to play the card (you have to play most curse givers). Needless to say the card found success at our table, but we also felt the card came up short on originality. Great fun card though.
6.26.Name: Titan
Originality: 8/10
Playtest: 5/10
Opinion: 4/10
Overall: 25/40
6.25/10
Group Thoughts: We liked the unique mechanic that encourages other players to play titan. But at $6 it seems too weak. On many occasions the + copper in their hand gave a player a province. Every time we played Titan Gold outplayed it. A quick fix that might work is, gaining the cards to the discard instead of the hand.
7.22.Name: Area 51
Originality: 5/10
Playtest: 7.5/10
Opinion: 6/10
Overall: 23.5/40
5.875/10
Group Thoughts: Originality took a hit because when we played Area 51 it felt very similar to black market, but a superior black market. But like black market it’s hard to win with and too much of a gamble. One issue this has over black market though is, when gain effects like embassy or boarder village. Since you aren’t technically gaining or even aware that your gaining that card those effects are lost, but that is ok and didn’t cause any big issues to surface.
8.34.Name: Scientific Method
Originality: 6/10
Playtest: 5/10
Opinion: 5/10
Overall: 22/40
5.5/10
Group Thoughts: The card has too little control to strategize with. Get ready to get piled up with the worst kingdom card on the board. Unfortunately, lost every game in the playtesting.
9.9.Name: Diviner
Originality: 9/10
Playtest: 2/10
Opinion: 2/10
Overall: 22/40
5.5/10 tie broken by my original score
Group Thoughts: The potion makes it too inaccessible. Not being able to easily dictate how many Diviners are in your deck, makes the below the line portion of that card somewhat out of your control, therefore hindering any possible strategies that might work with that mechanic.
10.30.Name: Artist
Originality: 3/10
Playtest: 7/10
Opinion: 4/10
Overall: 17/40
4.25/10
Group Thoughts: I felt like a super ironmonger which is why the originality took a hit. Just felt too similar to ironmonger to win anyone over. Didn’t have any real playtesting issues.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 s t R o u n d R e s u l t s
36. Name: Halfpenny 1st
Total: 9.25/10
19. Name: Relay Rider 2nd
Total: 8.75/10
35. Name: Artisan 3rd
Total: 8.625/10
31. Name: Riddling Witch 4th
Total: 8.125/10
8. Name: Benefactor 5th
Total: 7.75/10
22. Name: Area 51 6th
Total: 7.625/10
34. Name: Scientific Method 7th
Total: 7.5/10
9. Name: Diviner 8th
Total: 7.25/10
26. Name: Titan 9th
Total:7.0625/10
30. Name: Artist 10th
Total:6.875
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Name: Vase
Total: 6.75/10
14. Name: Poisoned Chalice
Total: 6.75/10
23. Name: Farmer
Total: 6.75/10
11. Name: Thieves' Guild
Total: 6.625/10
20. Name: Deathmonger
Total: 6.625/10
37. Name: Crypt
Total: 6.625/10
1. Name: Illicit Goods
Total: 6.5/10
18. Name: Reeve
Total: 6.5/10
27. Name: Molecule Splitter
Total: 6.5/10
39. Name: Revelation
Total: 6.5/10
13. Name: Channel
Total: 6.375/10
16. Name: XerxesPraelor's 2nd Submission
Total: 6.375/10
32. Name: Enclosure
Total: 6.25/10
5. Name: Nut
Total: 5.75/10
25. Name: Demon
Total: 5.6875/10
40. Name: Capital
Total: 5.625/10
3. Name: Band of Outcasts
Total 5.5/10
7. Name: Crystal Ball
Total: 5.5/10
10. Name: Windmill
Total: 5/10
28. Name: Honours
Total: 5/10
33. Name: Fashionista
Total: 5/10
38. Name: Maze
Total: 5/10
17. Name: HeavyD's Submission
Total: 4.875/10
21. Name: Arboretum
Total: 4.75/10
24. Name: Famine
Total: 4.75/10
6. Name: Expedition
Total: 4.5/10
15. Name: Elba
Total: 4.125/10
4. Name: XerxesPraelor's Submission
Total: 4/10
12. Name: Elf
Total: 3.75/10
29. Name: Thug
Total: .5/10
S u b m i s s i o n s
1. Name: Illicit Goods
Type: Action
Text: +$2 +1 buy
---------------------------------
While this is in play, you may buy or gain goods cards as if they were in the supply.
Setup: Set aside an additional kingdom card pile costing $5 or more. Card from this pile are goods cards.
Cost: $4
Originality: 7/10: Feels a lot like Young Witch with the additional kingdom pile, but is obviously different.
Playtestedness: 6/10: I feel, like Young Witch, Illicit Goods needs an additional motivation for buying a “Goods” card. If a Goods card is a valuable card you buy Illicit Goods, if it’s a less valuable $5+ card you don’t. For that it plays swingy
Opinion:6/10: $4 is about right for a woodcutter+, but the below the line effect is either a homerun or a strikeout making it either too expensive for what would be a woodcutter or a little too cheap for access to a great card.
Total: 6.5/10
2. Name: Vase
Type: Treasure - Victory
Text: $1 +1 buy
---------------------------------
Worth 3 VP if your deck has no actions costing more than 4$.
Cost: $5
Originality: 9/10
Playtestedness: 4/10 The main issue with this card is that it emphasizes Big Money too much. If you can’t buy any $5 Action cards you definitely have to play Money Money Money. Then it’s way too powerful; buying a dutchy with a $1 on it, awesome, then throw on a Buy…
Opinion: 5/10 Not my cup of tea, too money-centric. Love the originality though.
Total: 6.75/10
3. Name: Band of Outcasts
Type: Action
Text: +$3 Buy an action card costing at least 2$ immediately, putting it into your hand. Play it, then return it to the supply.
Cost: $4
Originality: 5/10 It feels like Black market with a purchase in the middle of your turn the primary difference is playing the purchased card.
Playtestedness: 3/10 This needs a Buy. Without it the opportunity cost, at the end of the game, is too great unless all the $3 or less supply piles are empty. What happens when you can’t afford an Action, you keep the $3? In a game without a $2 or $3 +$3 is a bit strong for $4. In a normal game you still end up getting a $3 value out of the card for the price of $4
Opinion: 5/10 I see the potential in this concept but you have to tinker with it a lot more.
Total 5.5/10
4. Name: XerxesPraelor's Submission
Type: ****
Text: ****.
Cost: $****
Originality: 6/10
Playtestedness: 1/10 as it’s worded now there is no mechanic for putting the card in play
Opinion: 3/10
Total: 4/10
5. Name: Nut
Type: Victory
Text: Worth 2 VP
---------------------------------
When you trash this, +2VP.
Cost: $4
Originality: 6/10 there isn’t a card which give victory chips for being trashed.
Playtestedness: 7/10 Not a lot going on should be fine in almost every game.
Opinion: 4/10 Too vanilla. Not enough going on to warrant being its own card.
Total: 5.75/10
6. Name: Expedition
Type: Action-Duration
Text: +1 Action Now and at the start of your turn: +1 Action, +1$, +1 Buy.
---------------------------------
While this is in play, if you would gain a card of your choice, instead you gain a card of the same cost of the player to your left's choice.
Cost: $3
Originality: 3/10 Super fishing village with a envoy-contraband-esque in your buy phase swindler. Different when you put it together but not deconstructed.
Playtestedness: 7/10 Seems like this card can have a lot of interaction (+) but that’s a double edge sword because that means there are more opportunities to break your card. From what I can see now it seems pretty well balanced.
Opinion: 5/10 I love fishing village, I’m just a control freak lol.
Total: 4.5/10
7. Name: Crystal Ball
Type: Treasure-Reaction
Text: $2 When you play this, reveal the top card of your deck and either discard it or put it back.
---------------------------------
When you discard this other than from play, you may reveal it and set it aside. At the start of your next Buy phase, play this card.
Cost: $5
Originality: 3/10 The under the line effect is very reminiscent of Tunnel just you get to play the card instead of get a gold. The above the line is very reminiscent of Spy
Playtestedness: 8/10 Looks good but maybe the cellar, horse trader, storeroom, vault etc. strategies get too big of a boost.
Opinion: 8/10 I love it because it makes those strategies boom.
Total: 5.5/10
8. Name: Benefactor
Type: Action
Text: +$2 While this is in play, when you buy a card costing at most what this card costs, gain a copy of it.
---------------------------------
Setup: Choose a card at random from the remaining kingdom cards in the game; its cost is this card's cost.
Cost: $?
Originality: 9/10 Nothing I could think of is similar to this.
Playtestedness: 6/10 at $5 the card could be a bit over powered with a dutchy rush at the end of a game. At $6 the extra Gold might make it too powerful, getting extra Gold and Dutchies… Oh and at $3 getting $2 and being able to gain an extra silver might be too much for a big money game.
Opinion: 7/10 Very interesting just hope it’s not overpowered at certain prices.
Total: 7.75/10
9. Name: Diviner
Type: Action
Text: Trash a card from your hand. +1 VP if it is a Curse.
---------------------------------
At the end of the game, if your deck contains at least as many Diviners as Victory cards, treat the trash pile as though it were a part of your deck.
Cost: $0P
Originality: 9/10
Playtestedness: 5/10 The price I think is perfect. The effect I’m cautiously optimistic about but with no mechanic forcing players to play curses, depending on the game, treating the trash as though it is a part of your deck might be really good. (Gardens, Silk Road, Feodum) Though after more thought there are many games were I will have more than 7 Victory cards making it difficult to gain the trash.
Opinion: 6/10 I like it but in this form it is not fully realized.
Total: 7.25/10
10. Name: Windmill
Type: Action
Text: +1 Action, +1 Card, +1 Buy.
---------------------------------
When you gain this card, +4$.
Cost: $3
Originality: 7/10 Nothing like it, not a whole lot of newness, just a variant on hinterlands when gain abilities.
Playtestedness: 2/10 Ironworks = Provinces | Workshop = Provinces | University = Provinces etc.
Opinion: 4/10 cool variation on hinterlands theme but not game ready enough.
Total: 5/10
11. Name: Thieves' Guild
Type: Reaction
Text: .....
---------------------------------
When an opponent would gain a card, you may reveal and trash this card. If you do, you gain that card and your opponent gains this card from the trash instead.
Cost: $4
Originality: 9/10 cool new mechanic
Playtestedness: 3/10 Not limited enough. The way it’s currently worded you could steal Provinces and Colonies
Opinion: 5.5/10 love the interconnectedness of the card but it’s just to damaging the way its worded now
Total: 6.625/10
12. Name: Elf
Type: Action
Text: +1 Action, +1 Card. Each other player reveals his hand.
---------------------------------
Cost: $2
Originality:2/10 Just not new enough.
Playtestedness: 10/10 Looks fine won’t have very many interactions
Opinion: 0/10 sorry there is just nothing to have an opinion about with this card.
Total: 3.75/10
13. Name: Channel
Type: Action - Reaction
Text: +2 Actions
---------------------------------
When another player plays an attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, draw a card, put your hand on top of your deck, and gain two cards costing up to 4$.
Cost: $1
Originality: 7/10
Playtestedness: 6.5/10 Not sure many randomly picked games would have the right components to make this card work. A game dominating card costing $4 or less, an Attack card and Channel.
Opinion: 5/10 neither here nor there for me.
Total: 6.375/10
14. Name: Poisoned Chalice
Type: Action
Text: +$2 Each other player either gains a curse, or gains two coppers, putting one in hand and the other on top of their deck.
Cost: $5
Originality: 7.5/10 I feel a lot of witch in this card just more powerful for the user and a little weaker for the attacked.
Playtestedness: 6.5/10 Because it is fundamentally similar to witch just with a few different tweaks I think this card would test fine with only one or two “hang-ups” like gardens or coppersmith or counting house.
Opinion: 5.5/10 Helps the opponent too much for my liking
Total: 6.75/10
15. Name: Elba
Type: Action - Reaction
Text: +2 Cards +1 Buy You may play all Actions and Treasures from your Island mat, in any order. (If you play one, play every single one)
---------------------------------
In games using this, when you buy a card, if it's not the first card you bought this turn, gain the card you bought to your Island mat instead of your discard pile.
Cost: $4
Originality: 6/10 So it’s a woodcutter-native village with a cool interact-able extra buy thing.
Playtestedness: 3.5/10 Your wording clashes I think a superior wording would be something like “After you use your first buy, each card bought after may be placed on your island mat after being gained.” Or something like that.
Opinion: 7/10 I like where this is going but it’s just not there.
Total: 4.125/10
16. Name: XerxesPraelor's 2nd Submission
Type: ****
Text: ****.
Cost: $****
Originality: 6.75/10 I’ve seen the mechanic before but is still new to dominion
Playtestedness: 6.5/10 too powerful even though the price is right.
Opinion: 5.5/10 too time consuming to get, too powerful once you have it.
Total: 6.375/10
17. Name: HeavyD's Submission
Type: ****
Text: ****.
Cost: $****
Originality: 6/10 Ironically very very similar to XerxesPraelor's 2nd Submission
Playtestedness: 3/10 WAY underpriced.
Opinion: 4.5/10 I like the below the line effect more than the above
Total: 4.875/10
18. Name: Reeve
Type: Action
Text: +$1 Take a coin token.
---------------------------------
When another player plays an attack card, you may discard this from your hand. If you do take coin tokens equal to half the cost of that attack, rounded up.
Cost: $4
Originality: 6.5/10 Above the line not so new. Below the line very new.
Playtestedness: 7/10 From what I can mentalize it seems fairly balanced. My primary quibble is “rounded up”; I did say I wanted something new. I think $3 for a rabble or a rogue might be a bit much.
Opinion: 6/10 I can see it but I can’t see making many strategies which incorporated this into it.
Total: 6.5/10
19. Name: Relay Rider
Type: Action
Text: +1 Action +1 Card +1 Buy Look through your discard pile. You may reveal a Relay Rider from it and put it in your hand.
Cost: $3
Originality: 9/10 Love it. Only knocks are a bunch of cards have +1 action +1 card etc and the discard pile effect is reminiscent of scavenger.
Playtestedness: 7/10 Some games that +1 Buy is going to be abused.
Opinion: 10/10 I love it. My favorite of the first 19 cards.
Total: 8.75/10
20. Name: Deathmonger
Type: Action - Reaction
Text: Trash the top card of your deck. You may trash the top card of your deck.
---------------------------------
When any player (including you) trashes a card, you may discard this from your hand. If you do, that player puts the trashed card in their hand.
Cost: $3
Originality: 8/10 only thing similar at all is fortress.
Playtestedness: 6.5/10 The wording could be more clear, maybe “When any player (including you) trashes a card, you may discard this from your hand. If you do, return the trashed card to their hand.”
Opinion: 4/10 I see how to use it just not sure it’s an effective strategy.
Total: 6.625/10
21. Name: Arboretum
Type: victory - Duration
Text: 2 VP When you discard this card in the clean-up phase, +2 VP and set it aside. Next turn, +$2 and flip it over. The next turn, trash it.
Cost: $5
Originality:6/10
Playtestedness: 6/10 Should work but $5 or a onetime silver and 2 VP chips. A little confusing with all the “next turns”
Opinion: 1/10 not enough going on to warrant the purchase
Total: 4.75/10
22. Name: Area 51
Type: Action
Text: +1 Card +1 Action Trash this card. If you do, put the top card of the Mystery pile on top of your deck.
---------------------------------
(Set up: Shuffle 10 random kingdom cards not in the game and place them face down next to the supply. The mystery pile is not part of the supply.)
Cost: $4
Originality: 9.25/10 Love the idea only thing similar is faintly black market.
Playtestedness: 5/10 Just a bit weak and really only winnable with a ton of luck.
Opinion: 7/10 Man wouldn’t it have been better “Trash this card. If you do, put the top card of the Mystery pile on top of your deck. +1 Card +1 Action”
Total: 7.625/10
23. Name: Farmer
Type: Action-Reaction
Text: +1 Card +1 Action
---------------------------------
Whenever you would draw a card other than during your Clean-up phase, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead of drawing a card, reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal an action or treasure card. Put that card into your hand and discard the other revealed cards.
Cost: $2
Originality: 8/10 Like it; original and it combines with itself.
Playtestedness: 4/10 Council room, Embassy, Hunting Grounds etc is crazy with this card.
Opinion: 7/10 I like the originality of the card but I don’t think the reaction effect should be able to be repeated.
Total: 6.75/10
24. Name: Famine
Type: Victory
Text: 0 VP Worth 2 VP if your deck contains four differently named victory cards.
---------------------------------
When you buy this, trash all cards from your hand,deck, discard pile, and play area.
Cost: $0
Originality: 9/10 only slightly similar to mint.
Playtestedness: 0/10 Too predictable and no way to combine it with other cards only card I could think of is feodum and it breaks the card. Feodum game: 1st turn feodum, 2nd famine, 3rd gold, 4th province. Regular game: 1st turn famine, 2nd copper, 3rd copper, 4th copper, 5th silver, 6th $5 card, 7th Gold, 8th province.
Opinion: 1/10
Total: 4.75/10
25. Name: Demon
Type: Action-Duration
Text: Now and at the start of every turn in which this card is in play, +1 Card.
At the start of Clean-up this turn, trash a card from your hand. If you do, leave this in play. If you don't, trash this and gain a curse.
Cost: $4
Originality: 6/10 reminds me of a created card I’ve seen on Board Game Geek
Playtestedness: 4/10 The wording is clunky. Very powerful.
Opinion: 6.75/10 Fun but too powerful.
Total: 5.6875/10
26. Name: Titan
Type: Action
Text: +2 cards Reveal your hand. If you revealed a...
... Copper, each other player gains a Curse and a Copper, putting them into their hand.
... Curse, each other player discards down to 3 cards in hand.
Cost: $6
Originality: 7/10 Reminds me of mountebank but is obviously different.
Playtestedness: 7.25/10 Like the price, Like +2 Cards over $ or Actions or similar.
Opinion: 7/10 Maybe could have been “... Copper, each other player gains a Curse and each player gains a copper, putting them into their hand.
Total:7.0625/10
27. Name: Molecule Splitter
Type: Action
Text: Trash a card from your hand costing at least $5.
If you do, gain a Positive Ion and a Negative Ion.
Cost: $5
+++++++++
Positive Ion $0*
Reveal your hand. Discard all Positive Ions from your hand.
+2 cards
+1 action
This is not in the Supply
Action
Negative Ion $0*
Reveal your hand. Discard all Negative Ions from you hand.
+1 card
+1 action
+1 buy
+$1
This is not in the supply
Action
Originality: 6/10 I love cards that aren’t in the supply, but they aren’t REALLY original.
Playtestedness:8/10 I don’t see any glaring issue with any mechanic just seems like it might be slow in some games.
Opinion: 6/10 Felt the cards are solid just they lack a bit in newness. Just occurred to me to publish this card it only takes 10 new cards not 30 because you could just retheme and use Laboratory and Market as prizes since they are both in the basic Dominion set.
Total: 6.5/10
28. Name: Honours
Text: These are spread out in a fan and can be bought in any order - there is one of each type
They are part of the kingdom
Cost: $X
Gold Trophy, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
The first time you have no cards in your hand and no actions remaining: +$3
(Action, not Action cards)
----------
This costs half the number of honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
Silver Trophy, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may discard an action card from your hand.
If you do +$2.
----------
This costs half the number of honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
Copper Trophy, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may reveal a Copper from your hand.
If you do, + $1.
----------
This costs half the number of Honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
Exhibition, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you discard this from play, if you have not played any duplicate cards this turn, take 2 Coin Tokens.
----------
This costs half the number of Honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
Benefice, $?
+ 1 Action
+ 1 Card
Reveal your hand.
If there are no duplicates in it, gain a Duchy.
----------
This costs half the number of honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
Fayre, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
If you've played more than 3 actions this turn (counting this): +1 Buy, Gain a card costing up to 4 that is not an Honour.
----------
This costs half the number of Honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
Livery, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you discard this from play, if you have had a Copper, Silver and a Gold in play this turn: gain a Copper, Silver and Gold, putting them on top of your deck in any order.
----------
This costs half the number of honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
Call to Arms, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may discard a card.
If you do, each other player discards down to 4 cards in hand.
----------
This costs half the number of Honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Attack - Honour
Shire, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you discard this from play, if you didn’t buy any cards this turn, gain 2 Honours and a Copper.
----------
This costs half the number of Honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Worth 1 VP for every 2 honour in your deck (rounded down)
Action - Victory - Honour
Charter of Franchise, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
Reveal a card from your hand.
If it is representative of a person or people, gain another copy of it.
----------
This costs half the number of honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
----------
Setup: Decide as a group which kingdom cards in the supply this would apply to.
Originality: 5.5/10 It is very similar to the Knights deck.
Playtestedness: 5/10 a lot of components too many ways to be abused. Buy Shire for $5 gain most of them all and still but provinces at the end of the game.
Opinion: 4/10 I didn’t like knight and this feels very similar.
Total: 5/10
29. Name: Thug
Type: Action
Text: +1 Action Look through your deck. You may draw any card from your deck. If you do, shuffle your deck immediately.
Cost: $4
Originality: 1/10 Several cards submitted prior have almost the same mechanic
Playtestedness: 0/10 Totally broken. A $4 Gold or a $4 whatever your best card is.
Opinion: 0/10 Sorry to be so critical
Total: .5/10
30. Name: Artist
Type: Action
Text: Look at the top 4 cards of your deck. Reveal and discard up to 3 of them. Put the rest back in any order. If you revealed an:
Action card, +1 Card.
Treasure card, +1 Action.
Victory card, +$1.
Cost: $2
Originality: 6/10 New take on the Ironworks choice mechanism
Playtestedness: 8.5/10 At first glare my intuition is telling me this card is a bit strong but I can’t quite place how. On second thought it might be a bit weak. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.
Opinion: 7/10 I like ironworks and ironmonger so this is right up that alley
Total:6.875
31. Name: Riddling Witch
Type: Action-Attack
Text: The player to your left may choose to have each of your opponents gain a curse. If no curses were gained this way, +4 Cards.
Cost: $4
Originality: 9/10 I like it, a nice variation on the opponent making decisions on your card mechanics.
Playtestedness: 7.5/10 Only issue is the card is offering a false choice. I can’t give you 4 cards and not expect you to get a province. So that means I’m going to be taking curses and once they run out you can get your +4 Cards. Balanced, I think…
Opinion: 7/10 The only thing I didn’t like was the false choice because it allows to many bad Dominion plays to be made.
Total: 8.125/10
32. Name: Enclosure
Type: Victory
Text: 0 VP Worth 2 VP if you have more Estates than Enclosures.
---------------------------------
When you buy this, +1$, +1 Buy.
Cost: $2
Originality: 9/10 can’t think of anything too similar, just cards submitted before Enclosure.
Playtestedness: 5/10 Effectively a $1 2vp card. Not a lot to it, no interactions except with ones that make it broken (Gardens, silk road)
Opinion: 2/10
Total: 6.25/10
33. Name: Fashionista
Type: Action
Text: +$2 Gain a card costing up to 4$.
You may look through your discard pile and put it back in any order.
Reveal a card from your hand or the top of your discard pile. Each opponent chooses one: they gain a copy, or you do.
Cost: $5
Originality: 9/10
Playtestedness: 1/10 I don’t know how to make this card work. What could you reveal that they wouldn’t want that you do.
Opinion: 1/10
Total: 5/10
34. Name: Scientific Method
Type: Action
Text: +2 Actions The player to your left chooses a non-empty kingdom card pile that you have not gained from this turn. Gain a copy of that card.
Cost: $4
Originality: 8/10 sorry but after reading what feels like 5-6 other cards with the “opponent choice” mechanism you’re the first to lose points for being less new then the others.
Playtestedness: 7/10 how do you know which piles you gained from with certainty? I like how hypothetically you could control which card your opponent chose with other gain cards.
Opinion: 7/10 I like it but I think it’s a bit of a beta right now.
Total: 7.5/10
35. Name: Artisan
Type: Action
Text: +2 Cards Put a card from your hand to the bottom of the Artisan deck. Reveal the top card of the Artisan deck. Each other player gains a copy of the revealed card. Place the revealed card to the bottom of the Artisan deck.
---------------------------------
Setup: Shuffle 1 Curse, 3 Coppers, and 1 Silver together and place them facedown in a pile. This is the Artisan deck.
Cost: $4
Originality: 9.5/10
Playtestedness: 7.5/10 There is room for improvement. While the +2 cards give you more options with what to put under the artisan deck think it also neuters the current hand. Possibly worth adding +1 Action but how to keep it balanced once you do.
Opinion: 8/10 I like the mechanic a lot.
Total: 8.625/10
36. Name: Halfpenny
Type: Treasure
Text: $1 Trash this at the beginning of Cleanup if you didn't play it from the trash pile.
---------------------------------
Any player may play Halfpenny from the trash pile as though it were in his or her hand.
Setup: Trash two Halfpennies for every player in the game.
Cost: $1
Originality: 10/10 love it.
Playtestedness: 8/10 A cleaner way to have the trashing mechanism might be: “If you played this from your hand trash this.” Main issue with this is it may affect the normal ebb and flow of the game too much.
Opinion: 9/10 I like your chances.
Total: 9.25/10
37. Name: Crypt
Type: Action
Text: Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.
Put any Treasures and Curses into your hand and discard the rest.
+1 Card per card discarded.
Cost: $5
Originality: 7.5/10 Feels a lot like farming village, with +1 card per card discarded
Playtestedness: 6/10 most likely $3+ for $5 seems a bit too powerful.
Opinion: 5.5/10 Strategically limited, too big money-esque
Total: 6.625/10
38. Name: Maze
Type: Action
Text: +1 Action Name 3 cards (your choices may be the same). Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. If the 3 cards you named match the 3 revealed, put them into your hand. If not, discard them.
Cost: $3
Originality: 6/10 Like wishing well but a luckier version
Playtestedness: 3/10 Can’t see any interactions that don’t then guarantee the cards effectiveness and can’t see how to make the card work routinely without copious amounts of luck.
Opinion: 5/10
Total: 5/10
39. Name: Revelation
Type: Action
Text: +1 Action Gain a card costing $3 or less and currently not in play.
Put it into your hand.
Cost: $5
Originality: 5/10 Not a lot of newness. Workshop + an action + put it on top
Playtestedness: 8/10 Should work in most games only pause for concern might be throne room, procession, king’s court and feodum.
Opinion: 8/10 I love Feodum and this by association.
Total: 6.5/10
40. Name: Capital
Type: Victory
Text: Worth 2 Victory Points for every set you have consisting of:
an Estate, a Duchy, and a Province.
Cost: $6
Originality: 6.75/10
Playtestedness: 5/10 so for every 10 victory points here are 2 more. I’ve had thoughts of cards like this, as I’m sure many of us have, but there is one glaring issue with the concept: the player with the most Estates, Duchies, and Provinces will likely win the game anyway.
Opinion: 4/10
Total: 5.625/10
-
Not sure if you are aware, but another contest (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=9245.0) just started.
-
This is quite the first post! I don't think anyone's actually offered prizes before. (I am sorry Kirian, but yours don't count. ;))
Since the other contest just started (as noted by eHalcyon), you might get a lot of duplicates if you continue with this contest.
-
Yeah, I don't think it'd be a good idea to host your own contest right now, but you'll be seeing new fan cards by the shovelful starting next week, when the submissions are made public. The theme is 'Treasure Chest', so you'll be seeing cards that exemplify each expansion; I'm sure there'll be plenty of original ideas showing up nonetheless. You could just judge the cards from the current contest and keep the same schedule, or you could stick around for 13 weeks and playtest whatever catches your eye, and then make your own announcement in this thread as to who gets the prizes. I don't think anyone would mind, so long as you don't make it look like you're co-opting the contest. Some people here were complaining that approval voting rewards safe choices too much, so I bet they'd like to see originality being rewarded.
I'm guessing most people on here already own the promo cards and/or would have a hard time collecting a physical reward. If you're intent on making sure everyone's incentivized or you change your mind about springing for international postage, a few dollars via Paypal would make a fine alternate prize.
-
I don't see why this couldn't run alongside the other competition... ::) It's straightforward and well expressed (not that I've come up with anything good (yet)), tbh I'd be more interested in this one then the other competition (although that is clearly very well thought out with, what looks like, pedigree)
-
Thanks for the feedback, I wasn't aware of the other contest. The other contest is focused around making cards similar to the theme of previous dominion sets. Thankfully my contest seems to fit right in, next to that theme. In this contest we're looking for cards unlike any other cards or themes found in other Dominion sets.
As far as the prizes go, I see no problem with a $2 or $3 Paypal/Amazon reward instead of Governor if the winner prefers that.
-
Thanks for the feedback, I wasn't aware of the other contest. The other contest is focused around making cards similar to the theme of previous dominion sets. Thankfully my contest seems to fit right in, next to that theme. In this contest we're looking for cards unlike any other cards or themes found in other Dominion sets.
As far as the prizes go, I see no problem with a $2 or $3 Paypal/Amazon reward instead of Governor if the winner prefers that.
Missed that bit the first time I read through the rules.
Do you want submissions private messaged to you or posted in this thread directly?
-
Yeah, one of the requirements for LF's contest is that you can't identify your own card until voting is closed. If you require public submissions, then people won't be able to submit their Treasure Chest cards to your contest. That's the reason I suggested sticking around for the next few months, or at least independently judging the Prosperity #1 entries as soon as they're made public.
-
If I win one of the contests, can you give me the Governor promo card on Goko?
-
Yeah, one of the requirements for LF's contest is that you can't identify your own card until voting is closed. If you require public submissions, then people won't be able to submit their Treasure Chest cards to your contest. That's the reason I suggested sticking around for the next few months, or at least independently judging the Prosperity #1 entries as soon as they're made public.
Thanks for the feedback, I wasn't aware of the other contest. The other contest is focused around making cards similar to the theme of previous dominion sets. Thankfully my contest seems to fit right in, next to that theme. In this contest we're looking for cards unlike any other cards or themes found in other Dominion sets.
As far as the prizes go, I see no problem with a $2 or $3 Paypal/Amazon reward instead of Governor if the winner prefers that.
Missed that bit the first time I read through the rules.
Do you want submissions private messaged to you or posted in this thread directly?
Well, in this contest many submissions to the Prosperity contest would not qualify. To make up for the cards which could meet both contest's requirements, like a Treasure-Attack, I'll accept those submissions through PM... if that complies with the rules of the other contest. Ideally I'd like the submissions to be public, but i'll accept private submissions.
-
Here's my submission: (see http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=9257.msg287489#msg287489)
:)
P.S. I would also probably add the wording at the bottom:
If you are unable to do so trash this card.
-
A Governor? Guess what just happened to my weekend.
I may or may not be able to convince you to limit submissions ;] (not going to use a machine or bs or anything)
-
From an old thread of mine, updated a bit:
Illicit Goods
$4 - Action
+$2
+1 buy
--
While this is in play, you may buy or gain goods cards as if they were in the supply.
Setup: Set aside an additional kingdom card pile costing $5 or more. Card from this pile are goods cards.
-
Here's my submission: (see http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=9257.msg287489#msg287489)
:)
P.S. I would also probably add the wording at the bottom:
If you are unable to do so trash this card.
I looked though the post you linked to and couldn't find a definitive card. Can you type the card you're submitting?
-
Vase
5$ - Treasure - Victory
Worth 1$
+1 Buy
--------------------------
Worth 3 VP if your deck has no actions costing more than 4$.
-
Vase
5$ - Treasure - Victory
Worth 1$
+1 Buy
--------------------------
Worth 3 VP if your deck has no actions costing more than 4$.
The ultimate rush card.
-
I like your card, Grujah, but are you attached to the name? "Goods" sounds like a treasure card to me, maybe that's just me. It wasn't until the third time reading it I realized it was an action.
-
Vase
5$ - Treasure - Victory
Worth 1$
+1 Buy
--------------------------
Worth 3 VP if your deck has no actions costing more than 4$.
The ultimate rush card.
Slog, you mean. Most people put Dukes into the slog category instead of the rush category, and this has even less 3 pile power because it doesn't coerce your opponent into helping empty the Duchy stack.
I do think it's a very solid slog card though, that's what it's supposed to be.
-
Vase
5$ - Treasure - Victory
Worth 1$
+1 Buy
--------------------------
Worth 3 VP if your deck has no actions costing more than 4$.
The ultimate rush card.
Slog, you mean. Most people put Dukes into the slog category instead of the rush category, and this has even less 3 pile power because it doesn't coerce your opponent into helping empty the Duchy stack.
I do think it's a very solid slog card though, that's what it's supposed to be.
Well, it's +1 Buy, and you want a bunch of cheap cards. You could probably buy a bunch of these and lesser cost actions and end the game pretty quickly.
-
Ok, I see where you are coming from now. Your talking more about a somewhat board dependent rush. I thought you were suggesting the card would rush out IGG style, same 3 piles every rush. But you mean a more Ironworks-Oasis-Silk Road style thing or somesuch.
I like those because it's cool to see how various actions can get incorporated into a rush strategy. Vineyards rushes are my favorite too.
-
Here's my submission: (see http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=9257.msg287489#msg287489)
:)
P.S. I would also probably add the wording at the bottom:
If you are unable to do so trash this card.
I looked though the post you linked to and couldn't find a definitive card. Can you type the card you're submitting?
Sorry - the wording was on the image, however it's changed a bit. Here is (hopefully) the final version (at least enough for you to get a clear idea) :
Band of Outcasts
4$, Action
+3$
Buy an action card costing at least 2$ immediately, putting it into your hand.
Play it, then return it to the supply.
-
Vase
5$ - Treasure - Victory
Worth 1$
+1 Buy
--------------------------
Worth 3 VP if your deck has no actions costing more than 4$.
The ultimate rush card.
Slog, you mean. Most people put Dukes into the slog category instead of the rush category, and this has even less 3 pile power because it doesn't coerce your opponent into helping empty the Duchy stack.
I do think it's a very solid slog card though, that's what it's supposed to be.
I wonder whether they'll play all the submissions in the same game. If so, there's a potential nice synergy between vase and band of outcasts.
-
Vase
5$ - Treasure - Victory
Worth 1$
+1 Buy
--------------------------
Worth 3 VP if your deck has no actions costing more than 4$.
The ultimate rush card.
Slog, you mean. Most people put Dukes into the slog category instead of the rush category, and this has even less 3 pile power because it doesn't coerce your opponent into helping empty the Duchy stack.
I do think it's a very solid slog card though, that's what it's supposed to be.
I wonder whether they'll play all the submissions in the same game. If so, there's a potential nice synergy between vase and band of outcasts.
We'll primarily be testing them individually, if some combos sound good we'll have to try them too.
-
I also have a LF's seaside card that would be perfect for this, but can't post it publicly. May I send it to you?
-
I also have a LF's seaside card that would be perfect for this, but can't post it publicly. May I send it to you?
Absolutely
-
Nut
$4 Victory
Worth 2 VP
__________
When you trash this, +2VP.
-
Gondola --- ($5 Action)
+1 Card
+1 Coin
Choose one: +1 Action, +1 Buy, +1 VP, or gain a coin token
-
Gondola --- ($4 Action)
+1 Card
+1 Coin
Choose one: +1 Action, +1 Buy, +1 VP, or gain a coin token
This is strictly better than Baker.
-
Gondola --- ($4 Action)
+1 Card
+1 Coin
Choose one: +1 Action, +1 Buy, +1 VP, or gain a coin token
This is strictly better than Baker.
? It's too strong, but not strictly better than Baker, unless I'm missing something...
-
Gondola --- ($4 Action)
+1 Card
+1 Coin
Choose one: +1 Action, +1 Buy, +1 VP, or gain a coin token
This is strictly better than Baker.
? It's too strong, but not strictly better than Baker, unless I'm missing something...
Oops, I misread the +1 Coin as Action. My bad!
-
Gondola --- ($4 Action)
+1 Card
+1 Coin
Choose one: +1 Action, +1 Buy, +1 VP, or gain a coin token
This is strictly better than Baker.
? It's too strong, but not strictly better than Baker, unless I'm missing something...
Oops, I misread the +1 Coin as Action. My bad!
I would defend it is not strictly better than Baker. This card can be a cantrip at the sacrifice of the other options, while Baker is a guaranteed cantrip. But I do wonder whether I should change the price to $5 or leave it at $4. My thought process is all the possible combinations on separate cards would cost $3-$4. Any suggestions?
-
Gondola --- ($4 Action)
+1 Card
+1 Coin
Choose one: +1 Action, +1 Buy, +1 VP, or gain a coin token
This is strictly better than Baker.
? It's too strong, but not strictly better than Baker, unless I'm missing something...
Oops, I misread the +1 Coin as Action. My bad!
I would defend it is not strictly better than Baker. This card can be a cantrip at the sacrifice of the other options, while Baker is a guaranteed cantrip. But I do wonder whether I should change the price to $5 or leave it at $4. My thought process is all the possible combinations on separate cards would cost $3-$4. Any suggestions?
You should change it to $5. It's strictly better than Peddler.
-
Gondola --- ($4 Action)
+1 Card
+1 Coin
Choose one: +1 Action, +1 Buy, +1 VP, or gain a coin token
This is strictly better than Baker.
? It's too strong, but not strictly better than Baker, unless I'm missing something...
Oops, I misread the +1 Coin as Action. My bad!
I would defend it is not strictly better than Baker. This card can be a cantrip at the sacrifice of the other options, while Baker is a guaranteed cantrip. But I do wonder whether I should change the price to $5 or leave it at $4. My thought process is all the possible combinations on separate cards would cost $3-$4. Any suggestions?
As I said, I misread the +1 Coin at the top as +1 Action, i.e. I thought it was always a cantrip. It is not strictly better than Baker as is. But it is still likely a $5 card. If you have options that would be worth $4, it shouldn't cost $4 itself.
-
What about that whole submissions is final rule? I know the edit was quick, but, pandora's box and stuff
-
What about that whole submissions is final rule? I know the edit was quick, but, pandora's box and stuff
Gondola --- ($5 Action)
+1 Card
+1 Coin
Choose one: +1 Action, +1 Buy, +1 VP, or gain a coin token
Unfortunately this submission does not qualify for the contest. There is no original mechanic/ use of a mechanic; Choices are Intrigue, VP chips are Prosperity and Coin Tokens are Guilds. Thank you for the submission, hopefully you'll submit another.
-
Can I submit a card from the mini-set design contest? I would submit Crystal Ball if it is allowed.
-
Expedition
3$ Action-Duration
+1 Action
Now and at the start of your turn: +1 Action, +1$, +1 Buy.
_____________________________________________________
While this is in play, if you would gain a card of your choice, instead you gain a card of the same cost of the player to your left's choice.
-
[Hahaha, I busted "solitaire dominion" open with an infinite replacement effect loop. But solitaire dominion isn't real dominion anyway :)]
-
Expedition
3$ Action-Duration
+1 Action
Now and at the start of your turn: +1 Action, +1$, +1 Buy.
_____________________________________________________
While this is in play, if you would gain a card of your choice, instead you gain a card of the same cost of the player to your left's choice.
Thanks for the submission
Can I submit a card from the mini-set design contest? I would submit Crystal Ball if it is allowed.
I added Crystal Ball too
-
Benefactor
$? - Action
+$2
While this is in play, when you buy a card costing at most what this card costs, gain a copy of it.
---
Setup: Choose a card at random from the remaining kingdom cards in the game; its cost is this card's cost.
-
So if I'm reading this right, this is sometimes a 5$ terminal silver that Haggles you a Lab when you buy a Lab.
Losing access to Province+Gold Haggle is not going to be enough of a downside, the card will be nuts, especially without a victory card clause like Haggler has.
-
What about that whole submissions is final rule? I know the edit was quick, but, pandora's box and stuff
Gondola --- ($5 Action)
+1 Card
+1 Coin
Choose one: +1 Action, +1 Buy, +1 VP, or gain a coin token
Unfortunately this submission does not qualify for the contest. There is no original mechanic/ use of a mechanic; Choices are Intrigue, VP chips are Prosperity and Coin Tokens are Guilds. Thank you for the submission, hopefully you'll submit another.
Somehow missed the original mechanic part... embarrassing...
Question before I resubmit: If I submit an idea I have for Lastfootnote's contest, who has said "Do not disclose your submissions publicly, either in this thread or elsewhere!" Then I cannot use that same card for his contest? Correct?
-
Question before I resubmit: If I submit an idea I have for Lastfootnote's contest, who has said "Do not disclose your submissions publicly, either in this thread or elsewhere!" Then I cannot use that same card for his contest? Correct?
This was already answered earlier:
Well, in this contest many submissions to the Prosperity contest would not qualify. To make up for the cards which could meet both contest's requirements, like a Treasure-Attack, I'll accept those submissions through PM... if that complies with the rules of the other contest. Ideally I'd like the submissions to be public, but i'll accept private submissions.
I'm not sure if we're encouraged, allowed, discouraged or disallowed to comment on the submitted cards (because that may influence the judges' ranking), but here are some of my thoughts on the cards. If it's the latter, I'll try to remove this part of the post as soon that is pointed out.
Illicit goods: Hmm... An expensive woodcutter to get one additional pile? Might be worth it if the goods card is strong. This will be viable if the goods card is very strong, so interesting card.
Vase: So this card forces you to some Big Money strategy, but big money strategies usually don't like alt-VP that much... It seems not too weak if there is some Big Money enabler costing $4 (or less). But I don't think it is too strong such that every game with this cards results in a big money mirror (far from that).
Band of Outcasts: So you can play money from your hand when buying a card? This will be really nice on self-trashers.
Nut: Nice.
Expedition: This looks really bad. With this card you often don't want to gain or buy any card costing $3-$5. That's a really really bad effect for two turns. It also have some problems rules wise: What does "of you choice" mean? The ruins gained from Death Cart, are those "of your choice"? The curse from a Torturer is that "of your choice"? Also, I think this can cause an infinite loop when buying a card with Trader in hand.
1. Player A has Expedition in play and Trader in hand, and buys a silver
2. Player A would gain a silver, having 2 "would gain"-effects.
3. Player A chooses to do the Expedition would gain-effect first
4. Player B chooses that Player A gains a Chancellor
[I'm not sure if all other would-gain-effect of gaining the Silvers stop now, but it doesn't matter, step 5 happens either way]
5. Player A reveals Trader to gain a Silver. Go to step 1.
So I think this card needs some nerfing.
Crystal Ball: Oh, that card. I like the idea.
Benefactor: As popsofctown noted, this really needs a victory clause. Other than that, it can be really strong at $5, as popsofctown pointed out. And at 4 it is similar to Talisman, except that it gives +$1 while being terminal, but that is MUCH stronger (compare copper to terminal $2, silver to terminal $3 or gold to terminal $4). So this really needs to get weaker, I think it won't be too weak if it gives just +$1. Then you get the problem that it is (almost) "strictly worse" than Talisman in games where it costs $4 (provided that the victory clause is added). Maybe to prevent that you want to change the vanilla bonus to something completely different like:
+$1,+1 Buy
+1 Card, +1 Buy
+2 Cards (although that might be too strong again)
-
Somehow missed the original mechanic part... embarrassing...
Question before I resubmit: If I submit an idea I have for Lastfootnote's contest, who has said "Do not disclose your submissions publicly, either in this thread or elsewhere!" Then I cannot use that same card for his contest? Correct?
The OP said he would take submissions by PM.
-
Diviner
0$+<potion> Action
Trash a card from your hand. +1 VP if it is a Curse.
________________________________
At the end of the game, if your deck contains at least as many Diviners as Victory cards, treat the trash pile as though it were a part of your deck.
-
@florrat:
Of your choice means that when you gained the card, you gained it using an effect that had at least 2 possible cards that you could gain as a result of the effect. So if all the prizes are gone, gaining a Duchy is not of your choice. If prizes remain, the card you pick is of your choice, so you probably want to pick Duchy lest you gain a curse.
Trader doesn't create an infinite loop, because gaining a Silver due to Trader isn't "gain a card of your choice" event, it's a "gain a Silver" event, which does not involve any choosing. You choose whether to reveal a Trader, but you don't choose which card you will gain when the gain event is replaced. So the Expedition doesn't trigger and the player to the left can't pick a new card at that point. You'll get a Silver.
Cursing attacks, Cultists, and even Explorer all give you a specific card, so you get that specific card, because you don't choose what you gain.
The card was supposed to actually say "gain a card of your choice or a card you bought", but I messed it up and don't want to violate the finality rules. Buying a card causes you to gain that specific card, you don't get to choose which card you gain as a result of buying, it's always the one you bought. So as I currently have it written, the effect will only trigger on Workshop type events. Possibly this error is some of the source of confusion, since it is easy to tell that the designer's intent is for the card to work on buys, but a literal reading of the phrase "of your choice" makes it not work on buys.
-
Okay, I understand your card better now. I just want to say that your definition of "of your choice" is one of the possible definitions for it. If I reveal a trader, then in my opinion, I chose to gain a silver for the silver. If I play a Explorer and reveal a Province then I chose gold over a silver. In fact, if Workshop was formulated as "choose a card in the supply costing at most $4. Gain (a copy of) the chosen card", then according to your explanation it won't trigger (I gained just 1 specific card, which I chose the effect before that). But in fact, as has been pointed out in other topics, this is actually what happens when you gain a card: first you choose some card, then you gain it. This matters with certain Trader/Ruins/Talisman interactions or something. When I read the card I thought the "of your choice" meant something like "whenever you gain a card during your turn from any effect but this one"
Well I don't want to sound to negative (sorry if I do), I just think the card is not so clear on what it does, and if the "while in play"-clause works for all buys, then I think the card is too weak. I do like the general idea, though, that one of your opponents decides which card you will be getting.
PS: The card also has some non-obvious interactions with Possession (both if the possessing player and the possessed player has one of these in play).
-
Windmill
Action
+1 Action, +1 Card, +1 Buy.
---
When you gain this card, +4$.
Cost 3$
-
Thieves' Guild
Reaction
When an opponent would gain a card, you may reveal and trash this card. If you do, you gain that card and your opponent gains this card from the trash instead.
Cost: 4$
-
Elf
$2 Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each other player reveals his hand.
-
As for balance, it is kind of like Walled Village because I think it's healthy for a card like it to be on the low end of the power curve. It is probably going to lose out to any other village, and possibly even be passed up as the only village sometimes in favor of big money. But it's a Fishing Village with a +buy, so I am pretty skeptical about it never being bought ever. Maybe you like your villages strong though, some people don't like Walled Village, and it is in fact a promo. That's a reasonable place to be.
I'm kind of going to give up on the clarity issues. I mean, it's a replacement effect, just like Trader. And Donald changed his mind on his own interpretation of Trader, let alone all the people who tried to figure out Trader+Ironworks on their own, so if you want me to execute a replacement effect idea I have without any ambiguity at all, you're holding me to a higher standard than Donald. And if you're going to do that, I would at least like to make 8 bucks an hour or something.
-
Channel
1$ Action - Reaction
+2 Actions
__________________________________
When another player plays an attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, draw a card, put your hand on top of your deck, and gain two cards costing up to 4$.
-
Channel
1$ Action - Reaction
+2 Actions
__________________________________
When another player plays an attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, draw a card, put your hand on top of your deck, and gain two cards costing up to 4$.
I assume the point is that you swap the top card of your deck with your entire hand, but the wording at the moment suggests that you draw a card into your hand, then put all (usually 6) cards back on top of your deck ... and presumably in an order of your choice. How often is this going to be useful?
-
Channel
1$ Action - Reaction
+2 Actions
__________________________________
When another player plays an attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, draw a card, put your hand on top of your deck, and gain two cards costing up to 4$.
I assume the point is that you swap the top card of your deck with your entire hand, but the wording at the moment suggests that you draw a card into your hand, then put all (usually 6) cards back on top of your deck ... and presumably in an order of your choice. How often is this going to be useful?
That's the wording I want.
I think it will be useful often. I can't give your rhetorical question much more answer than that if you're just going to restate the penalty from a penalty-reward card.
-
Channel
1$ Action - Reaction
+2 Actions
__________________________________
When another player plays an attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, draw a card, put your hand on top of your deck, and gain two cards costing up to 4$.
I assume the point is that you swap the top card of your deck with your entire hand, but the wording at the moment suggests that you draw a card into your hand, then put all (usually 6) cards back on top of your deck ... and presumably in an order of your choice. How often is this going to be useful?
That's the wording I want.
I think it will be useful often. I can't give your rhetorical question much more answer than that if you're just going to restate the penalty from a penalty-reward card.
Ok, let me see if I can work out what circumstances it will be useful in. As you say, the replacing your hand with a single card is meant to be the penalty, and the card-gaining the reward, but how often will gaining two cheap cards be worth sacrificing my next turn? In fact, how often does a Reaction to an Attack even have a penalty attached to it? I think maybe you could get away with "Reveal and discard this. Gain a card costing up to $4."
-
You don't replace your hand with a single card. I told you, the card was intended as written.
Any handsize attack can leave you with too little to buy a 5$ card, and sometimes 2 4's are better.
A game with cursing can just as easily make a regular hand unable to buy a 5$ card, and sometimes 2 4's are better.
You are totally missing that as written, the card lets you setup hands Haven/Courtyard style.
And that against deck inspection it is very powerful.
-
You don't replace your hand with a single card. I told you, the card was intended as written.
You said, "that's the wording I want", which is ambiguous. :P
-
It's not ambiguous, he never proposed an alternate wording.
-
You don't replace your hand with a single card. I told you, the card was intended as written.
Any handsize attack can leave you with too little to buy a 5$ card, and sometimes 2 4's are better.
A game with cursing can just as easily make a regular hand unable to buy a 5$ card, and sometimes 2 4's are better.
You are totally missing that as written, the card lets you setup hands Haven/Courtyard style.
And that against deck inspection it is very powerful.
My apologies - as well as reading the card wrong, I misread your explanation that it was right. So you're actually leaving yourself with an empty hand for your next turn, with the bonuses of getting 2 4s and some control over your next couple of hands. I still strongly suspect that it's not as useful as you think, but I appreciate that you're trying to offer something different to what's already out there. Its power will depend very heavily on what Attacks you might be facing, and what cheap cards you can gain, but that's part of why I dislike it because I think it's too situational - which, admittedly, just about any $1 is going to be.
-
I feel like "Necropolis, Copper, or nothing" is an interesting enough choice on its own, which is why it can provide the shell for a reaction that is far more situational. It's the same philosophy behind Tunnel: not all boards will actually make the reaction useful, but the basic effect is a mixup anyway.
-
Poisoned Chalice
$5
+2$
Each other player either gains a curse, or gains two coppers, putting one in hand and the other on top of their deck.
-
It's not ambiguous, he never proposed an alternate wording.
Well, he mentioned swapping the cards around. You're right, that's not an actual wording. Still, I thought you were agreeing with his interpretation too.
-
Elba
4$ Action
+2 Cards
+1 Buy
You may play all Actions and Treasures from your Island mat, in any order. (If you play one, play every single one)
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
In games using this, when you buy a card, if it's not the first card you bought this turn, gain the card you bought to your Island mat instead of your discard pile.
Opted for clunky wording to try to be crystal clear on the Trader interaction.
Best use for Ruined Village ever, right? If this gets to play testing, I would recommend trying it out with a Looter. I could see this being overpowered in a Chapel or Mountebank or Ambassador kind of way, it might be unskippable, but the other purchases should be interesting and the game should have a unique feel.
I thought about giving the card less powerful vanilla bonuses, but the card really needs to be powerful to keep up with its own "games using this" rule. If the vanilla bonuses were too far behind average engine components, a good engine would always beat a heavy Elba user just by buying Victory cards to the Island mat.
-
Elba
4$ Action
+2 Cards
+1 Buy
You may play all Actions and Treasures from your Island mat, in any order. (If you play one, play every single one)
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
In games using this, when you buy a card, if it's not the first card you bought this turn, gain the card you bought to your Island mat instead of your discard pile.
Opted for clunky wording to try to be crystal clear on the Trader interaction.
Best use for Ruined Village ever, right? If this gets to play testing, I would recommend trying it out with a Looter. I could see this being overpowered in a Chapel or Mountebank or Ambassador kind of way, it might be unskippable, but the other purchases should be interesting and the game should have a unique feel.
I thought about giving the card less powerful vanilla bonuses, but the card really needs to be powerful to keep up with its own "games using this" rule. If the vanilla bonuses were too far behind average engine components, a good engine would always beat a heavy Elba user just by buying Victory cards to the Island mat.
Not sure of the specific implementation, but the concept is very interesting. Playing this with Island would be kind of funny, having you put stuff back on the Island immediately.
-
Elba
4$ Action
+2 Cards
+1 Buy
You may play all Actions and Treasures from your Island mat, in any order. (If you play one, play every single one)
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
In games using this, when you buy a card, if it's not the first card you bought this turn, gain the card you bought to your Island mat instead of your discard pile.
Opted for clunky wording to try to be crystal clear on the Trader interaction.
Best use for Ruined Village ever, right? If this gets to play testing, I would recommend trying it out with a Looter. I could see this being overpowered in a Chapel or Mountebank or Ambassador kind of way, it might be unskippable, but the other purchases should be interesting and the game should have a unique feel.
I thought about giving the card less powerful vanilla bonuses, but the card really needs to be powerful to keep up with its own "games using this" rule. If the vanilla bonuses were too far behind average engine components, a good engine would always beat a heavy Elba user just by buying Victory cards to the Island mat.
When you play the cards on the Island mat, do they get shuffled back into your deck, or do they stay? If it's the latter, its broken beyond belief, but if it's the former than I'm not sure of its power. Buying ruins or coppers to play them isn't a great idea, and ruins don't add up to mega-turn material. If it's a mountebank, than I would almost rather have it in my discard pile so I can shuffle it in next time, instead of having to play the Elba.
Also, the implementation doesn't lead to putting 5 costs on your mat. If you have two buys than your options could be to buy a copper and a 5 cost, adding a junk card to your deck in order to activate Elba, or spending 8$ on a silver / 3 cost to put that 5 on the mat.
Additionally, there arises the problem of not buying Elba. It's just impossible. Because Elba says "in games using this" as opposed to "when this is in play" it makes it unavoidable if you want to buy more than one card in a turn, as the second card goes on the mat no matter what. This should be changed to "you may put the card on the Island mat", or "when this is in play etc."
-
I agree, buying Copper to put 5$ Action cards on your mat is usually unwise. I'm not sure why you think 5$ actions need to be on the mat sometimes for it to be a fun card, though. I mean, Band of Misfits can't ever play 5$ action cards, does that make it a miserable card?
And it's not impossible at all to forgo purchasing Elba. Nomad Camp is generally better on a Silk Road board. And anyway, y'know, it's hard to forgo buying Ambassador sometimes too.
-
I'm not sure if we're encouraged, allowed, discouraged or disallowed to comment on the submitted cards (because that may influence the judges' ranking), but here are some of my thoughts on the cards. If it's the latter, I'll try to remove this part of the post as soon that is pointed out.
It is encouraged!!!
Thanks for all the submissions some felt a little close to what I would consider "not different enough" but lucky for those cards/users my family thought otherwise.
-
Name: Reeve
Type: Action
Text: +$1.
Take a coin token.
---------------------------------
When another player plays an attack card, you may discard this from your hand. If you do take coin tokens equal to half the cost of that attack, rounded up.
Cost: $4
-
Windmill
Action
+1 Action, +1 Card, +1 Buy.
---
When you gain this card, +4$.
Cost 3$
This is way too close to a 3$ Peddler. If you play it, and you produce at least 3$ the turn you play it, which is terribly easy, it's a Peddler. But it's actually a Peddler with a perk, because now you gain another Peddler o.o .
In games with this card I would buy a Windmill or another card with +buy with every 3-6$ purchase until the stack ran out. I appreciate the idea, but even Fishing Village isn't a 7$ quality card priced at 3$.
It's worth noting that the only card that can gain copies of itself while providing more than 1 vanilla bonus is Rats.
-
Windmill
Action
+1 Action, +1 Card, +1 Buy.
---
When you gain this card, +4$.
Cost 3$
This is way too close to a 3$ Peddler. If you play it, and you produce at least 3$ the turn you play it, which is terribly easy, it's a Peddler. But it's actually a Peddler with a perk, because now you gain another Peddler o.o .
In games with this card I would buy a Windmill or another card with +buy with every 3-6$ purchase until the stack ran out. I appreciate the idea, but even Fishing Village isn't a 7$ quality card priced at 3$.
It's worth noting that the only card that can gain copies of itself while providing more than 1 vanilla bonus is Rats.
I find there to be a little more there than what you're describing, but I'll reserve any comments until the submissions are closed.
Those of you who have submissions please check the text I have under "submissions" to make sure they are correct.
-
Don't know if this has been asked, but is there a limit on the number of cards in the kingdom pile? (e.g. rats?)
-
Band of Outcasts: So you can play money from your hand when buying a card? This will be really nice on self-trashers.
Yeah - I went round the houses on this and still can't make up my mind. I did test it on Urchin, and it didn't make a huge difference, but that's hardly a power trasher!
-
Bit of a shot in the dark as I haven't quite had time to test them myself - but I thought - why not!
Honours
These are spread out in a fan and can be bought in any order - there is one of each type
They are part of the kingdom
Card details in images.
-
next 4
-
last 2
-
I cant see those cards ta56636, could you post them as text?
-
I cant see those cards ta56636, could you post them as text?
Try highlighting and dragging to the right. (They are attachments)
-
Hey, I just remembered a fairly unique card idea that I've had sitting around for a while but never tested. I suppose this is a good place to put it.
Farmer
$2 - Action-Reaction
+1 card
+1 action
---
Whenever you would draw a card other than during your Clean-up phase, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead of drawing a card, reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal an action or treasure card. Put that card into your hand and discard the other revealed cards.
A few comments on it. First, yes I know that reactions to card-drawing are supposed to be bad. An online version of this card would likely be a disaster. But IRL, you can usually just reveal it once for the whole turn, and then in the weird cases where you don't want to reveal it, just specify that before drawing.
Second, it assumes drawing is non-atomic. I'm not sure if that is ever specified in Dominion rules anywhere, but I assume that that's how drawing works because if you play Smithy with two cards left in your draw pile, you draw them first and then re-shuffle. If I'm wrong about that, then re-wording would be necessary.
Third, I have no idea how weak/strong it is. I think I originally had it as a pure reaction card, and then it would skip over itself which was cool, but I think that was too weak, so I made it a cantrip. It's called Farmer because it turns a Village into a Farming Village.
-
Hey, I just remembered a fairly unique card idea that I've had sitting around for a while but never tested. I suppose this is a good place to put it.
Farmer
$2 - Action-Reaction
+1 card
+1 action
---
Whenever you would draw a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead of drawing a card, reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal an action or treasure card. Put that card into your hand and discard the other revealed cards.
A few comments on it. First, yes I know that reactions to card-drawing are supposed to be bad. An online version of this card would likely be a disaster. But IRL, you can usually just reveal it once for the whole turn, and then in the weird cases where you don't want to reveal it, just specify that before drawing.
Second, it assumes drawing is non-atomic. I'm not sure if that is ever specified in Dominion rules anywhere, but I assume that that's how drawing works because if you play Smithy with two cards left in your draw pile, you draw them first and then re-shuffle. If I'm wrong about that, then re-wording would be necessary.
Third, I have no idea how weak/strong it is. I think I originally had it as a pure reaction card, and then it would skip over itself which was cool, but I think that was too weak, so I made it a cantrip. It's called Farmer because it turns a Village into a Farming Village.
"When you would draw a card" isn't in the Dominion rule book vocabulary. :(
-
Hey, I just remembered a fairly unique card idea that I've had sitting around for a while but never tested. I suppose this is a good place to put it.
Farmer
$2 - Action-Reaction
+1 card
+1 action
---
Whenever you would draw a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead of drawing a card, reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal an action or treasure card. Put that card into your hand and discard the other revealed cards.
A few comments on it. First, yes I know that reactions to card-drawing are supposed to be bad. An online version of this card would likely be a disaster. But IRL, you can usually just reveal it once for the whole turn, and then in the weird cases where you don't want to reveal it, just specify that before drawing.
Second, it assumes drawing is non-atomic. I'm not sure if that is ever specified in Dominion rules anywhere, but I assume that that's how drawing works because if you play Smithy with two cards left in your draw pile, you draw them first and then re-shuffle. If I'm wrong about that, then re-wording would be necessary.
Third, I have no idea how weak/strong it is. I think I originally had it as a pure reaction card, and then it would skip over itself which was cool, but I think that was too weak, so I made it a cantrip. It's called Farmer because it turns a Village into a Farming Village.
This triggers during cleanup for bonkersness.
-
Area 51 $4
+1 card
+1 action.
Trash this card. If you do, put the top card of the Mystery pile on top of your deck.
--
(Set up: Shuffle 10 random kingdom cards not in the game and place them face down next to the supply. The mystery pile is not part of the supply.)
Action
FAQ: cards from the mystery pile are not gained, so any on-gain effects do not happen.
-
Area 51 $4
+1 card
+1 action.
Trash this card. If you do, put the top card of the Mystery pile on top of your deck.
--
(Set up: Shuffle 10 random kingdom cards not in the game and place them face down next to the supply. The mystery pile is not part of the supply.)
Action
FAQ: cards from the mystery pile are not gained, so any on-gain effects do not happen.
Isn't this just a swingier Black Market?
-
Hey, I just remembered a fairly unique card idea that I've had sitting around for a while but never tested. I suppose this is a good place to put it.
Farmer
$2 - Action-Reaction
+1 card
+1 action
---
Whenever you would draw a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead of drawing a card, reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal an action or treasure card. Put that card into your hand and discard the other revealed cards.
A few comments on it. First, yes I know that reactions to card-drawing are supposed to be bad. An online version of this card would likely be a disaster. But IRL, you can usually just reveal it once for the whole turn, and then in the weird cases where you don't want to reveal it, just specify that before drawing.
Second, it assumes drawing is non-atomic. I'm not sure if that is ever specified in Dominion rules anywhere, but I assume that that's how drawing works because if you play Smithy with two cards left in your draw pile, you draw them first and then re-shuffle. If I'm wrong about that, then re-wording would be necessary.
Third, I have no idea how weak/strong it is. I think I originally had it as a pure reaction card, and then it would skip over itself which was cool, but I think that was too weak, so I made it a cantrip. It's called Farmer because it turns a Village into a Farming Village.
This triggers during cleanup for bonkersness.
Good catch. Clearly that wasn't intended, although I'm not sure it breaks anything. Probably makes clean-up really slow though, so I'll edit it.
-
Here's my submission: (see http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=9257.msg287489#msg287489)
:)
P.S. I would also probably add the wording at the bottom:
If you are unable to do so trash this card.
No need to add that line. As the card doesn't specify from where to buy the card (as Black Market or cards like Bandit Camp do) it would by default be from the supply. Cards that can't be returned to the supply cannot be bought from there, either.
-
Here's my submission: (see http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=9257.msg287489#msg287489)
:)
P.S. I would also probably add the wording at the bottom:
If you are unable to do so trash this card.
No need to add that line. As the card doesn't specify from where to buy the card (as Black Market or cards like Bandit Camp do) it would by default be from the supply. Cards that can't be returned to the supply cannot be bought from there, either.
He wanted that line there so that it isn't so good with one-shots.
-
Area 51 $4
+1 card
+1 action.
Trash this card. If you do, put the top card of the Mystery pile on top of your deck.
--
(Set up: Shuffle 10 random kingdom cards not in the game and place them face down next to the supply. The mystery pile is not part of the supply.)
Action
FAQ: cards from the mystery pile are not gained, so any on-gain effects do not happen.
Isn't this just a swingier Black Market?
Secret history of Treasure Map, etc..
-
Nice to offer prizes for a contest, and nice prizes!
Relay Rider - Action $3
+1 Action
+1 Card
+1 Buy
Look through your discard pile. You may reveal a Relay Rider from it and put it in your hand.
Deathmonger - Action/Reaction $3
Trash the top card of your deck. You may trash the top card of your deck.
----
When any player (including you) trashes a card, you may discard this from your hand. If you do, that player puts the trashed card in their hand.
FAQ: - When you play it as an Action, you can trash 1 or 2 cards from the top of your deck, but you get to see the first trashed card before deciding if you want to trash a second one, and the trashing is not atomic.
- When several cards are trashed simultaneously, you can reveal Deathmonger to any of them, but just one. You have to state which trashed card you are revealing Deathmonger to when you reveal it. If several Deathmongers are revealed simultaneously, the player whose turn it is chooses in which order to resolve their effects. If several players want to reveal Deathmonger at the same time, they do it in clockwise order, starting from the player whose turn it is.
- If you reveal Deathmonger and while resolving its effect the card you revealed it to is no longer in the trash, then it has no effect (just the lose track rule applied to this case).
EDIT: I am aware that Deathmonger is probably more political that DXV would like for Dominion, but I am personally not concerned. If you are, maybe Deathmonger is not the right card for you, feel free to ignore it.
-
Arboretum
Victory / Duration - $5
2 VP
When you discard this card in the clean-up phase, +2 VP and set it aside. Next turn, +$2 and flip it over. The next turn, trash it.
-
Arboretum
Victory / Duration - $5
2 VP
When you discard this card from play, +2 VP and set it aside. Next turn, +$2 and flip it over. The next turn, trash it.
As written, you would never discard it "from play" because it will never be "in play". The idea seems nice.
-
Channel
1$ Action - Reaction
+2 Actions
__________________________________
When another player plays an attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, draw a card, put your hand on top of your deck, and gain two cards costing up to 4$.
Put this in a kingdom with King's Court, Goons and Masquerade, and you've achieved the ultimate in pointless never-ending Dominion games!
-
Really? I would think it actually speeds up the outcome of KC/Goons/Masquerade. The pinned player can end the game on Estates, Masquerades, and Channels. Puts the pinner on some kind of clock to get more VPs than whatever green cards are in the pinned players deck.
-
Famine
0$ Victory
0 VP
Worth 2 VP if your deck contains four differently named victory cards.
_________________________________
When you buy this, trash all cards from your hand, deck, discard pile, and play area.
-
Bit of a shot in the dark as I haven't quite had time to test them myself - but I thought - why not!
Honours
These are spread out in a fan and can be bought in any order - there is one of each type
They are part of the kingdom
Card details in images.
I can't see any of the Images you posted.
-
Famine
0$ Victory
0 VP
Worth 2 VP if your deck contains four differently named victory cards.
_________________________________
When you buy this, trash all cards from your hand, discard pile, and play area.
The trashing seems powerful and swingy, because getting it on a timely manner on the first reshuffle can lead to massive advantage in boards with no other trashing. Much more likely to hit hard for just one player than Mint, and the advantage could be even higher, because you can trash Estates/Shelters. The Victory part is strange, is hard to buy more than one, unless you are lucky to have a hand you can trash at the beginning of your shuffle, otherwise you most likely won't be buying it, and just having one would make the "get Estate/Duchy/Province" not so much worth it. I would avoid trashing the discard to make it more viable to buy this on the endgame for the points AND make the early-game trashing less swingy.
-
This is a card I made a while ago. It is unplaytested
Demon
$4 - Action-Duration
Now and at the start of every turn in which this card is in play, +1 Card.
At the start of Clean-up this turn, trash a card from your hand. If you do, leave this in play. If you don't, trash this and gain a curse.
An every-turn cantrip trasher, but one that is hard to get rid of and stings when it does.
-
This is a card I made a while ago. It is unplaytested
Demon
$4 - Action-Duration
Now and at the start of every turn in which this card is in play, +1 Card.
At the start of Clean-up this turn, trash a card from your hand. If you do, leave this in play. If you don't, trash this and gain a curse.
An every-turn cantrip trasher, but one that is hard to get rid of and stings when it does.
Its more than a cantrip trasher, is a Lab-trasher on all other turns. Seems way too powerful, although the mandatory trashing may hurt, is definitively an opener. And trashing at the end of turn makes it even better and less dangerous. I would probably up the cost, avoid the +1 Card or make the trashing at the beginning of the turn. Probably the first 2, to make it less luck-based (although it would still compare favorably to lookout, I guess).
-
This is a card I made a while ago. It is unplaytested
Demon
$4 - Action-Duration
Now and at the start of every turn in which this card is in play, +1 Card.
At the start of Clean-up this turn, trash a card from your hand. If you do, leave this in play. If you don't, trash this and gain a curse.
An every-turn cantrip trasher, but one that is hard to get rid of and stings when it does.
Its more than a cantrip trasher, is a Lab-trasher on all other turns. Seems way too powerful, although the mandatory trashing may hurt, is definitively an opener. And trashing at the end of turn makes it even better and less dangerous. I would probably up the cost, avoid the +1 Card or make the trashing at the beginning of the turn. Probably the first 2, to make it less luck-based (although it would still compare favorably to lookout, I guess).
Oops. You're totally right. Perhaps the +1 card should be removed.
-
Famine
0$ Victory
0 VP
Worth 2 VP if your deck contains four differently named victory cards.
_________________________________
When you buy this, trash all cards from your hand, discard pile, and play area.
The trashing seems powerful and swingy, because getting it on a timely manner on the first reshuffle can lead to massive advantage in boards with no other trashing. Much more likely to hit hard for just one player than Mint, and the advantage could be even higher, because you can trash Estates/Shelters. The Victory part is strange, is hard to buy more than one, unless you are lucky to have a hand you can trash at the beginning of your shuffle, otherwise you most likely won't be buying it, and just having one would make the "get Estate/Duchy/Province" not so much worth it. I would avoid trashing the discard to make it more viable to buy this on the endgame for the points AND make the early-game trashing less swingy.
Typo. Thought I put the word "deck" in there, but I didn't. It is a totally different card if it trashes the deck, the intent is for each player to have the option to try "Mint+Lighthouse" at the beginning of the game if they feel brave.
The VP clause is for cards that use Remodel or Workshop and chose not to buy Famine. I had no intention of providing enough VP to convince a Famine opener to not trash the Famine.
It's worth noting that trashing cards from play does not cancel out the coin they've provided, so you can use +buy to sneak soda bottles into the movie theater.
-
Famine
0$ Victory
0 VP
Worth 2 VP if your deck contains four differently named victory cards.
_________________________________
When you buy this, trash all cards from your hand, discard pile, and play area.
The trashing seems powerful and swingy, because getting it on a timely manner on the first reshuffle can lead to massive advantage in boards with no other trashing. Much more likely to hit hard for just one player than Mint, and the advantage could be even higher, because you can trash Estates/Shelters. The Victory part is strange, is hard to buy more than one, unless you are lucky to have a hand you can trash at the beginning of your shuffle, otherwise you most likely won't be buying it, and just having one would make the "get Estate/Duchy/Province" not so much worth it. I would avoid trashing the discard to make it more viable to buy this on the endgame for the points AND make the early-game trashing less swingy.
Typo. Thought I put the word "deck" in there, but I didn't. It is a totally different card if it trashes the deck, the intent is for each player to have the option to try "Mint+Lighthouse" at the beginning of the game if they feel brave.
The VP clause is for cards that use Remodel or Workshop.
So it trashes literally everything you have? I can't see that ever, ever being a good idea. Maybe something super weird with Poor House + Squire, since you only need to spend one turn buying Copper... but really?
Edit: your edit makes an interesting point about +Buy, but that still means the earliest you are going to do this is on turn 3, assuming you draw the +Buy card you opened with. And then you're going to end up with a deck that just has Famine and maybe a Silver, maybe something a little better. Still seems absolutely terrible. :P
-
Edit: your edit makes an interesting point about +Buy, but that still means the earliest you are going to do this is on turn 3, assuming you draw the +Buy card you opened with. And then you're going to end up with a deck that just has Famine and maybe a Silver, maybe something a little better. Still seems absolutely terrible. :P
Nomad camp
-
Edit: your edit makes an interesting point about +Buy, but that still means the earliest you are going to do this is on turn 3, assuming you draw the +Buy card you opened with. And then you're going to end up with a deck that just has Famine and maybe a Silver, maybe something a little better. Still seems absolutely terrible. :P
Nomad camp
Peddler! Marauder? Feodum!
-
Edit: your edit makes an interesting point about +Buy, but that still means the earliest you are going to do this is on turn 3, assuming you draw the +Buy card you opened with. And then you're going to end up with a deck that just has Famine and maybe a Silver, maybe something a little better. Still seems absolutely terrible. :P
Nomad camp
Peddler! Marauder? Feodum!
Ehhh?
Nomad Camp is still just $2 of value, so that's not amazing to have in a slim deck. You're not going to get Peddler because it looks at cards in play, which will all get trashed away. Marauder is mediocre for building up your economy, since the Spoils disappear; moreover, opponent can play Marauder and those ruins will have an even bigger effect on your newly empty deck. Feodum -- OK, that one works a bit better.
-
I think you are missing out having a card that basically only works on the first turns, and its not incredibly amazing at it. Even chapel, you almost every time buy it on T1/T2, but then use it for several turns, and in Cursing games, you may keep using it for quite some time. Also, this card being a VP card is kind of useless, given that it does not provide enough VP to workaround the drawback of buying it in the endgame. I would try a version with less trashing and some real usage for VPs. VPs for $0 can be great with +Buys in the end of the game, but not if they are going to trash all the other green you have.
-
Oh trust me, Nomad Camp won't be in your slim deck, but it will be in the trash pile.
And Peddler won't be in your pre-apocalyptic deck, but it can be in your slim one.
I think you're getting the suggestions backwards.
You may be quite right about Marauder, since it's a junker. I haven't played enough with it to be honest. My roommates won't play with me. They keep doing homework. They basically suck
-
Oh trust me, Nomad Camp won't be in your slim deck, but it will be in the trash pile.
And Peddler won't be in your pre-apocalyptic deck, but it can be in your slim one.
I think you're getting the suggestions backwards.
You may be quite right about Marauder, since it's a junker. I haven't played enough with it to be honest. My roommates won't play with me. They keep doing homework. They basically suck
I'm not sure what you mean. Suppose you have $4 and +Buy. You can spend the first buy on Famine, trashing everything. Then you can spend the next buy on Nomad Camp. Is that not what you were getting at when you mentioned it?
Or wait, you mean you could use it to get Famine before the shuffle. OK, got it.
Peddler would be very difficult to get into your slim deck. Say you have $X and +Buy. You spend the first buy on Famine. You trash everything, including the cards in the play area. Peddler now costs $8. So I still don't know what you mean with Peddler.
Basically, this card is a big effect but the effect is almost always going to be terrible. There are niche cards, sure. This is beyond niche.
-
I think you are missing out having a card that basically only works on the first turns, and its not incredibly amazing at it. Even chapel, you almost every time buy it on T1/T2, but then use it for several turns, and in Cursing games, you may keep using it for quite some time. Also, this card being a VP card is kind of useless, given that it does not provide enough VP to workaround the drawback of buying it in the endgame. I would try a version with less trashing and some real usage for VPs. VPs for $0 can be great with +Buys in the end of the game, but not if they are going to trash all the other green you have.
VPs for 0$ are too good with +buys at the end of the game, that's why you can't buy this card in endgame. The VP is strictly for Ironworks variants.
Trashing your whole deck is often a bad thing. This makes the card weak. I like weak cards. I feel like nobody makes Explorer fan cards anymore. Actually, as a matter of fact, 4$ Explorer is like the most suggested card ever, and people even make 4$ cards that are strictly better* than Explorer, one of which is in this contest.
I feel like anyone who suggests a card with a power level around Counting House gets flak, and any card anyone posts that doesn't improve Big Money on its own or by villaging into Steward is on trial for being a bad card.
*The province thing is a very minor part of Explorer
-
To the OP: In the submissions list, my card Deathmonger was copied wrong. The text below the line should be corrected.
-
I think you are missing out having a card that basically only works on the first turns, and its not incredibly amazing at it. Even chapel, you almost every time buy it on T1/T2, but then use it for several turns, and in Cursing games, you may keep using it for quite some time. Also, this card being a VP card is kind of useless, given that it does not provide enough VP to workaround the drawback of buying it in the endgame. I would try a version with less trashing and some real usage for VPs. VPs for $0 can be great with +Buys in the end of the game, but not if they are going to trash all the other green you have.
VPs for 0$ are too good with +buys at the end of the game, that's why you can't buy this card in endgame. The VP is strictly for Ironworks variants.
Trashing your whole deck is often a bad thing. This makes the card weak. I like weak cards. I feel like nobody makes Explorer fan cards anymore. Actually, as a matter of fact, 4$ Explorer is like the most suggested card ever, and people even make 4$ cards that are strictly better* than Explorer, one of which is in this contest.
I feel like anyone who suggests a card with a power level around Counting House gets flak, and any card anyone posts that doesn't improve Big Money on its own or by villaging into Steward is on trial for being a bad card.
*The province thing is a very minor part of Explorer
Not at all. I think niche cards are cool. But cards that are completely useless except with very specific combos? You can still buy Counting House and get some value out of it, even if the board is not great for it. But "trash absolutely everything" is probably an instant loss on the vast majority of boards. When is it viable? There can't be other decent trashing. There probably can't be any junking attacks. You almost certainly need +Buy so you can start with at least some economy.
Maybe if you gave it +Buy on buy (so you can always buy something after this). And maybe if you trashed all but one other card. Then it's still super crazy but it opens up a few avenues where it might actually work.
-
I was wrong about Peddler. I am that guy that Throne Rooms his Peddler and expects it to get cheaper, every single time.
I feel like if I can name a dozen cards that can enable something, that's enough. Catacombs, Nomad Camp, Feodum, Squire, Native Village, Haven, Ironworks, Workshop, Remodel, Armory, Haggler, Forge. And that's like, from memory, without looking through the record of all cards that exist. And it excludes combinations of cards that might be able to work together to make it work.
-
Titan $6
+2 cards
Reveal your hand. If you revealed a...
... Copper, each other player gains a Curse and a Copper, putting them into their hand.
... Curse, each other player discards down to 3 cards in hand.
Action-Attack
-
I don't know why you feel it matters that Counting House doesn't ruin BMU as much as this card ruins BMU. Both cards ruin BMU. If you don't have a specific combo, you shouldn't play the card, and you won't. How terrible play is irrelevant as long as the play is at least terrible enough to be declined.
+buy on gain, that would be a different card. Maybe a better card, maybe closer to the sweet spot between Witch and Scout. But the card is viable enough as it is IMO, and makes a difference more often than Counting House whether or not Counting House is "useful" when it's bad.
-
I was wrong about Peddler. I am that guy that Throne Rooms his Peddler and expects it to get cheaper, every single time.
I feel like if I can name a dozen cards that can enable something, that's enough. Catacombs, Nomad Camp, Feodum, Squire, Native Village, Haven, Ironworks, Workshop, Remodel, Armory, Haggler, Forge. And that's like, from memory, without looking through the record of all cards that exist. And it excludes combinations of cards that might be able to work together to make it work.
I don't think those work. Catacombs is a $5 so if you plan to trash that to get a free card, you're unlikely to pick up Famine until like turn 4. And then you have something maybe a little better than Silver in your deck? Similar reasoning for Nomad Camp. I will grant Feodum and Squire, but those need some support too; Squire especially needs a good attack card. Native Village doesn't really work -- you can't save specific cards from being Famine-trashed without another enabler (or extreme luck in finding the good cards). And then after the Famine you still need to buy two Coppers to get a Native Village to retrieve your mat contents. Haven can save one card, I guess? Ironworks, Workshop, Remodel, Armory, Haggler and Forge -- none of those work? You need to buy them again afterwards, and how are you going to do that with nothing in your deck?
The only 2 card combo I see is Famine-Feodum, where you can try to pick up a bunch of Feodums and then instantly trash them all for a deck of nothing but Silver. That's pretty cool. The others all look bad unless you have like 3-4 support cards, AND there probably cannot be junkers (which would wreck the trimmed deck) AND there can't be better trashing.
Again, there is niche, but this is way beyond niche. It's just a dead card almost every single time.
It's not about BMU at all (I don't think I mentioned it?). The issue I see with it is that the use cases for Famine are just hyper-specific. With Counting House, it's rare but it still happens -- something with Golem, counter to Mountebank, some other situations I'm sure. But with this, you've got Feodum and then the few miracle boards where the stars align.
OK, if that doesn't faze you, I have thought of a way that it's broken -- first player to play Possession can instantly destroy his opponent's deck. And changing it to on-gain just shifts the problem to Swindler.
-
To the OP: In the submissions list, my card Deathmonger was copied wrong. The text below the line should be corrected.
Fixed
-
I think some boards with no trashing and no special specific enablers will still make famine worth it, maybe that's the main way we disagree. Most engines aren't fast enough to make that attractive, but I think cost reduction or VP chips could. I might actually playtest this with my friend, just to see if you're right.
I don't think Squire needs much more than no-trash, if that, to work. It provides 2 buys, is a powerful, cheap silver gainer, and leads straight into a slim deck engine. I'm not sure whether Squire/Squire or Famine/Copper is a better opening, but I expect one of them can beat a deck with no trashing.
Catacomb, I may be wrong about. I have no idea why you are so skeptical about Nomad camp though. Nomad Camp->Famine+Explorer is pretty similar Mint-FG, except the Estates are gone (and Silver is not as awesome as Fool's Gold).
The first player to get Possession doesn't trash his opponent's deck, the same way Chapel doesn't, Possession has a safety clause. It does actually have a pin, just like Forge does, but unlike Forge the pin is finite. If the victim player doesn't get any +buy or gainers, the max output of the pin is 9 consecutive turns using the Possessor's own deck, which may not be worth gaining the 8 green cards.
-
I think some boards with no trashing and no special specific enablers will still make famine worth it, maybe that's the main way we disagree. Most engines aren't fast enough to make that attractive, but I think cost reduction or VP chips could. I might actually playtest this with my friend, just to see if you're right.
I don't think Squire needs much more than no-trash, if that, to work. It provides 2 buys, is a powerful, cheap silver gainer, and leads straight into a slim deck engine. I'm not sure whether Squire/Squire or Famine/Copper is a better opening, but I expect one of them can beat a deck with no trashing.
Catacomb, I may be wrong about. I have no idea why you are so skeptical about Nomad camp though. Nomad Camp->Famine+Explorer is pretty similar Mint-FG, except the Estates are gone (and Silver is not as awesome as Fool's Gold).
The first player to get Possession doesn't trash his opponent's deck, the same way Chapel doesn't, Possession has a safety clause. It does actually have a pin, just like Forge does, but unlike Forge the pin is finite. If the victim player doesn't get any +buy or gainers, the max output of the pin is 9 consecutive turns using the Possessor's own deck, which may not be worth gaining the 8 green cards.
Haha, whoops, good call on Possession!
OK, mass Squire may work for providing +Buy to start and then mass Silver gaining after.
I'm not sure what the game plan is for Nomad Camp. You buy Nomad Camp t1 (which does require starting 4 or 5, no guarantees here) and then on t2 you buy Famine/X. What X is depends on the board and how much Copper you managed to get in that second hand. If the best you can do is Silver, then your deck is Silver and Famine and you have to waste a few more turns getting some semblance of an economy, and even then you have a deck that will choke pretty quickly when you start to green. Explorer may work, but now that's a 3-card combo and you have to get a little lucky to afford Explorer on your Nomad Camp turn.
You may be right about where we disagree. I feel like you do need specific enablers -- +Buy so you're not stuck buying Copper after you Famine, and then something that enables very rapid card gains so that you can have an economy and then green without choking horribly. And both of those probably need to be cheap. On top of the requirement that there is no other trashing and that there are no counters (of which I think there are plenty), then I think that's asking for a lot.
It's an interesting concept though, and I think it might work if it were toned down a little bit.
-
I think some boards with no trashing and no special specific enablers will still make famine worth it, maybe that's the main way we disagree. Most engines aren't fast enough to make that attractive, but I think cost reduction or VP chips could. I might actually playtest this with my friend, just to see if you're right.
I don't think Squire needs much more than no-trash, if that, to work. It provides 2 buys, is a powerful, cheap silver gainer, and leads straight into a slim deck engine. I'm not sure whether Squire/Squire or Famine/Copper is a better opening, but I expect one of them can beat a deck with no trashing.
Catacomb, I may be wrong about. I have no idea why you are so skeptical about Nomad camp though. Nomad Camp->Famine+Explorer is pretty similar Mint-FG, except the Estates are gone (and Silver is not as awesome as Fool's Gold).
The first player to get Possession doesn't trash his opponent's deck, the same way Chapel doesn't, Possession has a safety clause. It does actually have a pin, just like Forge does, but unlike Forge the pin is finite. If the victim player doesn't get any +buy or gainers, the max output of the pin is 9 consecutive turns using the Possessor's own deck, which may not be worth gaining the 8 green cards.
Haha, whoops, good call on Possession!
OK, mass Squire may work for providing +Buy to start and then mass Silver gaining after.
I'm not sure what the game plan is for Nomad Camp. You buy Nomad Camp t1 (which does require starting 4 or 5, no guarantees here) and then on t2 you buy Famine/X. What X is depends on the board and how much Copper you managed to get in that second hand. If the best you can do is Silver, then your deck is Silver and Famine and you have to waste a few more turns getting some semblance of an economy, and even then you have a deck that will choke pretty quickly when you start to green. Explorer may work, but now that's a 3-card combo and you have to get a little lucky to afford Explorer on your Nomad Camp turn.
You may be right about where we disagree. I feel like you do need specific enablers -- +Buy so you're not stuck buying Copper after you Famine, and then something that enables very rapid card gains so that you can have an economy and then green without choking horribly. And both of those probably need to be cheap. On top of the requirement that there is no other trashing and that there are no counters (of which I think there are plenty), then I think that's asking for a lot.
It's an interesting concept though, and I think it might work if it were toned down a little bit.
I don't want to "tone it down" or make it any less unique. If I wanted to buff it I'm pretty sure I'd make it a treasure instead, worth 2 coins. It's another thing I considered.
-
I don't want to "tone it down" or make it any less unique. If I wanted to buff it I'm pretty sure I'd make it a treasure instead, worth 2 coins. It's another thing I considered.
Toning it down doesn't have to neuter it. For example, if it trashed everything you had except for one card, that's still extremely unique but it opens up a few more avenues that maybe let it be viable. Your idea of making it a Silver might work, because that opens it up for boards with decent $2s.
-
I don't want to "tone it down" or make it any less unique. If I wanted to buff it I'm pretty sure I'd make it a treasure instead, worth 2 coins. It's another thing I considered.
Toning it down doesn't have to neuter it. For example, if it trashed everything you had except for one card, that's still extremely unique but it opens up a few more avenues that maybe let it be viable. Your idea of making it a Silver might work, because that opens it up for boards with decent $2s.
Making it a Silver would definitely make it a contender card. I don't think spending one turn buying a Copper is a big deal at all.
If it's worth 2 coins, it might be a little too strong I think. I don't like cards that are automatically good if they are the only trasher. There's a lot of official cards like that, like Remake, I guess, but I don't have to like it, eh?
If it's worth 1 coin, I think that's a pretty nice spot, but then it's not interesting to gain it without buying it.
-
I cant see those cards ta56636, could you post them as text?
Sorry about that - here they are:
Gold Trophy, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
The first time you have no cards in your hand and no actions remaining: +$3
(Action, not Action cards)
----------
This costs half the number of honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
Silver Trophy, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may discard an action card from your hand.
If you do +$2.
----------
This costs half the number of honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
Copper Trophy, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may reveal a Copper from your hand.
If you do, + $1.
----------
This costs half the number of Honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
Exhibition, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you discard this from play, if you have not played any duplicate cards this turn, take 2 Coin Tokens.
----------
This costs half the number of Honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
Benefice, $?
+ 1 Action
+ 1 Card
Reveal your hand.
If there are no duplicates in it, gain a Duchy.
----------
This costs half the number of honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
Fayre, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
If you've played more than 3 actions this turn (counting this): +1 Buy, Gain a card costing up to 4 that is not an Honour.
----------
This costs half the number of Honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
Livery, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you discard this from play, if you have had a Copper, Silver and a Gold in play this turn: gain a Copper, Silver and Gold, putting them on top of your deck in any order.
----------
This costs half the number of honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
Call to Arms, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may discard a card.
If you do, each other player discards down to 4 cards in hand.
----------
This costs half the number of Honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Attack - Honour
Shire, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you discard this from play, if you didn’t buy any cards this turn, gain 2 Honours and a Copper.
----------
This costs half the number of Honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Worth 1 VP for every 2 honour in your deck (rounded down)
Action - Victory - Honour
Charter of Franchise, $?
+1 Card
+1 Action
Reveal a card from your hand.
If it is representative of a person or people, gain another copy of it.
----------
This costs half the number of honours left in the supply (rounded down)
Action - Honour
----------
Setup: Decide as a group which kingdom cards in the supply this would apply to.
-
Thug, $4, Action
+1 Action
Look through your deck.
You may draw any card from your deck. If you do, shuffle your deck immediately.
-
Thug, $4, Action
+1 Action
Look through your deck.
You may draw any card from your deck. If you do, shuffle your deck immediately.
There has been plenty of discussion on this kind of thing, and its broken, I would say you need extreme penalties (like discard your hand or something) to make it work. Compare with Sage which costs almost the same ($3 and $4 are not that different). Forgive for not getting the links for you, I'm not sure how to search them and don't have tons of time right now.
-
I really like the "if you do" there. Smart move.
-
Molecule Splitter $5
Trash a card from your hand costing at least $4.
If you do, gain a Positive Ion and a Negative Ion.
Action
Positive Ion $0*
Reveal your hand. Discard all Positive Ions from your hand.
+2 cards
+1 action
This is not in the Supply
Action
Negative Ion $0*
Reveal your hand. Discard all Negative Ions from you hand.
+1 card
+1 action
+1 buy
+$1
This is not in the supply
Action
-
Molecule Splitter $5
Trash a card from your hand costing at least $4.
If you do, gain a Positive Ion and a Negative Ion.
Action
You should make the player reveal their hand if he has no card costing $4 or more, or add a "You may". Like it is, it has no accountability.
I think this is way too good like it is, you will be swimming in Labs and Markets in no time, even if you discard some of them when they collide, they are still extremely good, and the race to get them can be fierce (how many of each will there be? 10?). Sacrificing a $4 is not so bad, but is also not so easy, that part seems fine. I would make the Ions one-shots like Spoils. Cantrip one-shots are interesting.
-
Molecule Splitter $5
Trash a card from your hand costing at least $4.
If you do, gain a Positive Ion and a Negative Ion.
Action
But the Ion's aren't in the supply, so basically this is just useful for on-trash benefits. Should probably be "gain a Positive Ion and a Negative Ion from the Ion pile".
-
Molecule Splitter $5
Trash a card from your hand costing at least $4.
If you do, gain a Positive Ion and a Negative Ion.
Action
You should make the player reveal their hand if he has no card costing $4 or more, or add a "You may". Like it is, it has no accountability.
Molecule Splitter $5
Trash a card from your hand costing at least $4.
If you do, gain a Positive Ion and a Negative Ion.
Action
But the Ion's aren't in the supply, so basically this is just useful for on-trash benefits. Should probably be "gain a Positive Ion and a Negative Ion from the Ion pile".
New wording: you may trash a card costing at least $5. Gain a Positive and a Negative Ion from the ion pile.
-
@Dominion_Contests: If you are going to leave Famine worded as it is (in accordance with your "no changes rule") I am totally fine with that. However, I request you not waste any time playtesting it in flawed form, because it seems like a terrible card with the typo. Absurdly swingy.
-
Like I said, I might be the one to cause a submission limit to be imposed >_<
I have six resubmissions from the Mini-set design contest. One or two of them might not qualify. The only card I ever made that won a Mini-set design challenge was Astrolabe, and I feel reluctant to resubmit that one, even though it's a good card. I feel like it already won something, and kind of doesn't fit into this contest quite.
Artist
$2 - Action
Look at the top 4 cards of your deck. Reveal and discard up to 3 of them. Put the rest back in any order. If you revealed an..
Action card, +1 Card.
Treasure card, +1 Action.
Victory card, +$1.
Riddling Witch
$4 - Action-Attack
The player to your left may choose to have each of your opponents gain a curse. If no curses were gained this way, +4 Cards.
Enclosure
$2 - Victory
0VP. Worth 2 VP if you have more Estates than Enclosures.
--
When you buy this, +1$, +1 Buy.
Posh Village
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
--
When you discard this from play, you may put it on top of your deck if you bought a Treasure this turn.
Fashionista
$5 - Action
+2$
Gain a card costing up to 4$.
You may look through your discard pile and put it back in any order.
Reveal a card from your hand or the top of your discard pile. Each opponent chooses one: they gain a copy, or you do.
Scientific Method
$4 - Action
+2 Actions
The player to your left chooses a non-empty kingdom card pile that you have not gained from this turn. Gain a copy of that card.
Those that disliked these cards in the past may note that I nerfed Riddling Witch and buffed Fashionista (besides giving it a more awesome name.)
-
@Dominion_Contests: If you are going to leave Famine worded as it is (in accordance with your "no changes rule") I am totally fine with that. However, I request you not waste any time playtesting it in flawed form, because it seems like a terrible card with the typo. Absurdly swingy.
Submit Famine again and I'll put the revised version up.
-
Thug, $4, Action
+1 Action
Look through your deck.
You may draw any card from your deck. If you do, shuffle your deck immediately.
There has been plenty of discussion on this kind of thing, and its broken, I would say you need extreme penalties (like discard your hand or something) to make it work. Compare with Sage which costs almost the same ($3 and $4 are not that different). Forgive for not getting the links for you, I'm not sure how to search them and don't have tons of time right now.
this was originally a $5 card. i playtested it using only Base and Intrigue sets and lost badly in the 2 games i used it in. i can only assume that once used with other sets, the brokeness kicks in somehow.
-
If you have any questions about how it works, feel free to ask!
Artisan
Cost: 4$
Action
+2 Cards
Put a card from your hand to the bottom of the Artisan deck. Reveal the top card of the Artisan deck. Each other player gains a copy of the revealed card. Place the revealed card to the bottom of the Artisan deck.
--
Setup: Shuffle 1 Curse, 3 Coppers, and 1 Silver together and place them facedown in a pile. This is the Artisan deck.
I posted the idea a while ago, and I think I've found a good balance for the starting deck contents. I really like the mechanic in it (I'm actually in the process of designing a game with it) and it is an absolute blast to play with. It's fairly powerful, allowing you to pseudo-trash a card from your hand while junking your opponent's deck. But that possibility of flipping over the Silver (and any other helpful cards that may be added to the deck over the course of the game) makes the card fun and interesting, but also a bit swingy with what is drawn.
-
If you have any questions about how it works, feel free to ask!
Artisan
Cost: 4$
Action
+2 Cards
Put a card from your hand to the bottom of the Artisan deck. Reveal the top card of the Artisan deck. Each other player gains a copy of the revealed card. Place the revealed card to the bottom of the Artisan deck.
--
Setup: Shuffle 1 Curse, 3 Coppers, and 1 Silver together and place them facedown in a pile. This is the Artisan deck.
I posted the idea a while ago, and I think I've found a good balance for the starting deck contents. I really like the mechanic in it (I'm actually in the process of designing a game with it) and it is an absolute blast to play with. It's fairly powerful, allowing you to pseudo-trash a card from your hand while junking your opponent's deck. But that possibility of flipping over the Silver (and any other helpful cards that may be added to the deck over the course of the game) makes the card fun and interesting, but also a bit swingy with what is drawn.
This seems like a swingier, better Masquerade (swingier mostly because of the Silver). It's +2 cards, pseudo-trash a card, junk everyone else. I guess the big difference is that the junking sticks. It's an interesting mechanic, but I feel like you would have to change something to make it less similar to Masquerade. Like, maybe have the Artisan deck start with good cards (and adjust the price accordingly if necessary)? That way at the beginning when you want to be trashing a lot, you help everyone else, and then later on you generally hurt everyone else. That would probably make it swingier though.
If you start with one Silver per player in the Artisan deck (and no other cards), then they probably tend to both help each other equally at the beginning of the game. I'm not sure whether that would increase or decrease swinginess overall, but I would guess decrease.
-
24. Name: Famine
Type: Victory
Text: 0 VP Worth 2 VP if your deck contains four differently named victory cards.
---------------------------------
When you buy this, trash all cards from your hand, deck, discard pile, and play area.
Cost: $0
-
Thug, $4, Action
+1 Action
Look through your deck.
You may draw any card from your deck. If you do, shuffle your deck immediately.
There has been plenty of discussion on this kind of thing, and its broken, I would say you need extreme penalties (like discard your hand or something) to make it work. Compare with Sage which costs almost the same ($3 and $4 are not that different). Forgive for not getting the links for you, I'm not sure how to search them and don't have tons of time right now.
this was originally a $5 card. i playtested it using only Base and Intrigue sets and lost badly in the 2 games i used it in. i can only assume that once used with other sets, the brokeness kicks in somehow.
4-5$ is a really huge leap man. There's lots of cards that are too powerful at 4$ and too weak at 5$. The effect is even more pronounced than usual with a card like this.
That said, one could argue that cards that make this broken like Witch, Wharf, and Mountebank, are really the problems themselves. I didn't have the same kneejerk reaction my peers did, anyhow, I thought the fizzle chance seemed quite enough to keep the card alright, to the point where I'm not sure if your critic(s) noticed the high fizzle chance (especially with the mention of fizzleproof sage)
-
Posh Village
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
--
When you discard this from play, you may put it on top of your deck if you bought a Treasure this turn.
Isn't this quite similar to Walled Village?
-
New wording: you may trash a card costing at least $5. Gain a Positive and a Negative Ion from the ion pile.
Why not just use cation and anion? And a better name for the card itself would be something like a galvanic cell (or heck, even just solvent).
-
Posh Village
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
--
When you discard this from play, you may put it on top of your deck if you bought a Treasure this turn.
Isn't this quite similar to Walled Village?
One or two of them might not qualify.
-
Halfpenny
1$ Treasure
Worth 1$
Trash this at the beginning of Cleanup if you didn't play it from the trash pile.
____________________________________________
Any player may play Halfpenny from the trash pile as though it were in his or her hand.
____________________________________________
Setup: Trash two Halfpennies for every player in the game.
-
Halfpenny
1$ Treasure
Worth 1$
Trash this card if you played it from your hand.
____________________________________________
Any player may play Halfpenny from the trash pile as though it were in his or her hand.
____________________________________________
Setup: Trash two Halfpennies for every player in the game.
I don't understand this. Am I missing something, or does it basically just mean that every player has a permanent +$4 in a two-player game, +$6 in three-player game, etc.? That seems like a terrible idea...I must be missing something...
Edit: Or maybe the idea is that if you play it from the trash, it goes to your discard pile? That's much more reasonable. I think the "as though it were in his hand" phrase makes that very unclear though.
-
Yeah. Magic the Gathering has that interaction all the time, and it in that game it works like your latter interpretation (the one I intend). "As though" refers to the manner in which it is played, but not the history of where it was played from. If prune the flower off of a rose as though I were beheading my school principal, it means I probably used a big axe, but it doesn't mean I go to jail. Kinda something like that
I'm not sure of the true, correct way to interpret the English, or whatever. But this particular card can kind of cheat by on the basis of, ok there is two ways to interpret this, one of them is broken, absurd, and furthermore could simplify to much shorter text. Must be the other one.
There's really some personal taste with these things. Dominion_Contests is beyond welcome to use a different wording that he likes better, I don't much care. If Dominion already had a standard wording for me to follow, it wouldn't be a very original card, so I copied MtG.
-
Guys I have 666 respect, this contest is making the whole forum treat me like the antichrist
I just really really want a Governor ok, is that so wrong?
-
I just really really want a Governor ok, is that so wrong?
Is the BGG store out of stock?
On the wording for Half-Penny, you could make the below-the-line text:
---
While this is in the trash, at the start of your buy phase, you may gain this. If you do, +$1.
This changes a few interactions (Watchtower, Bank, Venture, probably some others) but it mostly keeps the spirit of your card.
If you keep your wording, you should still probably specify when you can do it. But I suppose "as though it were in [your] hand" implies during the Buy phase, like other Treasures. Still, I agree with scott that the current wording can be confusing.
-
I just really really want a Governor ok, is that so wrong?
Is the BGG store out of stock?
On the wording for Half-Penny, you could make the below-the-line text:
---
While this is in the trash, at the start of your buy phase, you may gain this. If you do, +$1.
This changes a few interactions (Watchtower, Bank, Venture, probably some others) but it mostly keeps the spirit of your card.
If you keep your wording, you should still probably specify when you can do it. But I suppose "as though it were in [your] hand" implies during the Buy phase, like other Treasures. Still, I agree with scott that the current wording can be confusing.
That lets you gain a Silver for every Halfpenny in the trash with Trader, every turn, that's a little swingy.
-
Not sure if actually swingy, because everyone can buy Trader, and you won't have Trader in hand every turn. But I think it might actually be broken because you could just repeatedly "gain" it and Trader until the Silver stack is depleted. Replace "gain this" with "put this in your discard" and it should work, I think?
-
I may as well submit a few old favourites since I've yet to actually submit any of them into contests:
Mob, $2, Action
+1 Card
+$1
If you have Mob in play, this does not take an action to play.
Sacrifice, $3, Action
Trash a card from your hand. If it is an…
Action card, +3 Cards
Treasure card, +2 Actions
Victory card, +$3
Grand Design, $3, Action
+$1
You may discard any number of differently named Victory cards.
+2 Cards per card discarded.
Crypt, $5, Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.
Put any Treasures and Curses into your hand and discard the rest.
+1 Card per card discarded.
Revelation, $5, Action
+1 Action
Gain a card costing $3 or less and currently not in play.
Put it into your hand.
Capital, $6, Victory
Worth 2 Victory Points for every set you have consisting of:
an Estate, a Duchy, and a Province.
-
My Herbalists are weeping. You make them weep. They are dragging their Horns of Plenty behind them on a trail of tears. Will they ever meet the wise old Mandarin who wants to help them? No one knows. They chew Mint leaves upon their way, hoping to find some comfort in it.
Invisible +1$ could make counting coin a pain, also.
-
While this is in the trash, at the start of your buy phase, you may gain this. If you do, +$1.
This changes a few interactions (Watchtower, Bank, Venture, probably some others) but it mostly keeps the spirit of your card.
How about "While this is in the trash, at the start of your buy phase, you may play this"?
-
Who is "you?" It's in the trash pile. No one owns it. I would assume "you" would be a reference to DXV, and he would be allowed to come to the game and play a Halfpenny during his buy phases.
-
Who is "you?" It's in the trash pile. No one owns it. I would assume "you" would be a reference to DXV, and he would be allowed to come to the game and play a Halfpenny during his buy phases.
"You" is the player whose turn it currently is. Duchess also says "you" for the effect that it has while in the supply, when nobody owns it.
-
Who is "you?" It's in the trash pile. No one owns it. I would assume "you" would be a reference to DXV, and he would be allowed to come to the game and play a Halfpenny during his buy phases.
"You" is the player whose turn it currently is.
Well, specifically, the player whose buy phase it currently is.
Duchess also says "you" for the effect that it has while in the supply, when nobody owns it.
...And it refers to the player who's gaining a Duchy, of course.
-
yeah i was being silly
-
Maze
$3 Action
+1 Action
Name 3 cards (your choices may be the same). Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. If the 3 cards you named match the 3 revealed, put them into your hand. If not, discard them.
-
Maze
$3 Action
+1 Action
Name 3 cards (your choices may be the same). Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. If the 3 cards you named match the 3 revealed, put them into your hand. If not, discard them.
Do you need to get all 3 right to get them? Or do you get any that are correct?
-
The submission deadline has passed. Given the number of submissions (40) I will be judging and commenting on each card but only the 10 best cards by my ratings will make it to the FAMILY ROUND.
In the FAMILY ROUND the contest will proceed as advertised with each family member judging 1-10 for Originality, 1-10 Playtested-ness and 1-10 for their opinion of the card, with originality worth 50% of the cards rating and Playtested-ness and Personal Opinion worth %25 each.
Some of the final submissions did not qualify. Here's each one and why:
Posh Village
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
--
When you discard this from play, you may put it on top of your deck if you bought a Treasure this turn.
Too similar to walled village
Mob, $2, Action
+1 Card
+$1
If you have Mob in play, this does not take an action to play.
Mechanically plays the same as Cultist just with +1 Card and +$1 instead of +2 Cards
Sacrifice, $3, Action
Trash a card from your hand. If it is an…
Action card, +3 Cards
Treasure card, +2 Actions
Victory card, +$3
Too similar to Transmute
Grand Design, $3, Action
+$1
You may discard any number of differently named Victory cards.
+2 Cards per card discarded.
Mechanically too similar to crossroads. It seems like a caveat in the crossroads mechanic.
I will be spending today dwindling down the submissions. Would you all like me to post the final 10 as soon as I have determined them or would it be better to announce everything at once?
-
I will be spending today dwindling down the submissions. Would you all like me to post the final 10 as soon as I have determined them or would it be better to announce everything at once?
+1 to announce as soon as you have new information. If you even have feedback and don't mind spending time writing it down, it makes it much nicer. I would understand if you don't want to take the trouble, though.
-
Thoughts on some cards, as listed in the OP.
9. Name: Diviner
Type: Action
Text: Trash a card from your hand. +1 VP if it is a Curse.
---------------------------------
At the end of the game, if your deck contains at least as many Diviners as Victory cards, treat the trash pile as though it were a part of your deck.
Cost: $0P
This is kind of odd. Potion cards should be strong enough that it's worth picking up a Potion to get it even if it's the only card that costs Potion. Also, they should be valuable to get in multiples. Transmute is the only official card where these statements don't hold. Diviner is slow terminal trashing. If it's the only trasher around you might go for it anyway... but Transmute is almost always better. The end of game thing is where Diviner is really unique, but it is also quite odd. It doesn't work if you have more Victory cards than Diviners, which will be common. As a weak terminal, you really don't want too many. That means that the special clause almost never comes into effect.
Now, is the clause a punishment or a reward? The trash often contains Estates, so in that way it could be a reward. But the reward is meagre and the opportunity cost is huge -- at most you can have 10 Victory cards in your deck, and for that you'll need all 10 Diviners. No mean feat for a Potion cost card. It may also be a reward in a non-mirror when you go Gardens and an opponent is trashing heavily... but again, that requires you to get a whole bunch of Diviners which are actually kind of dead. If it's a Gardens game, you don't really want to be trashing with Diviners anyway, and all those Coppers in your deck are actually good for you. The case where you might actually want more than one Diviner is when you are swimming in Curses, because trashing a Curse with Diviner is a 2VP swing. That's not bad. But in this case, you probably don't want the trash to be counted as part of your deck.
All in all, very strange. I wonder if I am missing something in what this card is supposed to do.
11. Name: Thieves' Guild
Type: Reaction
Text: .....
---------------------------------
When an opponent would gain a card, you may reveal and trash this card. If you do, you gain that card and your opponent gains this card from the trash instead.
Cost: $4
This is incredibly political and, I think, it breaks the game in multiple ways. First, the threat of this card just really changes the game dynamic for the worse, IMO. It just becomes really swingy. Suddenly it's not about how strong my deck is, but about how often I can have TG in my hand when an opponent gains a Province. The fact that TG is gained by the victim gives him a chance to retaliate, but that's all up to luck. In a game like this, I think the winning strategy may often be to get as many TG as possible and don't bother ever buying big VP cards, only trying to steal them from others. If you don't buy your own Provinces, you don't risk them getting stolen.
A bigger issue -- it is ambiguous what happens if multiple players reveal a TG. Dominion is not just a 2 player game! So say Albert gains a Province and both Billy and Carol reveal TG. Who gets the Province now? There are ways to answer this, but they are unintuitive and probably not satisfactory, e.g. resolve in turn order starting from the player whose turn it is. So Billy steals from Albert, and Carol is out of luck. Or is she?
Another big issue -- the reaction itself causes players to gain cards -- most importantly, the one who used the reaction gains the stolen card. But before that happens, he would gain the stolen card, which means that ANOTHER player could reveal a TG to steal the stolen Province. So what that means is that you want to be the last one to reveal TG from your hand. Now whenever any player would gain something, he has to wait around and see if anyone is going to reveal a TG. The player who has a TG nervously waits, hoping someone else reveals TG first. What kind of time limit do we put on this?! And when a player gives in and reveals TG, the waiting game starts again to see if someone else reveals another TG to steal it. Even the original victim could steal it back, but he might be waiting to see if another player tries to swoop in first. The whole game thus slows down to a crawl.
30. Name: Artist
Type: Action
Text: Look at the top 4 cards of your deck. Reveal and discard up to 3 of them. Put the rest back in any order. If you revealed an:
Action card, +1 Card.
Treasure card, +1 Action.
Victory card, +$1.
Cost: $2
I suppose the bonuses are only given once each, e.g. if you reveal four Victory cards, you still only get +$1. The best this can ever be is a Peddler, and it is often worse... except you also get a bunch of filtering and cycling. I think you often draw the best card of 4, which should actually be quite powerful. But if the best card is an action, you would need to have played a village unless you also reveal a Treasure.
Changing the bonuses around would change the card quite a bit as well. I wonder if there are more interesting configurations. As it is, you can always draw an action if you reveal it, but you need to reveal Treasure to get +1 action to play it. That is the main interaction. It is more interesting than putting +1 Card on Treasure, which would always allow you to draw a Treasure that is, of course, playable. An interesting change might be to have Action cards give +$1 and Victory cards +1 card. With this change, you can only draw a revealed Action card if you also reveal a Victory card, and then you also need to reveal a Treasure in order to get the +1 action. But maybe this is too big a nerf. Who knows!
Overall, I like the concept a lot, assuming that the bonuses do not stack.
Other notes:
#14 Poisoned Chalice appears to have been copied incorrect. It says +2 on it, but it doesn't specify what.
#26 Titan looks like it should be Victory-Action type, or else it could never be played.
#21 and #40 Arboretum appear to be duplicates.
-
26. Name: Titan
Type: Victory
Text: +2 cards Reveal your hand. If you revealed a...
... Copper, each other player gains a Curse and a Copper, putting them into their hand.
... Curse, each other player discards down to 3 cards in hand.
Cost: $6
This should be an action type, not a victory type.
27. Name: Molecule Splitter
Type: Action
Text: Trash a card from your hand costing at least $4.
If you do, gain a Positive Ion and a Negative Ion.
Cost: $5
+++++++++
Positive Ion $0*
Reveal your hand. Discard all Positive Ions from your hand.
+2 cards
+1 action
This is not in the Supply
Action
Negative Ion $0*
Reveal your hand. Discard all Negative Ions from you hand.
+1 card
+1 action
+1 buy
+$1
This is not in the supply
Action
Molecule Splittler should say this: Trash a card from your hand costing at least $5. Gain a Positive Ion and a Negative Ion from the Ion pile.
-
Oh, I guess Titan doesn't have any VP on it at all.
Edit: More on Diviner... maybe you can get into a weird kind of Golden-ish Deck where you trash away all your Victory cards, including the good ones, with the intent that they'll be counted as yours in the end anyway? But even doing that, Diviner itself is so slow (first to get, then to trash) that I don't think it would be able to compete with other strategies. Maybe with Chapel on the board, going for Gold Gold Silver Diviner Province, if the board is lacking anything else.
-
Oh, I guess Titan doesn't have any VP on it at all.
Edit: More on Diviner... maybe you can get into a weird kind of Golden-ish Deck where you trash away all your Victory cards, including the good ones, with the intent that they'll be counted as yours in the end anyway? But even doing that, Diviner itself is so slow (first to get, then to trash) that I don't think it would be able to compete with other strategies. Maybe with Chapel on the board, going for Gold Gold Silver Diviner Province, if the board is lacking anything else.
It would be slow and the other players can probably just jump in to count the trash for themselves too. The Bishop Golden Deck is usually slow even against not extrmely great BM enablers, and this would probably be slower because of the Potion and the lack of +$1 while trashing.
-
Also, they should be valuable to get in multiples. Transmute is the only official card where these statements don't hold.
Can't say I agree, Golem doesn't synergize with itself, and if anything multiple copies increase the fizzle chance, or at least require you to dilute your action quality to avoid the fizzle chance. Do you get multiple golems anyway? Of course you do, you already have the potion.
The same is true of University on some boards.
As it is, you can always draw an action if you reveal it, but you need to reveal Treasure to get +1 action to play it. That is the main interaction.
This is a false statement. If you reveal exactly one action, you can either order it so that it is on top, or discard it to draw a card, but you cannot choose both. I don't know to what extent this drove the rest of your analysis offkilter.
The configuration I chose is ordered by "I don't want to discard this=I get a big bonus though", and that's why I think it's the best configuration.
[/quote]
-
It would be slow and the other players can probably just jump in to count the trash for themselves too.
If you have two Provinces already, it could be a bit difficult to rapidly jump in and gain 2 diviners before the game ended. I would expect you are better off just beating it outright for being too slow.
-
Also, they should be valuable to get in multiples. Transmute is the only official card where these statements don't hold.
Can't say I agree, Golem doesn't synergize with itself, and if anything multiple copies increase the fizzle chance, or at least require you to dilute your action quality to avoid the fizzle chance. Do you get multiple golems anyway? Of course you do, you already have the potion.
The same is true of University on some boards.
As it is, you can always draw an action if you reveal it, but you need to reveal Treasure to get +1 action to play it. That is the main interaction.
This is a false statement. If you reveal exactly one action, you can either order it so that it is on top, or discard it to draw a card, but you cannot choose both. I don't know to what extent this drove the rest of your analysis offkilter.
The configuration I chose is ordered by "I don't want to discard this=I get a big bonus though", and that's why I think it's the best configuration.
On Potion cards -- I did not say anything about self-synergy. I said that they should be valuable in multiples. Barring very exceptional cases, you're not going to buy a Potion with the goal of getting just one copy of something. That's why Transmute is so often ignored. This is not something I am just making up. It is how Alchemy was designed. From the Secret Histories:
He figured, he was shuffling everything together, and some games he would just turn over one card with Potion in the cost. Do you buy Potion just to get that one card? He thought not.
So I always knew this was an issue. The cards had to be worth buying multiple copies of. They had to be compelling. With just one out, you had to still consider buying Potion to get it. So that's why the set has so many +1 action cards, and then a victory card and a treasure; it's all stuff you want as much of as you can get.
With Golem, yes you usually do want more than one, and it's not just because you already have a Potion. It's hard to be specific because strategy with Golem depends so much on the other cards in the kingdom. Keep in mind that Golems aren't even necessarily terminal if you can see your deck with non-terminal actions.
On Artist -- I just read it again. I thought that it was "reveal 4 cards and discard up to 3", and then you get bonuses based on all 4 cards revealed. Now I am more confused about how it works. Do you get a bonus for each card then, so you could (for example) discard 3 Coppers for +$3? If so, I think the wording should be:
"For each card discarded, if it is an..."
The current wording makes it sound like the bonuses don't stack.
But if the bonuses stack, I think it is way too powerful for $2. Playing a Artist-BM would make this pretty close to a terminal Gold for $2, with some filtering on top of that.
If they don't stack, it's not that much different from what I thought it was. I still like it.
-
Just finished making my remarks about each card. I'm going to give the board the rest of the night to contemplate whether I should put the rating up right away and it'll give me a chance to sleep on the remarks and read them again before I post them for you all to read. By default I'll be posting the remarks tomorrow.
I also edited the "winning" section of the original contest guidelines, so check them out.
-
Also, they should be valuable to get in multiples. Transmute is the only official card where these statements don't hold.
Can't say I agree, Golem doesn't synergize with itself, and if anything multiple copies increase the fizzle chance, or at least require you to dilute your action quality to avoid the fizzle chance. Do you get multiple golems anyway? Of course you do, you already have the potion.
The same is true of University on some boards.
As it is, you can always draw an action if you reveal it, but you need to reveal Treasure to get +1 action to play it. That is the main interaction.
This is a false statement. If you reveal exactly one action, you can either order it so that it is on top, or discard it to draw a card, but you cannot choose both. I don't know to what extent this drove the rest of your analysis offkilter.
The configuration I chose is ordered by "I don't want to discard this=I get a big bonus though", and that's why I think it's the best configuration.
On Potion cards -- I did not say anything about self-synergy. I said that they should be valuable in multiples. Barring very exceptional cases, you're not going to buy a Potion with the goal of getting just one copy of something. That's why Transmute is so often ignored. This is not something I am just making up. It is how Alchemy was designed. From the Secret Histories:
He figured, he was shuffling everything together, and some games he would just turn over one card with Potion in the cost. Do you buy Potion just to get that one card? He thought not.
So I always knew this was an issue. The cards had to be worth buying multiple copies of. They had to be compelling. With just one out, you had to still consider buying Potion to get it. So that's why the set has so many +1 action cards, and then a victory card and a treasure; it's all stuff you want as much of as you can get.
With Golem, yes you usually do want more than one, and it's not just because you already have a Potion. It's hard to be specific because strategy with Golem depends so much on the other cards in the kingdom. Keep in mind that Golems aren't even necessarily terminal if you can see your deck with non-terminal actions.
On Artist -- I just read it again. I thought that it was "reveal 4 cards and discard up to 3", and then you get bonuses based on all 4 cards revealed. Now I am more confused about how it works. Do you get a bonus for each card then, so you could (for example) discard 3 Coppers for +$3? If so, I think the wording should be:
"For each card discarded, if it is an..."
The current wording makes it sound like the bonuses don't stack.
But if the bonuses stack, I think it is way too powerful for $2. Playing a Artist-BM would make this pretty close to a terminal Gold for $2, with some filtering on top of that.
If they don't stack, it's not that much different from what I thought it was. I still like it.
They don't stack. You reveal and discard up to 3 cards, then you go through and do each of the three bonuses. You might discard only a Great Hall. "Is it true that I discarded an Action? It is, I draw a card. Is it true I discarded a treasure? No, it isn't. Is it true that I discarded a Victory card? Yes, it is, I get a coin".
-
I find it funny that you like the card, because it was actually a perennial failure in the Mini set design contest. I submitted it three times, and it always finished in last place. Perhaps it was always misread, in spite of the way I tinkered with the wording.
-
Just finished making my remarks about each card. I'm going to give the board the rest of the night to contemplate whether I should put the rating up right away and it'll give me a chance to sleep on the remarks and read them again before I post them for you all to read. By default I'll be posting the remarks tomorrow.
I also edited the "winning" section of the original contest guidelines, so check them out.
I'm pretty unsure whether you should post the remarks, really. Like if I found out one of my least favorite submissions made it to testing and my favorite one didn't I'd be pretty bummed.
-
I find it funny that you like the card, because it was actually a perennial failure in the Mini set design contest. I submitted it three times, and it always finished in last place. Perhaps it was always misread, in spite of the way I tinkered with the wording.
When did you submit it? I don't remember seeing it before. I didn't really pay attention to the first few contests (Peddler variant, which this kind of fits, Curser, which this doesn't, and I don't remember what else).
I still like it, but I think I like it better the way I misread it. :P
-
Also, they should be valuable to get in multiples. Transmute is the only official card where these statements don't hold.
Can't say I agree, Golem doesn't synergize with itself, and if anything multiple copies increase the fizzle chance, or at least require you to dilute your action quality to avoid the fizzle chance. Do you get multiple golems anyway? Of course you do, you already have the potion.
The same is true of University on some boards.
I'm confused... How do multiple golems increase the fizzle change? What do you mean by fizzle chance? The only thing I can think if that I would consider to be a golem fizzling is if you play it and don't find 2 actions in your entire deck. This might be true if you have a good engine that can draw itself every turn, but in that case extra golems don't hurt at all anyway. You usually want lots of golems because you want to make sure you can play 1 or 2 every turn.
-
Somehow my card got put up on the list twice, not sure how.
-
Also, they should be valuable to get in multiples. Transmute is the only official card where these statements don't hold.
Can't say I agree, Golem doesn't synergize with itself, and if anything multiple copies increase the fizzle chance, or at least require you to dilute your action quality to avoid the fizzle chance. Do you get multiple golems anyway? Of course you do, you already have the potion.
The same is true of University on some boards.
I'm confused... How do multiple golems increase the fizzle change? What do you mean by fizzle chance? The only thing I can think if that I would consider to be a golem fizzling is if you play it and don't find 2 actions in your entire deck. This might be true if you have a good engine that can draw itself every turn, but in that case extra golems don't hurt at all anyway. You usually want lots of golems because you want to make sure you can play 1 or 2 every turn.
The extra golems don't hurt, the same way spending 6$ on a Pearl Diver won't hurt your deck. There is some opportunity cost there.
-
Just like there is opportunity cost in getting more than one Wharf? Comparing Golem with Pearl Diver makes no sense.
-
Just like there is opportunity cost in getting more than one Wharf? Comparing Golem with Pearl Diver makes no sense.
Well, it is definitely possible to overbuy Golems, at an opportunity cost—once more than a third of the Action cards in your deck are Golems, you start thinking about whether you should have invested your money differently.
-
Just like there is opportunity cost in getting more than one Wharf? Comparing Golem with Pearl Diver makes no sense.
If you are drawing your whole deck with Wharf, and you could buy a Silver, yeah, there's an opportunity cost.
-
Just like there is opportunity cost in getting more than one Wharf? Comparing Golem with Pearl Diver makes no sense.
If you are drawing your whole deck with Wharf, and you could buy a Silver, yeah, there's an opportunity cost.
Sure. But the second Wharf was probably worth it. I just don't understand the Pearl Diver comparison. If you want a Golem, you're probably going to want more than one.
-
Just updated with the 1st round's results.
In the next few minutes I'll be editing in my remarks.
-
3. Name: Band of Outcasts
Type: Action
Text: +$3 Buy an action card costing at least 2$ immediately, putting it into your hand. Play it, then return it to the supply.
Cost: $4
Originality: 5/10 It feels like Black market with a purchase in the middle of your turn the primary difference is playing the purchased card.
Playtestedness: 3/10 This needs a Buy. Without it the opportunity cost, at the end of the game, is too great unless all the $3 or less supply piles are empty. What happens when you can’t afford an Action, you keep the $3? In a game without a $2 or $3 +$3 is a bit strong for $4. In a normal game you still end up getting a $3 value out of the card for the price of $4
Opinion: 5/10 I see the potential in this concept but you have to tinker with it a lot more.
Total 5.5/10
Don't take this the wrong way, but:
- purchases made in the action phase don't count as your buy. (to quote Black Market "A card bought during the Action phase does not count as a card bought in your Buy phase")
- It's main difference is that you use the action card only once, making it nothing like Black Market (although you could easily argue that it's too much like Band of Misfits - which eHalcyon (?) does much more convincingly)
It's hard to point this out without sounding grumpy :P - just perhaps be sure of what you're saying ;)
Have fun with the rest of the competition :)
-
@Dominion_contest: Small question: I assume you are giving one of the scores for the final round also. Are the scores given here going to stick or are you going to rethink them based on the playtesting? I would argue strongly in favor of the latter.
-
The reason I swapped away from "When you play this, if you played this from your hand, trash it." for Halfpenny is that you can actually immediately play it from the trash pile after the trigger, making it a cheap Silver. The cleanup delay is necessary to prevent reuse, not too unlike the cleanup delay on scheme is necessary to prevent action reuse.
-
@Dominion_contest: Small question: I assume you are giving one of the scores for the final round also. Are the scores given here going to stick or are you going to rethink them based on the playtesting? I would argue strongly in favor of the latter.
The 10 best scoring cards will be judged by the other 3 Dominion players and my re-rating will only be used as a tie breaker.
-
Hopefully you transcribe some of your family members' comments. Forums have a natural dearth of input from the sort of people that don't visit forums. If it isn't too great a burden.
Most interesting interaction I see for trying a pair side by side is Titan and Relay Rider. Kind of like a Mountebank/Counting House thing going on there. On the whole, though, none of the top ten look like they are dying to hang out with eachother and should mostly get tested with official cards, as planned.
-
The reason I swapped away from "When you play this, if you played this from your hand, trash it." for Halfpenny is that you can actually immediately play it from the trash pile after the trigger, making it a cheap Silver. The cleanup delay is necessary to prevent reuse, not too unlike the cleanup delay on scheme is necessary to prevent action reuse.
Well, in Halfpenny/Masterpiece games, you could shorten it quite a bit. "Setup: Choose a player to go first. That player wins the game." Is there really not meant to be any limit on the number you can take per turn?
-
The reason I swapped away from "When you play this, if you played this from your hand, trash it." for Halfpenny is that you can actually immediately play it from the trash pile after the trigger, making it a cheap Silver. The cleanup delay is necessary to prevent reuse, not too unlike the cleanup delay on scheme is necessary to prevent action reuse.
Well, in Halfpenny/Masterpiece games, you could shorten it quite a bit. "Setup: Choose a player to go first. That player wins the game."
This rubbed me the wrong way, and yet I could not think of a pithy argument that would demonstrate why you were wrong.
So I spent the last two hours on the floor of my room playing a Solitaire game against myself. I forced Halfpenny, Masterpiece, and Highway to be available, and allowed the other seven to be randomly selected from Base, Dark Ages, Hinterlands, and Seaside. The shelter roll came up Estates, Al opened 4/3, and Bo opened 5/2, which I'm not entirely sure was the best outcome for Bo.
The board was Highway, Festival, Pillage, Margrave, Mystic, Wandering Minstrel, Marauder, Gardens, Masterpiece, Halfpenny. Al spent all the Halfpennies he could on Masterpiece turn 1, as you suggested, but could not piledrive the Provinces in a sufficiently timely manner with Margrave Big Money. Bo persevered in spite of rough luck, his 5/2 Margrave missed the reshuffle, among other things, although Bo and Al started getting similar luck after the early phase.
The reason it took 2 hours is because I logged all the moves by hand. I can transcribe them later if you want to see, although I am too tired to do so now.
I feel with a minimal amount of restriction on the kingdom I was able to find a board that had a healthy Masterpiece-Halfpenny interaction, so even if lots of them don't work out that well, it's at least not a no-brainer all the time for player one, and I don't think it is more of a detractor 5/2 Witch, which doesn't even require a card combo.
-
Although I didn't test it, I don't think Al would have been better off using the Masterpiece Silvers to transition to a Highway mirror either, in that hipster JoaT kind of style. The early silvers slowed down his cycling but caused him to hit 6, 7, or 8$ frequently, but he couldn't rapidly incorporate +buy into the mix, so his bulk didn't really give him any more power to pick up engine parts than Bo had. Bo only needed to draw 4$ in any particular hand to do roughly as good a job collecting engine parts as Al's turn 3 8$ hand did.
-
Hopefully you transcribe some of your family members' comments. Forums have a natural dearth of input from the sort of people that don't visit forums. If it isn't too great a burden.
That's the plan. No guarantees on how detailed it will be though.
-
Hmm, I just realized that Halfpenny actually introduces a lot of first player advantage. Even in a 2p game, p1 gets first crack at +$4 on their turn. But those cards are self-trashing so it's not a huge hit. Opening 5/2 means you could open with a Platinum. First player could also open Goons (potentially taking more Halfpennies than necessary, in order to prevent p2 from using them). Yes it comes with a cost of 4 junky cards, but those cards are self-trashing. A fix might be to limit how many Halfpennies you can use from the trash per turn.
-
I still really like the card (despite my prejudice against global rule changes), and I do appreciate you playtesting this. Just bear in mind that every extra player at the table would put two more Silvers into the first player's deck. Even without Masterpiece, a particularly vindictive player1 could grab the entire pile and buy a gold, just to prevent all the other players from having as good of an opening split as he did. If Vault or Secret Chamber is on the board, he never even has to give them up, and the game is unchanged for the other 1/2/3 players. Even if player1's statistical advantage is no more than '5/2 split on Mountebank/Chapel', that's still bad and it also makes the game less fun for everyone.
Just a thought; if you really don't want to cap the number of Halfpennies per turn you can swipe, why not have them start out in people's decks rather than as a shared resource? All it would take is changing the type to Treasure-Shelter, and then deciding whether they replace Coppers or other Shelters. As the game progresses, it'll converge to "free money smoothing on every turn, 40% of the turns" but now player1 has just as much money in hand as everyone else when the game starts. There's still problems with that; if player1 needs to drop one or two of his Haypennies in order to hit $3, then player2 is swimming in cash. But at least that's exactly the same as any other bad split, just with a higher variance.
-
I still really like the card (despite my prejudice against global rule changes), and I do appreciate you playtesting this. Just bear in mind that every extra player at the table would put two more Silvers into the first player's deck.
It also puts two more Halfpennies into the first players deck, and provides two more players that can punish the slow cycling with attack cards.
Even without Masterpiece, a particularly vindictive player1 could grab the entire pile and buy a gold, just to prevent all the other players from having as good of an opening split as he did.
Uh.. if I draw 5/2 and open Rabble-Halfpenny, I am not even going to the slightest bit jealous of your "Cache"-Oracle opening.
Gaining a gold and six self trashing coppers your first turn is not that great. Cache is not 5$ quality on most boards, and on the boards where it is, you wouldn't even want the coppers to be self-trashing.
If Vault or Secret Chamber is on the board, he never even has to give them up, and the game is unchanged for the other 1/2/3 players. Even if player1's statistical advantage is no more than '5/2 split on Mountebank/Chapel', that's still bad and it also makes the game less fun for everyone.
So every turn you don't have Vault in hand, you're going to treat the Halfpennies as curses?
And you're going to buy Secret Chamber?
And lastly, you're not entirely correct, because you can still purchase Halfpennies. Terminal+Halfpenny is a good 5/2 opening, and has the result of adding another Halfpenny to the "ecosystem".
Even if player1's statistical advantage is no more than '5/2 split on Mountebank/Chapel', that's still bad and it also makes the game less fun for everyone.
Well, KC-Goons-Masquerade makes the game less fun for everyone, but Donald has said he wouldn't add a safety sentence to Masquerade even if given the chance, iirc. It's kind of the same attitude I have here. It's a weakness but it's not something I feel comes up often enough and generates enough advantage/unfunness that it merits reformatting the card.
-
Hmm, I just realized that Halfpenny actually introduces a lot of first player advantage. Even in a 2p game, p1 gets first crack at +$4 on their turn. But those cards are self-trashing so it's not a huge hit. Opening 5/2 means you could open with a Platinum.
If it's a colony game, if player 1 draws 5/2 and not 2/5, 3/4, or 4/3, yes, he can do that.
There's even more conditionalism here though, player 1 needs to draw the platinum in a 9$ hand to sustain his advantage. If he's successful in that, then I agree, he is probably going to crush hardcore. If he doesn't though, I think he has a considerable chance of losing anyway. No one will be impressed by an early Province, you're probably buying a 5$ action of the same cost that the players with silvers are buying. But the other players get to see their actions sooner, so I think it's winnable in the engine fest that is a colony game.
First player could also open Goons (potentially taking more Halfpennies than necessary, in order to prevent p2 from using them). Yes it comes with a cost of 4 junky cards, but those cards are self-trashing. A fix might be to limit how many Halfpennies you can use from the trash per turn.
Militia is a 4$ card. An early Goons doesn't stack, so the VP aspect is negligible. Yes, sometimes Goons is the only attack on the board, and it's really good to get it early, and-there's-no-trashing-and-I'mma-embargo-goons but you're making lots of implicit assumptions about the board when you say that gaining a Goons and 4 temp coppers is gg. There's some other necessary elements
-
Hmm, I just realized that Halfpenny actually introduces a lot of first player advantage. Even in a 2p game, p1 gets first crack at +$4 on their turn. But those cards are self-trashing so it's not a huge hit. Opening 5/2 means you could open with a Platinum.
If it's a colony game, if player 1 draws 5/2 and not 2/5, 3/4, or 4/3, yes, he can do that.
There's even more conditionalism here though, player 1 needs to draw the platinum in a 9$ hand to sustain his advantage. If he's successful in that, then I agree, he is probably going to crush hardcore. If he doesn't though, I think he has a considerable chance of losing anyway. No one will be impressed by an early Province, you're probably buying a 5$ action of the same cost that the players with silvers are buying. But the other players get to see their actions sooner, so I think it's winnable in the engine fest that is a colony game.
First player could also open Goons (potentially taking more Halfpennies than necessary, in order to prevent p2 from using them). Yes it comes with a cost of 4 junky cards, but those cards are self-trashing. A fix might be to limit how many Halfpennies you can use from the trash per turn.
Militia is a 4$ card. An early Goons doesn't stack, so the VP aspect is negligible. Yes, sometimes Goons is the only attack on the board, and it's really good to get it early, and-there's-no-trashing-and-I'mma-embargo-goons but you're making lots of implicit assumptions about the board when you say that gaining a Goons and 4 temp coppers is gg. There's some other necessary elements
For the Platinum thing, yeah there are conditions, but that just makes it swingy. As for your further conditions -- drawing another $9 hand is actually not that crazy, considering you also added 4 Halfpennies to your deck. So yeah, p1 could very well buy a second Platinum very quickly. But even if he doesn't, I think he is still ahead of the game. He doesn't need to grab an early Province -- he can take Gold or various $5+ cards. The players with Silver instead have a greater chance of missing out on $5s, let alone bigger cards. I think you are undervaluing Platinum, or overestimating the damage caused by self-trashing Coppers.
The point on Goons vs. Militia is fair, but with Goons you are still getting +1 or +2VP when you play it, and that can matter. Militia is a $4 card, but it hurts less BECAUSE of that price -- it's accessible to everyone at the start. If I get a Militia and you aren't allowed to get one, there are plenty of boards where that can hurt a lot.
-
I'm saying that Player 1 has to get a second platinum between the first and second reshuffle for the game to be unwinnable for his opponents. If he doesn't get it that soon but still gets it early, he still has an edge, dominance, even, but the game isn't mathematically unwinnable like Mint/FG with no villages/+buy or something.
You do realize you are complaining about something that happens in 1.04% of 3-4 player games right? For a glitch that happens in 1% of your games to warrant scrapping a card, a strong edge for player 1 isn't enough for me to be upset. The glitch needs to summon the tentacled demon god of Fluxx itself from the floor, eliciting the screams of horrified children as it devours all the cards and pelts fleeing players in the back with miniature hotels and houses and cars full of pink and blue peg people.
Then, I might be upset, maybe, but if we just played 99 jolly games with Halfpenny I might feel like it was worth it.
-
I'm saying that Player 1 has to get a second platinum between the first and second reshuffle for the game to be unwinnable for his opponents. If he doesn't get it that soon but still gets it early, he still has an edge, dominance, even, but the game isn't mathematically unwinnable like Mint/FG with no villages/+buy or something.
You do realize you are complaining about something that happens in 1.04% of 3-4 player games right? For a glitch that happens in 1% of your games to warrant scrapping a card, a strong edge for player 1 isn't enough for me to be upset. The glitch needs to summon the tentacled demon god of Fluxx itself from the floor, eliciting the screams of horrified children as it devours all the cards and pelts fleeing players in the back with miniature hotels and houses and cars full of pink and blue peg people.
Then, I might be upset, maybe, but if we just played 99 jolly games with Halfpenny I might feel like it was worth it.
Eh? The chance of opening 5/2 as p1 isn't that small, is it? And unless you've changed the card, it happens in 2p games as well. The setup rule I read said 2 per player. With that setup rule and 3 players, 5/2 opening isn't even necessary.
-
I'm saying that Player 1 has to get a second platinum between the first and second reshuffle for the game to be unwinnable for his opponents. If he doesn't get it that soon but still gets it early, he still has an edge, dominance, even, but the game isn't mathematically unwinnable like Mint/FG with no villages/+buy or something.
You do realize you are complaining about something that happens in 1.04% of 3-4 player games right? For a glitch that happens in 1% of your games to warrant scrapping a card, a strong edge for player 1 isn't enough for me to be upset. The glitch needs to summon the tentacled demon god of Fluxx itself from the floor, eliciting the screams of horrified children as it devours all the cards and pelts fleeing players in the back with miniature hotels and houses and cars full of pink and blue peg people.
Then, I might be upset, maybe, but if we just played 99 jolly games with Halfpenny I might feel like it was worth it.
Let's say it's a three-player game, so there are six halfpennies in the trash. The only way I can not open platinum as first player is if I draw $2 in my first hand, so there's an 11/12 chance I hit $9 T1, denying the other players six halfpennies. T2 I probably get a Silver but let's just say I get nothing T2. We're talking about getting a second Platinum before the second shuffle, so that gives us T3-T5 to deal with. As long as Platinum doesn't collide with Estate, we hit $9. There's a 2/17 chance you don't draw your Platinum at all during T3-T5 (if it's at the bottom and misses the re-shuffle). Otherwise, on the hand during T3-T5 in which you have a Platinum, there should be a 13C4/16C4 chance that you draw 4 coppers with it. This gives us:
(11/12)*(15/17)*(13C4/16C4)=31.77% of Colony games where this happens.
I don't know where you got 1.04%. I wouldn't be surprised if I did that wrong, but I would be surprised if it's not in the 10%-50% range. (I'm not sure about multiplying 15/17 by 13C4/16C4, but at least it should give a rough estimate right?) It's probably better if you buy Silver T2 (which you can most of the time), and/or there are more than 3 players.
-
I'm saying that Player 1 has to get a second platinum between the first and second reshuffle for the game to be unwinnable for his opponents. If he doesn't get it that soon but still gets it early, he still has an edge, dominance, even, but the game isn't mathematically unwinnable like Mint/FG with no villages/+buy or something.
You do realize you are complaining about something that happens in 1.04% of 3-4 player games right? For a glitch that happens in 1% of your games to warrant scrapping a card, a strong edge for player 1 isn't enough for me to be upset. The glitch needs to summon the tentacled demon god of Fluxx itself from the floor, eliciting the screams of horrified children as it devours all the cards and pelts fleeing players in the back with miniature hotels and houses and cars full of pink and blue peg people.
Then, I might be upset, maybe, but if we just played 99 jolly games with Halfpenny I might feel like it was worth it.
Eh? The chance of opening 5/2 as p1 isn't that small, is it? And unless you've changed the card, it happens in 2p games as well. The setup rule I read said 2 per player. With that setup rule and 3 players, 5/2 opening isn't even necessary.
Er, right, 1.04% chance of happening in a game with 2 players.
8.3% chance of 5/2, 12% chance of platina.
I'm skeptical about 6 Halfpennies and a platinum destroying dominion as we know it. My goodness, this is the same forum where I can't convince anyone that maybe Copper/Ghost ship is an ok opening sometimes. I lose from both sides on copper.
-
Woah, I'm in 3rd place? That rocks! :D
I do like Halfpenny though.
-
I'm saying that Player 1 has to get a second platinum between the first and second reshuffle for the game to be unwinnable for his opponents. If he doesn't get it that soon but still gets it early, he still has an edge, dominance, even, but the game isn't mathematically unwinnable like Mint/FG with no villages/+buy or something.
You do realize you are complaining about something that happens in 1.04% of 3-4 player games right? For a glitch that happens in 1% of your games to warrant scrapping a card, a strong edge for player 1 isn't enough for me to be upset. The glitch needs to summon the tentacled demon god of Fluxx itself from the floor, eliciting the screams of horrified children as it devours all the cards and pelts fleeing players in the back with miniature hotels and houses and cars full of pink and blue peg people.
Then, I might be upset, maybe, but if we just played 99 jolly games with Halfpenny I might feel like it was worth it.
Eh? The chance of opening 5/2 as p1 isn't that small, is it? And unless you've changed the card, it happens in 2p games as well. The setup rule I read said 2 per player. With that setup rule and 3 players, 5/2 opening isn't even necessary.
Er, right, 1.04% chance of happening in a game with 2 players.
8.3% chance of 5/2, 12% chance of platina.
I'm skeptical about 6 Halfpennies and a platinum destroying dominion as we know it. My goodness, this is the same forum where I can't convince anyone that maybe Copper/Ghost ship is an ok opening sometimes. I lose from both sides on copper.
If they were actually Coppers it would be different. Self-trashing really softens the blow though. And opening Platinum is pretty powerful man, especially if only one player can do it.
-
vv
I'm saying that Player 1 has to get a second platinum between the first and second reshuffle for the game to be unwinnable for his opponents. If he doesn't get it that soon but still gets it early, he still has an edge, dominance, even, but the game isn't mathematically unwinnable like Mint/FG with no villages/+buy or something.
You do realize you are complaining about something that happens in 1.04% of 3-4 player games right?
Eh? The chance of opening 5/2 as p1 isn't that small, is it? And unless you've changed the card, it happens in 2p games as well. The setup rule I read said 2 per player. With that setup rule and 3 players, 5/2 opening isn't even necessary.
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the probability of getting two Platinums before the other players can catch up, not the probability of getting the first one.
You do realize you are complaining about something that happens in 1.04% of 3-4 player games right? For a glitch that happens in 1% of your games to warrant scrapping a card, a strong edge for player 1 isn't enough for me to be upset. The glitch needs to summon the tentacled demon god of Fluxx itself from the floor, eliciting the screams of horrified children as it devours all the cards and pelts fleeing players in the back with miniature hotels and houses and cars full of pink and blue peg people.
Then, I might be upset, maybe, but if we just played 99 jolly games with Halfpenny I might feel like it was worth it.
Now that I have to think on it, I think I would disagree even without the platinum problem. It's still privileging player 1 and giving him the option to take choices away from other players, at a temporary detriment to himself. DXV had a very similar problem, when the game could end on Duchies as well as Provinces. It didn't benefit a player to piledrive Duchies, because then everyone else would join in and the game would be decided by the luck of your next three/four hands, rather than strategy. He didn't think it would be a problem, because who would make the game less fun for all players if it didn't improve his probability of winning? Turns out that had to be tweaked a bit before publication.
Also, who the hell is proposing to scrap the card? We've all said it was good, and you stand to gain a Governor out of it. All we said was that if it opened with the words "Twice per turn, . . ." there wouldn't be any possibility of breaking the opening turn. If you could just tell us why you don't want a cap rather than being so dramatic when somebody suggests one, then we might understand your position better.
-
vvI'm saying that Player 1 has to get a second platinum between the first and second reshuffle for the game to be unwinnable for his opponents. If he doesn't get it that soon but still gets it early, he still has an edge, dominance, even, but the game isn't mathematically unwinnable like Mint/FG with no villages/+buy or something.
You do realize you are complaining about something that happens in 1.04% of 3-4 player games right?
Eh? The chance of opening 5/2 as p1 isn't that small, is it? And unless you've changed the card, it happens in 2p games as well. The setup rule I read said 2 per player. With that setup rule and 3 players, 5/2 opening isn't even necessary.
I'm pretty sure he's talking about the probability of getting two Platinums before the other players can catch up, not the probability of getting the first one.
Neither, it's the probability of player one drawing 5/2 (not 2/5) compounded with the probability the game includes Prosperity.
You do realize you are complaining about something that happens in 1.04% of 3-4 player games right? For a glitch that happens in 1% of your games to warrant scrapping a card, a strong edge for player 1 isn't enough for me to be upset. The glitch needs to summon the tentacled demon god of Fluxx itself from the floor, eliciting the screams of horrified children as it devours all the cards and pelts fleeing players in the back with miniature hotels and houses and cars full of pink and blue peg people.
Then, I might be upset, maybe, but if we just played 99 jolly games with Halfpenny I might feel like it was worth it.
Now that I have to think on it, I think I would disagree even without the platinum problem. It's still privileging player 1 and giving him the option to take choices away from other players, at a temporary detriment to himself. DXV had a very similar problem, when the game could end on Duchies as well as Provinces. It didn't benefit a player to piledrive Duchies, because then everyone else would join in and the game would be decided by the luck of your next three/four hands, rather than strategy. He didn't think it would be a problem, because who would make the game less fun for all players if it didn't improve his probability of winning? Turns out that had to be tweaked a bit before publication.
I haven't read that secret history, so you will need to explain to me why people rush Duchies and make the game less fun for all players to make your point I think.
Also, who the hell is proposing to scrap the card? We've all said it was good, and you stand to gain a Governor out of it. All we said was that if it opened with the words "Twice per turn, . . ." there wouldn't be any possibility of breaking the opening turn. If you could just tell us why you don't want a cap rather than being so dramatic when somebody suggests one, then we might understand your position better.
I use the term "scrapping" because "Twice per turn" sends things down one level of elegance, and I just really hate that. I love cards like Torturer that naturally keep themselves under control, but never put a limit that seems artificial. We have stuff like Outpost that can't get by without it, but I have a soft spot for that kind of simplicity. The shelter rework maintains much of the elegance, and I prefer it to "twice per turn", although there's all sorts of overhead and whatnot going on with going that route.
I have a lot more respect for a complaint along the lines of, "let's change it so that player one doesn't get tempted to play keepaway in three player when a dead-draw terminal is in play", because that affects a broad number of games, like, at least 3%, probably more like 20, I'm not sure. "Dude, change your card, in 1.04% of 2 player games player 1 can gain a Platinum after taking on just 4 Loans" is a pretty frustrating criticism. This is a game where we tolerate the 40% of the time Familiar ends the game on turn 3 because the other 60% of the time is interesting.
-
I'm saying that Player 1 has to get a second platinum between the first and second reshuffle for the game to be unwinnable for his opponents. If he doesn't get it that soon but still gets it early, he still has an edge, dominance, even, but the game isn't mathematically unwinnable like Mint/FG with no villages/+buy or something.
You do realize you are complaining about something that happens in 1.04% of 3-4 player games right? For a glitch that happens in 1% of your games to warrant scrapping a card, a strong edge for player 1 isn't enough for me to be upset. The glitch needs to summon the tentacled demon god of Fluxx itself from the floor, eliciting the screams of horrified children as it devours all the cards and pelts fleeing players in the back with miniature hotels and houses and cars full of pink and blue peg people.
Then, I might be upset, maybe, but if we just played 99 jolly games with Halfpenny I might feel like it was worth it.
Let's say it's a three-player game, so there are six halfpennies in the trash. The only way I can not open platinum as first player is if I draw $2 in my first hand, so there's an 11/12 chance I hit $9 T1, denying the other players six halfpennies. T2 I probably get a Silver but let's just say I get nothing T2. We're talking about getting a second Platinum before the second shuffle, so that gives us T3-T5 to deal with. As long as Platinum doesn't collide with Estate, we hit $9. There's a 2/17 chance you don't draw your Platinum at all during T3-T5 (if it's at the bottom and misses the re-shuffle). Otherwise, on the hand during T3-T5 in which you have a Platinum, there should be a 13C4/16C4 chance that you draw 4 coppers with it. This gives us:
(11/12)*(15/17)*(13C4/16C4)=31.77% of Colony games where this happens.
I don't know where you got 1.04%. I wouldn't be surprised if I did that wrong, but I would be surprised if it's not in the 10%-50% range. (I'm not sure about multiplying 15/17 by 13C4/16C4, but at least it should give a rough estimate right?) It's probably better if you buy Silver T2 (which you can most of the time), and/or there are more than 3 players.
1% specifically applies to 2 player, and I made a mental mistep when I said it had anything to do with 3 player.
-
I have a lot more respect for a complaint along the lines of, "let's change it so that player one doesn't get tempted to play keepaway in three player when a dead-draw terminal is in play", because that affects a broad number of games, like, at least 3%, probably more like 20, I'm not sure. "Dude, change your card, in 1.04% of 2 player games player 1 can gain a Platinum after taking on just 4 Loans" is a pretty frustrating criticism. This is a game where we tolerate the 40% of the time Familiar ends the game on turn 3 because the other 60% of the time is interesting.
Dude, you are way too sensitive here. "4 Loans" isn't even an accurate comparison, geez. And the percentage argument is pretty weak. So what if the times that it comes up are a little rare? If it's broken, it's broken.
Now if you argue that it isn't broken, that's a different matter. Maybe it isn't. But it seems to me that being the only one able to get a t1 Platinum gives a player an immense advantage, and that's all down to luck. 4 self-trashing Coppers is a small price to pay as it only slows down that player by 1 turn (that's all you need for those 4 Halfpennies to disappear). Even accounting for that, you gain the Platinum extremely early AND you have a decent chance at additional Plats or other good cards. It gets worse with 3p or more because it's even more likely p1 gets the early Plat, and a second one soon after that. 6 self-trashing Coppers again only slows you down by about 1 turn, which is totally worth it for an early Platinum or two.
If you don't think it gives p1 a big advantage, then explain why. Rarity of occurrence isn't a good answer.
But seriously, you seem to be taking things way too personally here. These are criticisms of cards, not you. And it's not even a criticism of the overall concept -- just a specific quirk of the implementation. What's the issue? Maybe it seems like you're getting more criticism than anyone else? Well for one thing, I tend to default to a critical position, sorry. But if you seem to be getting an undue share of criticism, consider that you also posted way more cards here than anyone else. And finally, keep in mind that receiving even negative feedback is a pretty good thing. It means the concept was interesting enough to get a response. You're a cool guy pops, and you have interesting ideas. No need to be so snippy.
-
I haven't read that secret history, so you will need to explain to me why people rush Duchies and make the game less fun for all players to make your point I think.
No problem: I found it in Secret History of the Dominion Cards.
Province: As mentioned in the BGN article, we changed this from 5 VP to 6 VP during development, as part of the fix to the Duchy rush. The Duchy rush was, you buy nothing but Silver and Duchies. At the time the game ended when any Victory pile ran out. If one person went for the Duchy rush you could beat them, but if two people did, you had to join them. My friends found this strategy, but it didn't seem like a problem. It was a boring strategy, so the only reason to play it was if you thought it would win for you. It wouldn't though; it would win for someone at random, since we would all follow suit. You could make the game suck but that's it. So we never did it.
Well would you believe, being able to make the game suck is not so hot. Furthermore, if you're a new player, the Duchy rush may elevate your chance of winning from zero to even. So it was in fact a problem. An anonymous playtester realized this, Valerie and Dale raised the alarm, and in the end, Province changed from 5 VP to 6 VP and the end condition changed from "any empty victory pile" (the end condition we were using at the time, but not the original one, which was "any empty pile") to the one you know. We tried ideas that Valerie or Dale came up with, but in the end happened to go with something that I suggested (which is why I didn't count this when I mentioned Thief as the only card they changed). These two changes were easily the most important changes during development.
Even if you've studied the effects of this card on deck cycling and found that it's an adequate penalty for player1's greed in every non-platinum case, why should you believe that anyone else who plays a Halfpenny game knows this too? I used to buy Scout all the time, just for the filtering. Even if player1 is only hurting himself by playing keep-away, he still has the ability to make the game less fun for everyone.
I have a lot more respect for a complaint along the lines of, "let's change it so that player one doesn't get tempted to play keepaway in three player when a dead-draw terminal is in play", because that affects a broad number of games, like, at least 3%, probably more like 20, I'm not sure. "Dude, change your card, in 1.04% of 2 player games player 1 can gain a Platinum after taking on just 4 Loans" is a pretty frustrating criticism. This is a game where we tolerate the 40% of the time Familiar ends the game on turn 3 because the other 60% of the time is interesting.
Now that I'm looking at that 1.04% figure, it seems cherry-picked. Not only is it a lot higher in 3 or 4-player games, it's a whole lot higher if you're playing with people who don't own every expansion. People who really like Prosperity might even just flip a coin to decide if it's a Colony or Province game. If you choose the lowest possible figure out of all those choices, it isn't going to be representative. I'm guessing the 40% figure is the probability that only one player buys a Familiar on turn 3? I'm pretty skeptical that that player is guaranteed the win, or would even come close to the advantage that turn1 Platinum gives you. Would 'don't have this in the same game as Platinum' be a more elegant clause than what you see on cards like Outpost, Fool's Gold or Crossroads? Probably only 1% of boards would support an infinite Outpost chain, and setting up such a chain wouldn't confer any advantage, since buying victory cards would increase the chance of breaking the chain.
-
I don't feel I have been overly snippy. I said I had more respect for some complaints than others, that's a commentary on the complaints, not the person making them.
Let's say you open Platinum/nothing, you drew 5/2. I would think it's only fair that my hypothetical player 2 gets 5/2 as well. I threw a 10 card kingdom at the wall just now, it gave me Ghost ship as the best 5$ attack. So my guy gets to open Ghost Ship. Which actually puts a fancy spin on the "Witch/copper opening" debate thing since he can buy a Halfpenny. Let's buy him one, it rounds things off a whole lot.
Plat guy has exactly 16$ in his deck now, which will be spread over 3 turns. So he can get, like, 2 Ghost ships and a silver, one of his hands gets hit by the Ghost ship.
Ghost ship guy has 8$ in his deck. Man, that's like half as much money. If ghost ship doesn't miss the reshuffle, he'll take exactly 2 turns for his second run through his deck. He is likely to split that 5/3 or 4/4. If it's 4/4, he probably uses a trashed Halfpenny to shore things up and get Ghostship-power5. But let's go the simpler way and say he gets Ghostship Silver.
So, after four turns of using player two's deck, player two is ready to start a fresh reshuffle, and his deck has 9$ in it, and he has double Ghostship.
Player 1 does not even have a chance to draw a Ghost ship yet on turn 5, his deck is that bloated. Player 1's first chance at seeing a Ghost ship comes on his sixth turn, when 3 of his cards might be Ghost ship. Having an early Platinum only allowed him to catch up on Ghost ships, player 2 got two Ghost ships as well and starts playing a double Ghostship deck a turn and a half faster. Essentially, Player 1 has gotten an early Platinum, but he has reversed the attacking momentum he'd usually get, player 2's attacks are hitting player 1's purchases earlier. If the board is tilted Big Money, Player 1 probably still wins. If this is the kind of game where players are going to aim to play Ghost ship every turn though, Player 2 is positioned to do that much better now, and I'm not even convinced player 1 is winning.
That is kinda garbled, I did my best. Ghost ship is really good yeah, but all boards have a good 5$, it's different every time. Taking on halfpennies means that you have to play dominion for 5 turns without using your Action resource, instead of playing dominion that way for 2 turns. That is huge and I think it is important to appreciate. Al was not only behind on cycling because he bought a bunch of treasure, he was additionally behind because he was not using his Action resource to improve his cycling with Margrave.
-
Now that I'm looking at that 1.04% figure, it seems cherry-picked. ... it's a whole lot higher if you're playing with people who don't own every expansion.
People who really like Prosperity might even just flip a coin to decide if it's a Colony or Province game.
I... I need a break.
-
Player 2 isn't in a worse position because his deck contains less money in total, he's in a worse position because his money density is much lower. Especially in a game with handsize attacks, high money density is a really big deal...
It doesn't even matter whether you think Player 2 still has some chance of coming back against a T1 Platinum... this is a game, games are supposed to be fun, playing against (or even with) such a massive pure-luck advantage isn't fun.
-
since buying victory cards would increase the chance of breaking the chain.
I think the problem is not the infinite chains, but KC-Outpost and even TR-Outpost being too powerful.
For the chain, you have KC-KC-Scheme-Scheme-Outpost, that gives you infinitely many turns, its not that hard to setup (because the KCs and the Scheme "naturally" stay on top once you draw KC-Scheme) and its not hurt by adding green. Even worse, adding green will only make the game longer because its more difficult for the player with infinite turns to deplete the Provinces or Colonies, and three-piling would take a long time. There are other setups with Scavenger that would also work and give you a Province per turn, but those would not be so problematic, since the game would be over soon.
-
there ARE other cards in this contest, right?
:)
-
That is kinda garbled, I did my best. Ghost ship is really good yeah, but all boards have a good 5$, it's different every time. Taking on halfpennies means that you have to play dominion for 5 turns without using your Action resource, instead of playing dominion that way for 2 turns. That is huge and I think it is important to appreciate. Al was not only behind on cycling because he bought a bunch of treasure, he was additionally behind because he was not using his Action resource to improve his cycling with Margrave.
Not every board has a good $5, and most of them don't hold up against Platinum, especially considering the Plat guy can get the $5 cards as well. Yeah it comes a little later, but that's no big deal. Consider, why is it so good to get the power $5s and play them early? To slow your opponent down and to speed yourself up on the way to better cards and eventually VP. That pretty often involves getting Platinum, which is a very difficult card to pick up the first time. The Platinum guy gets to skip all that work and just have a Plat. And having that Plat makes it way easier to get more Plats and other good cards. He might not get to play Ghost Ship as early, but it doesn't matter -- he's already so far ahead that the opponent is only playing catch-up.
Putting a cap on the number of halfpennies you can use from the trash is a very simple clause, and I don't think it takes away that much elegance. You could even put it in the setup rule:
On the first turn of each player, trash two Halfpennies.
A negative of this approach is that it doesn't do all the setup at the very start of the game, but the wording is concise and easy to understand. Interestingly, it reduces first player advantage because subsequent players may be able to use Halfpennies from p1 if p1 leaves them behind.
-
Can we agree to disagree? I'm pretty sure neither of us have opened Platinum before. I still don't understand why I am expected to accept your speculation as better than mine.
-
Can we agree to disagree? I'm pretty sure neither of us have opened Platinum before. I still don't understand why I am expected to accept your speculation as better than mine.
Sure. And man, I don't expect you to just accept the speculation. It's supposed to be a dialogue. I think you are misreading me as hostile when I am just commenting.
-
Why isn't Diviner drawing more criticism for being in the top ten? In hindsight, I think it needs at least +1 coin. That's sort of the minimum standard for crappy trasher with other effect you are maybe interested in.
And the Curse bonus should be 2 or more VP, 1 to counteract the effect of that curse itself getting considered part of your deck, and 1 to counteract the curses your opponent trashes with Chapel or something.
-
I'm noting some similarity between Benefactor and Talisman. Benefactor at 4$ is pretty much just way better, Duchess is better than Copper. Some people would consider Talisman among the official failures though. I'm not sure whether I would. It's a pretty weak card, it's not Scout, but it's tough to make it work.
Benefactor at 5$ makes the 4-5 leap in amount of benefit, but also makes the 4-5 leap in cost of acquisition.
Initially I had some concerns about Benefactor at 5, I think I posted as such. I think Benefactor at 5 passes "the Witch test" with flying colors though. Curses are just inverted Labs, you know, instead of putting a little slip of paper in your deck saying "As you pass this, if you would draw a card, draw 2" you are putting in a little slip of paper saying "as you pass this, if you would draw a card, draw 0". Benefactor trades a more boundless ability to gain Labs for a restriction on your purchase that turn, if it's a Province buying turn it's no dice.
We shall see, though, it's still pretty strong
-
Area 51, that one seemed alright at first glance, but when I look at it again I think it really needs to be 5$ or it will dominate every single 4$ hand. Worst case scenario, you cycle it and it replaces itself with a 2$ card. 2, 3, and 4 coin cards are roughly equivalent stuff though. The greatest possible disappointment is to accidentally buy a 4$ "silver", which is a little worse than Silver because you will draw it 1 turn later. It's possible that you get a situational 2-4$ card like Coppersmith, but those are roughly equal to the number of instawin ridiculouses like early Hoard or Forge so let's just let those cancel out.
At the low risk of slightly delayed silver, you can get 5$ delayed actions for 4$ with this card. Furthermore they may be 5$ actions that bring something to the board that is missing, like trashing or attacking (and some 2-4$ cards provide that too). Jumping the 4-5 gap at the risk of dropping the smaller 4-2 gap is too good a deal to pass up, and I think this card is like, better than Caravan.
I think 2P would be a better cost for Area 51, actually.
-
Sorry for being overanxious but, is there a new deadline for posting the results?
-
Just a thought; if you really don't want to cap the number of Halfpennies per turn you can swipe, why not have them start out in people's decks rather than as a shared resource? All it would take is changing the type to Treasure-Shelter, and then deciding whether they replace Coppers or other Shelters.
I rather like this idea ... there could even be situations where you don't spend them on turn 1/2 so that the next player can't - e.g. P1 plays 3C rather than 3C+1S and gets a $3 rather than a $4 card...
I don't think the card creator keen on this, but I might use it as the idea for a new card...
-
Sorry for being overanxious but, is there a new deadline for posting the results?
Sorry i thought i allotted ourselves until Saturday night. I will be pushing back the deadline until then (Saturday night).
-
Sorry for being overanxious but, is there a new deadline for posting the results?
Sorry i thought i allotted ourselves until Saturday night. I will be pushing back the deadline until then (Saturday night).
Ok, thanks. BTW, will you also be revealing your identity then?
-
what identity? he is dominion contests
-
Sorry for being overanxious but, is there a new deadline for posting the results?
Sorry i thought i allotted ourselves until Saturday night. I will be pushing back the deadline until then (Saturday night).
Ok, thanks. BTW, will you also be revealing your identity then?
what identity? he is dominion contests
Thanks for clarifying that Pops. Sorry we have to push back the results one more night. We want to get in a bit more playtesting.
-
Highway-Highway-Band of Outcasts is... interesting.
-
Highway-Highway-Band of Outcasts is... interesting.
Mildly interesting. If Pearl Diver is on the board, Band of Outcasts becomes a Grand Market with deck manipulation instead of +buy.A little effort for a little reward. Not much more interesting than official interactions with Highwyay
-
I think Band of Outcast is a tweak on Band of Misfits, one of the tweaks being that it gets to play better Actions with cost reduction. The problem is that Band Of Outcast is too easy to spam, so I worry that it may be too powerful (Imagine easier-to-spam Band of Misfits). With one-shots it would be incredible.
-
Highway-Highway-Band of Outcasts is... interesting.
Mildly interesting. If Pearl Diver is on the board, Band of Outcasts becomes a Grand Market with deck manipulation instead of +buy.A little effort for a little reward. Not much more interesting than official interactions with Highwyay
I was thinking of Highway, Highway, Band of Outcasts, playing and returning a Band of Outcasts, playing and returning a Band of Outcasts... (repeat until you have an arbitrarily large amount of money)
-
Over the next hour I'm going to be putting in the results and updating after each of the 10 final scores are put in.
Let the drum-roll begin. ;D
-
Crap. I totally forgot that the mystery pile should only have cards costing $4 and up. Oops.
-
Everything is Final Congrats to Archetype, Popsofctown and RobertJ.
-
Oh hey, that's awesome! :) I never would have thought I would actually win! Congrats to pops and RobertJ; I liked your guys' card ideas too.
A few notes on Artisan:
- It should be Action-Attack. I just forgot to put that in when I typed it up.
-Silver is optional. I like it because it adds an element of surprise. But it is swingy, so if you don't like it you can swap it out for a Copper or something.
I'm glad you liked the card and I hope it continues to see play with your group! Thanks for running the contest. Testing these cards out and giving prizes like this is really, really generous of you. Hopefully you continue to stay around the forums!
-
Highway-Highway-Band of Outcasts is... interesting.
Mildly interesting. If Pearl Diver is on the board, Band of Outcasts becomes a Grand Market with deck manipulation instead of +buy.A little effort for a little reward. Not much more interesting than official interactions with Highwyay
I was thinking of Highway, Highway, Band of Outcasts, playing and returning a Band of Outcasts, playing and returning a Band of Outcasts... (repeat until you have an arbitrarily large amount of money)
Oh! Right!
-
Thank you for running the contest. It was fun.
In my playtesting Halfpenny was an excellent purchase for 5/2 splits, especially if you open a dead drawer. I'm surprised that didn't come up. Halfpenny is like Duchess though, it won't necessarily get bought.
And to pull a little bit of a Kanye, I think Relay Rider would have been more deserving of most game ready than Benefactor. Based on the feedback you gave, it sounded like Benefactor was crowding out other strategies. Powerful cards that render 3 or 4 cards obselete every time they show up can lower the fun quotient a lot more than weak cards that end up functioning like 1 blank slot most of the time.
Furthermore, Relay Rider is a self stacker card, which makes it even more important for the designer to make sure the card is weak. Since the strategy for self stacker cards is usually simplistic, buying that particular card over and over again, a well designed self stacker needs to move the interesting decision to deciding whether to dive in and use the strategy at all.
Alchemist is a great official self stacker, because it dominates fewer than half of the boards it appears on, but requires the strategy to be considered every time. Minion, especially at the time it was introduced, is not such a great self stacker, because most of the time it removes all other 5-6$ cards from consideration until the Minion stack has been emptied.
I'm not trying to trash Benefactor, it's a great card, but I think Relay Rider performed better in regards to needing no tweaks. I highly doubt it needs a buff to be relevant at least some of the time, considering how closely it compares to Wishing Well, and how favorably it comes out of that comparison.
-
I mentioned this a few pages earlier and I don't think anyone responded to it, but now that Artisan has won the contest, I feel like it should be repeated. How is Artisan substantially different from Masquerade? I love the new mechanic, but the way that it's implemented makes it feel very similar to Masq: draw two, trash one, slightly hurt everyone else. In fact it even maintains the aspect of "what you trash is what junks other players", although obviously to a much lesser degree (it does it in a more random/communal way). The main difference is that this hurts everyone else much more since they cannot pass a card back, and it costs $4. I would be surprised if Artisan is not a very dominant card on most boards.
I do feel like it's worth repeating that I really appreciate and like the new mechanic that Artisan gives, I'm not trying to bash the card or anything, I just feel like the particular implementation of it makes it a more painful Masq.
-
Strong cards tend to get favored in fan card contests. It's a pattern.
-
Wow. I'm very surprised and pleased that my card won something. Also somewhat embarrassed since there are a lot of cards that look to me to be just as deserving! I agree with popsofctown that Relay Rider could consider itself unlucky.
Thanks to Dominion_Contests for running this and providing the prizes. I'll PM to claim my Governor shortly. Congrats to the other winners. Artisan is definitely a worthy winner.
Thinking about the card again. Probably whoever suggested that it should have a no victory card clause is correct. Other than that I'm not convinced it will be overpowered at $5 although this is obviously a concern. Haggler is a natural comparison and clearly Benefactor will often be better. On the other hand Haggler has a lot more flexibility (Province and Gold, Gold and $5 card etc.) which is lost in Benefactor. Perhaps there is a better choice for the vanilla effect although making it $1 looks weak.
Generally, I'm still interested in other ideas for cards which would work at any cost. It would be good to hear any thoughts here or in this thread.
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=9296.0 (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=9296.0)
-
I wouldn't add the victory clause unless I was sure it was necessary (I'm not sure, although I think it probably is necessary).
If you do add a victory clause, then you can have a high degree of certainty it's not overpowered. Missing out on Province into Gold is a pretty huge loss compared to Haggler, especially if you can't replace it with Duchy into Duchy (might sound cloggy, but with all the Lab into Labs you did earlier it's going to be tolerable
-
Anyone else heard back yet?
-
OP delivered. Thank you so much!
-
Gondola --- ($4 Action)
+1 Card
+1 Coin
Choose one: +1 Action, +1 Buy, +1 VP, or gain a coin token
This is strictly better than Baker.
? It's too strong, but not strictly better than Baker, unless I'm missing something...
Oops, I misread the +1 Coin as Action. My bad!
How odd, I also thought the top part said +1 card +1 action.
-
Gondola --- ($4 Action)
+1 Card
+1 Coin
Choose one: +1 Action, +1 Buy, +1 VP, or gain a coin token
This is strictly better than Baker.
? It's too strong, but not strictly better than Baker, unless I'm missing something...
Oops, I misread the +1 Coin as Action. My bad!
How odd, I also thought the top part said +1 card +1 action.
I think it's because we all typically write +$1 with the dollar sign in there, so we don't read "coin" as "coin" in a vanilla bonus.
-
My Governor arrived this morning. Many thanks again Dominon_Contests.
-
I contacted Dominion_Contests last Friday, but haven't recieved a message back. But he hasn't been online since the 26th of September.
-
I contacted Dominion_Contests last Friday, but haven't recieved a message back. But he hasn't been online since the 26th of September.
Sorry about that delay. I have been away from DSF for a while, but I have your address ect. now and i'll send your Governor out by the end of the week
-
I contacted Dominion_Contests last Friday, but haven't recieved a message back. But he hasn't been online since the 26th of September.
Sorry about that delay. I have been away from DSF for a while, but I have your address ect. now and i'll send your Governor out by the end of the week
Not a problem! Feel free to take your time.