(http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/Prayer.png) | Quote PrayerThe set's one-shot. Just like spoils, it's not in the supply, so it can only be gained by cards that reference the pile. |
(http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/Believer.png) | Quote Believer ★★★★★★☆☆☆☆An innocent-looking but crazy strong Throne Room variant. FAQ: If you target a duration that you played this turn, Believer stays in play as a reminder that you played it. (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/29970540/Seaside%20Rule.txt) Whether you put the card on your deck, in your hand, play it again or not makes no difference, Believer always stays out. Likewise, it doesn't matter if the effect is triggered on-play or on-buy, it always stays out. If you target a duration from last turn, Believer doesn't stay out, because that duration would not have affected your next turn. |
(http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/Temple.png) | Quote Temple ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆A card trying to utilize the "super discard pile" idea. You can remove dead cards from your deck, and they even stay out for another shuffle. |
(http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/RoyalSanctum.png) | Quote Royal Sanctum ★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆Another Throne Room variant. Just like Believer, it's a lot stronger than it looks, maybe too strong. |
(http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/Monastery.png) | Quote Monastery ★★★★★★★★★☆A village that can trash. Pretty average powerlevel. |
(http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/Shrine.png) | Quote Shrine ★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆A workshop that can trash. If you want to keep it, you can use it go gain a copy of itself before sacrificing it. |
(http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/Crusade.png) | Quote Crusade ★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆A card... thing. |
(http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/Zealot.png) | Quote Zealot ★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆Kind of a mix of conspirator and Scavenger, but also its own card. |
(http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/SacredVillage.png) | Quote Sacred Village ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆Credit for the idea goes to Scott Pilgrim (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=11562.0). This card can be draw, sifter, or village, depending on your current Action count. |
(http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/HolyGround.png) | Quote Holy Ground ★★★★★★★★☆☆A cellar variant. With a lot of text. Maybe too much? I like to think that the mechanic is simple, but being a reaction takes a lot of space, as does referencing another pile. This card suffers from doing both. |
(http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/Inquisition.png) | Quote Inquisition ★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆ |
(http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/Priestess.png) | Quote Priestess ★★★★★★★★☆☆A rather innocent terminal draw. |
(http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/Grail.png) | Quote Grail ★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆A silver that gains more silvers. It's pretty strong. |
Monastery ★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
+1 Card. +1 Action. If you have exactly 5 cards in your hand, you may trash a card from your hand. If you don't, +1 Action.
Fundamentalist ★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 3$g
+2$. Choose one: Put a card from your hand on top of your deck; or trash the top 2 cards from a supply pile that is not a victory pile; or gain a silver; or each player (including you) gains a copper.
Holy Ground ★★★★★★★★☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 5$
+1 Action. Discard any number of cards. +1 Card per card discarded. If an Action, a Treasure, and a Victory card were discarded, gain a Prayer from the Prayer Pile.
--
When another player plays an Attack card, you may discard this. If you do, gain a Prayer from the Prayer pile, putting it into your hand.
Replace ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
+1 Action
Trash a card from your hand. You may reveal a card costing up to 3$ more than the trashed card. If you do, gain a copy of the revealed card.
Shrine ★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Choose one: Gain a card costing up to 4$; or trash up to one card from your hand for every two Action cards you have in play then trash this
Believer ★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆[/quote]
You may choose an Action card you have in Play that is not a Believer. Put it in your hand or on top of your deck.
--
When you buy this, you may put an Action card you have in Play on top of your deck.
Inquisition ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
+2$. Each player may trash a card from his hand costing at least 3$. If you do, gain a Prayer from the Prayer pile, putting it on top of your deck. Each other player that doesn't gains a Curse.
Temple ★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Set aside any number of cards from your hand on your temple mat.
---
Whenever you play an Action card, if the number of cards in your hand matches the number of cards on your temple mat, you may draw a card. Whenever you buy a card, discard a card from your Temple mat.
Crusade ★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
+2 Cards. Reveal your hand. If at least half of the cards revealed cost 0$, +1 Action. Each other player may discard his hand. If he discards any card this way, he gains 2 Prayers from the Prayer pile, putting one on top of his deck.
Monastery ★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
+1 Card. +1 Action. If you have exactly 5 cards in your hand, you may trash a card from your hand. If you don't, +1 Action.
Fundamentalist ★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 3$
+2$. Choose one: Put a card from your hand on top of your deck; or trash the top 2 cards from a supply pile that is not a victory pile; or gain a silver; or each player (including you) gains a copper.
Shrine ★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Choose one: Gain a card costing up to 4$; or trash up to one card from your hand for every two Action cards you have in play then trash this
Believer ★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
You may choose an Action card you have in Play that is not a Believer. Put it in your hand or on top of your deck.
--
When you buy this, you may put an Action card you have in Play on top of your deck.
Temple ★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Set aside any number of cards from your hand on your temple mat.
---
Whenever you play an Action card, if the number of cards in your hand matches the number of cards on your temple mat, you may draw a card. Whenever you buy a card, discard a card from your Temple mat.
I can't tell if "if you don't" means "if you don't have exactly 5 cards", or "if you don't trash".the old version had "if you didn't draw a second card" in a new line, it was more clear there. showdown chose to put it in the same line with the new version, I don't really know why and I didn't ask yet. But it's probably best to make it as it was, like so:
This seems a little too complicated, and I don't see people using "everyone gains a Copper" very much; but the main thing I want to point out is, it's too strong for $3. "+$2, gain a Silver" alone is almost Explorer, given that you don't match Explorer with Gold every time you buy it; "+$2, gain a Silver or a bunch of other options" probably needs to be $5 as well.i thought so too, but it really isn't that strong. you buy it just for silver sometimes, but it's not broken. you can compare it to JoaT, both will gain you a silver, JOAT will draw a card which is worth about as much as +2$, and then JoaT also does two other things. it's decent for BM, but not that amazing.
The trashing here just seems so weak as to be hardly worth it.it is absolutely worth it.
Is this a Throne Room variant? If it's terminal, it looks more like a Scheme variant. Also, its interaction with Duration cards in particular would be super confusing and hard to track IRL.a normal throne room has a phantom "+1 action." this has a phantom "-1 action" but does the same otherwise, so yea i think it's a throne room variant. but it can obviously do a whole bunch of things that tr can't.
This seems too powerful. cantrip trashing seems already good for $4, and this more or less turns into a village for later. I think it needs to cost $5.that was my first instinct too, but it seems fine so far. you can't trash with it as much as i expected, because you want to use it as a village pretty quickly, and you can't trash twice in a row. if it's too strong, I'll make it draw only if you don't trash. but as i said, it looked fine so far.
The condition is a bit complicated. Is that necessary? Maybe just Action and Treasure are enough, since you want to discard Victory cards anyway. Moreover, I would try to change it to just one card. Like "If you discard a card costing $4 or more" or similar. If you do it with just one, you can separate it. "You may discard ..... If you do, +1 Card and gain ....." and then just Cellar. Maybe separating the part of the effect that produces the gain for conditions on more than one card would be nice as well, though it would combo less with dual-types (not a big deal, being outside Intrigue).i don't think it's complicated. it's basically "discard one of every card type to trigger it". it worked really well so far, i don't really see why i should change it. the victory card is not trivial, you don't always have green cards in your deck.
Really an Engine card, but possibly not strong enough. I would start with up to $4 more and maybe even cost it $3 (though costing $3 makes it weaker for Province gaining, but that can be fine, especially with the power-up) then lower it if its too much, because if its OP, it will be obvious faster when playtesting (and it will make players buy it more without requiring them to).my feeling says it's strong. i might be wrong, but I don't really think i want to test an even stronger version yet.
Seems weak for a Curser, but weak Cursers can be fine. +$2 and curse the opponents is a bit weak (weaker than Witch in general). This comes with a bane. The Prayer gaining does not seem strong enough to justify it. As a Curser, I think its weaker than Witch/MB/Cultitst, but possibly better than Soothsayer (quite different to compare, though). The Attack seems deffinitely nastier than Soothsayer's (considering both bane here and Soothsayer's card-drawing compensation). The bonus here is a bit weaker in general, and a lot weaker for BM, but can even be stronger for many Engines.these are about my thoughts as well. that's a good thing though, I'd like it being weaker than witch. the dominance of junkers is one of the few aspects i dislike in dominion
I would go with "you may" and "if you don't" instead of choose one.why?
Also, the trashing condition seems complicated. I would just trash Shrine first and then trash a card per Action in play (maybe exactly instead of up to, if you need some nerf). Being terminal, making the trash non-optional gives interesting decision on whether to leave your non-terminals unplayed, if you have cards you would like to keep.the first version i tested trashed itself first then counted one for every 2 cards. that seemed like it could use a small buff, but only a small one. trashing one per action card will make it too good. i want you to work for trashing.
Are the "Whenever"s supposed to be active all the time or only when there is a Temple in play? If the former, put a while this is in play. If the latter, you need some indication like "in games using this".I don't think that's true. The way I understand it is, if something is written below a horizontal line, it means that it always applies. regardless of that, if it's not clear to you, it may be a good idea to add "in games using this", even if it isn't necessary. there is enough space left.
do you draw a card after an empty hand even if no Temple's were bought?yes, you do. that's intentional, but not very significant.
The problem is that the Action effect seems uninteresting. The pseudo-trashing is pretty darn good, may even be too good (considring chapel has an "up to 4", maybe you need to cap this as well). This seems like it could be non-terminal, so you can at least use it for mild sifting. Also, do you need to discard things on-buy? Maybe discarding on Temple-play is better, otherwise, seems like something easier to forget. I also don't see the connection, is it always bad to discard things from the Temple mat?
(I don't get the Penalty, why is it there?).it's an idea i've been playing around with for a while now. originally, it was on its own card and an option for yourself, but I ended up using it as a reaction here. it works on this card because, if both players go crusades, and yours won't activate, you can at least salvage your turn, which makes it less swingy. also, prayer costs 0$, so it helps for the next turn
s trashing from a non-victory pile really worth all that text? Its probably pretty good for rushes, but it does not feel like you will stop an engine just by trashing their piles (at least in 2p). Maybe it is good for rushing Duchies even without alt-VP? I guess the bottom-line is that I don't see great appeal in the card. If it were not wordy, that is not a problem, but I personally need a good reason for a wordy card.
Overall comment: I think you are making things too easy on the players. Maybe that's the intent, to have cards that play better casually. But it seems to me you are avoiding lots of downsides with options, optional effects, and such. I think its good to have non-obvious downsides (like forced gaining or trashing).i don't know, i find them to be annoying and uninteresting. generally, I would always prefer it if a card has the option to do nothing at all over a forced action that can sometimes be harmful.
QuoteThis seems a little too complicated, and I don't see people using "everyone gains a Copper" very much; but the main thing I want to point out is, it's too strong for $3. "+$2, gain a Silver" alone is almost Explorer, given that you don't match Explorer with Gold every time you buy it; "+$2, gain a Silver or a bunch of other options" probably needs to be $5 as well.i thought so too, but it really isn't that strong. you buy it just for silver sometimes, but it's not broken. you can compare it to JoaT, both will gain you a silver, JOAT will draw a card which is worth about as much as +2$, and then JoaT also does two other things. it's decent for BM, but not that amazing.
QuoteThe trashing here just seems so weak as to be hardly worth it.it is absolutely worth it.
QuoteIs this a Throne Room variant? If it's terminal, it looks more like a Scheme variant. Also, its interaction with Duration cards in particular would be super confusing and hard to track IRL.a normal throne room has a phantom "+1 action." this has a phantom "-1 action" but does the same otherwise, so yea i think it's a throne room variant.
it's a little bit hard to track with durations, but it's not as hard as procession is, and procession didn't die because of it either. i should also mention that i love this card, it's my favorite of the ones I've made, I really think the tracking issues are worth it.
And no way is Jack's drawing worth about as much as +$2. In the early game, it's worth slightly less than +$1; later it's more likely to be worth more, but the early game is when price differences like this matter most.1$ plus significant cycling. and early on it can trash your estates, which is huge. and JoaT also defends against junkers and discard/topdeck attacks. i have played fundamentalist/BM, it's not that good.
I still think it needs to cost at least $4okay, i have to elaborate a little bit here, because we're obviously coming from very different angles. first and most importantly: the intention behind pricing a card is to make the card fun to play with, not to make it balanced in terms of powerlevel. I would go as far as to say that balance of powerlevel is a myth, it doesn't exist in dominion. look at harvest, then look at mountebank. but more specifically, look at chapel. If the intention with chapel had been to make it balanced in terms of powerlevel, it would probably cost 4$. but now imagine what that would change: you would still open chapel lots of times when it's there, but you would almost always pair it with silver, and 5/2 is now just terrible. it'd make the game less interesting. that's why chapel costs 2$. it's insanely overpowered, but you can't win with lots of chapels, that's why it doesn't break the game.
QuoteCould you elaborate? It looks like you have to have an engine running before you can trash anything with it—by which point you don't really need trashing as much anymore. And then the trashing is a one-shot.QuoteThe trashing here just seems so weak as to be hardly worth it.it is absolutely worth it.
it is. which is why when i designed believer, I expected it to be really weak. but i wasn't arguing powerlevel, i was arguing that it's similar in what it does: you have a throne room and a cantrip in hand -> you can play the cantrip twice, and you produce another +action. you have a believer and a cantrip in hand -> you can play the cantrip twice, but you require another +action to do so. it seems like a throne room variant to me.QuoteThat's a big difference!QuoteIs this a Throne Room variant? If it's terminal, it looks more like a Scheme variant. Also, its interaction with Duration cards in particular would be super confusing and hard to track IRL.a normal throne room has a phantom "+1 action." this has a phantom "-1 action" but does the same otherwise, so yea i think it's a throne room variant.
I disagree; it's much harder to track than Procession/Duration. If you Procession a Duration, the Duration is trashed but the Procession stays in play. If you use this to pull a Duration out of play, you've got nothing remaining in play at all to remind you to activate the Duration's next-turn effects.you're once again forgetting that I've already played with it. you have believer in play to remind you of stuff. It doesn't become a duration card like throne room variants do, if that's what you mean, but it's not that big of a problem, usually, you target duration cards that kicked in from last turn, and then you can just put those in your duration area just like the "regular ones". And in the rare cases that you played a duration card twice (or played it once but topdecked it), it's still not that hard. remember that with procession, it's not uncommon to have just one procession out that draws like 16 cards, if you played a procession-procession chain.
Monastery ★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
+1 Card. +1 Action. If you have exactly 5 cards in your hand, you may trash a card from your hand. If you didn't trash a card, +1 Action.
Monastery
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
+1 Card. +1 Action. If you have at 5 or more cards in your hand, trash one of them. Otherwise, +1 Action.
Prayer
Types: Action
Cost: 0$*
+3 Cards. +1 Action. Discard a card. Return this to the Prayer Pile (This is not in the Supply.)
Fundamentalist ★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 3$
+2$. Choose one: Put a card from your hand on top of your deck; or trash the top 2 cards from a supply pile that is not a victory pile; or gain a silver; or each player (including you) gains a copper.
Holy Ground ★★★★★★★★☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 5$
+1 Action. Reveal then discard any number of cards. +1 Card per card discarded. If an Action, a Treasure, and a Victory card were discarded, gain a Prayer from the Prayer Pile.
--
When another player plays an Attack card, you may discard this. If you do, gain a Prayer from the Prayer pile, putting it into your hand.
Replace ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
+1 Action
Trash a card from your hand. You may reveal a card costing up to 3$ more than the trashed card. If you do, gain a copy of the revealed card.
Shrine ★★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
Choose one: Gain a card costing up to 4$; or trash up to one card from your hand for every two Action cards you have in play then trash this
Believer ★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 2$
You may choose an Action card you have in Play that is not a Believer. Put it in your hand or on top of your deck.
--
When you buy this, you may put an Action card you have in Play on top of your deck.
Inquisition ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 5$
+2$. Each player may trash a card from his hand costing at least 3$. If you do, gain a Prayer from the Prayer pile, putting it on top of your deck. Each other player that doesn't gains a Curse.
Crusade ★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
+2 Cards. Reveal your hand. If at least half of the cards revealed cost 0$, +1 Action. Each other player may discard his hand. If he discards any card this way, he gains 2 Prayers from the Prayer pile, putting them on top of his deck.
Gathering ★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 6$
+2 Cards, +1 Action. If you have at least 7 cards in hand, you may trash a card from your hand. You may play a Gathering from your hand.
This might be OK power-wise. Tough to say. Although it's not too wordy, it seems a little wonky to me. I would try:Hm, can you specify what you mean with wonky? I don't really see the advantage of your version. Just to decrease complexity? But the card isn't very complicated. Also, it's a big nerf, I don't think it needs a nerf.QuoteMonastery
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
+1 Card. +1 Action. If you have at 5 or more cards in your hand, trash one of them. Otherwise, +1 Action.
But that's just my opinion. Fewer choices when you play it, but you still have a choice of what to trash.
[+$2; Gain a Silver] is pretty close to a $5 value just by itself. I would nix the "each player gains a Copper" option. For one thing, some players will complain that this isn't an Attack. But mostly I just don't think people will choose that option enough to justify its inclusion.Again, that one is dropped. I don't know how I missed it in the OP. Sorry that I made you comment on it anyway. Some of the reasons I dropped it were things you mentioned here.
The first two options look really weak compared to [gain a Silver], which itself is not super strong. I would almost suggest bumping the cost to $5, having it give you +$3, and keeping the first three options as-is. Except you probably want to say "move the top 2 cards of a Supply pile that is not a Victory pile to the trash" to avoid on-trash shenanigans and rules confusion. I agree that making supply trashing one of several options on a "choose one" is a good solution to the AP problem. Unless you have a good reason to do it, you'll just choose another option.
Could afford to be simpler. The Action part, I mean. Maybe "If you discarded an Action" or "If you discarded a Silver', etc. Discarding Victory cards and Coppers is something you do anyway and you need a lot more words for them.I guess if two people say pretty much the same thing, I should start listening to it. I'm really hesitant to change this card though, because it works fine as it is. Then again, what you're saying is mostly to cut redundancy, which wouldn't really change the way it works. I guess the thing is just that it basically says "discard one card of each type" and I thought that was really simple; wordy, but simply. Maybe I'm just not that afraid of a few more words. I also don't think any of the 3 conditions is redundant, you don't always have treasure cards in your deck, and you definitely don't always have estates. Dunno, I just think I rather have a few more words and have it doing exactly what I want then make it simpler but less interesting.
A remodel where you need a copy of the card you want to gain in your hand. I don't love it. I don't have any suggested fixes, though.I didn't test it yet (because I wanted to wait for a nicer image), so it's very possible that I'll drop it really early. I can't really predict how it works out, maybe having to get copies of the cards you want is interesting, maybe it's not.
Huh. It's sort of interesting. I'm worried that it's just too much of a dud on a board without cheap cantrips, though. You want both options way less. But maybe that's OK. Sometimes you don't want Workshop/Ironwork/etc. But there at least you can use the ability. The trashing here doesn't really work unless you have the cantrips available. I guess I have mixed feelings about it.Basically, it's good when workshop is good, unless you just want the trashing, then it can sometimes be good in other games. You don't always buy workshop; you don't always buy shrine. I don't think that's a problem.
You mention it being great with Duration cards, but it causes rules/tracking problems with those. If you remove a just-played Duration card from play using Believer's on-buy ability, there's nothing reminding you to do the next-turn effect. Scheme and Prince have complex wordings to avoid this very issue!Yea, I'm aware of that. Again, I'll argue that it's less complicated than procession, which can leave you with one procession in play that draws 16 cards. But I was considering something like "if you would discard it during your next cleanup-phase", so that you can't do stuff with duration cards anymore. If i do that, you could still target duration cards that kicked in from last turn, because that doesn't have a tracking issue, so you could still play a double tactician board with one tactician. It would make the card much more wordy though. But I'll keep an eye on it.
The part where you can trash a card to gain a Prayer on your deck seems weak. Likewise, I'm not sure how often opponents will trash a valuable card from their hands to avoid a Curse.I'm speculating here, because I haven't tested the card yet. I often consider silver a necessity to get to 5$, that's why I thought the option is often worth it, but I might be wrong. I also expect you to trash most of the time if there's no trashing, rather than gaining a curse, but I might be wrong here too. If you don't have any suggested changes, I'll probably start by testing it as it is.
In general, I'm not a big fan of cards where you don't know when you play them whether or not they'll be terminal. Tribute is cute, but I really don't like that aspect of it. [...] Hard to say how often opponents will go for the discard-hand effect. At first I thought almost never, or that it wouldn't be fun if you did, but I'm changing my mind. Seems like it could be a neat option, especially when you have a terrible hand.I know what you mean, I also dislike that about tribute. But it's not nearly as bad with this one, because you already know most of your hand before drawing. There are times when you don't know though, but most of them you still have to try. So far, there was only one time when I didn't know if playing it was a good idea; I ended up not playing it.
I'm glad you changed the text such that it only cares about cards costing $0, not other copies of Crusade.actually, that's another error :-[ I must have forgotten to change the description, because the original version only cared about cost. It was a necessary change though, there's no way around it. It's not strong enough when it works to make activating it that tough.
I think "you may trash if you have at least X cards in hand" is covered by Monastery, which I like better than this. Yeah, I'm not really excited about this one.Did you see that it can be a village?
Hopefully that helps! Sorry if I was too harsh.It does, and not at all. Thanks!
I'm confused... the image for Believer has a different wording, with a different effect, from the description and discussion about it. I'm assuming one or the other is an updated version?
For the wording on the image, it's confusing I think. When you say "if you discard it from play this turn, you may..." that sounds to me like you will get the card back at the end of your turn, when it would otherwise be discarded. In other words, a Scheme effect, not a Throne Room effect. If you are trying to use a wording like that to limit Duration cards, you would need "if you would discard it from play this turn". But that doesn't work because not all cards can know if they will be discarded from play this turn or not; depends on things like Scheme and Treasury.
Scribe ★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 5$
You may play this as if it were an Action card on your Scribe mat that you choose. If you do, this is that card until it leaves play. If you don't, you may put an Action card from the Supply on your Scribe mat.
---
When you play an Action card, +1$ if you have a copy of it on your Scribe mat.
ephesos plays Scribe...Wow, I just realized that doing this gives you infinite money. When I wrote it, I just thought it would be being rude to your opponent. But infinite money's just crazy. Needs some sort of fix/interpretation where you can't Scribe as Scribe.
choosing to play it as a card on the Scribe mat...
choosing to play it as Scribe...
choosing to play it as a card on the Scribe mat...
*opponent has disconnected*
I can totally see forgetting to do the +$1, especially if Scribe isn't actually in play at the time I play the actionIf this were a problem, Investment must have had it too, but I've never heard LF mentioning it. It definitely wasn't a problem in the games I've played with it; you're excited about playing cards you invested in, that's not something you forget. And you have the cards to remind you of it too. The only thing you have to remember is whether you made your Scribes imitate Action cards (and get the +1$) or used it to invest in other cards (don't get the +1$). that seems quite reasonable.
But I'm pretty sure that Peddler still costs 6$ if you just played a Band of Misfits.
Monastery ★★★★★★☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
+1 Card. +1 Action. If you have exactly 5 cards in your hand, you may trash a card from your hand. If you didn't trash a card, +1 Action.
Prayer
Types: Action
Cost: 0$*
+3 Cards. +1 Action. Discard a card. Return this to the Prayer Pile (This is not in the Supply.)
Holy Ground ★★★★★★★★☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 5$
+1 Action. Reveal then discard any number of cards. +1 Card per card discarded. If an Action, a Treasure, and a Victory card were discarded, gain a Prayer from the Prayer Pile.
--
When another player plays an Attack card, you may discard this. If you do, gain a Prayer from the Prayer pile, putting it into your hand.
Shrine ★★★★★★★☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
Choose one: Gain a card costing up to 4$; or trash up to one card from your hand for every two Action cards you have in play then trash this
Believer ★★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 2$
You may choose an Action card you have in Play that is not a Believer. Put it in your hand or on top of your deck.
--
When you buy this, you may put an Action card you have in Play on top of your deck.
Inquisition ★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 5$
+2$. Each player may trash a card from his hand costing at least 3$. If you do, gain a Prayer from the Prayer pile, putting it on top of your deck. Each other player that doesn't gains a Curse.
Crusade ★★★★★☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
+2 Cards. Reveal your hand. If at least half of it are copies of crusade and cards that cost 0$, +1 Action.
Gathering ★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 6$
+2 Cards, +1 Action. If you have at least 7 cards in hand, you may trash a card from your hand. You may play a Gathering from your hand.
Zealot ★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
Dig for an Acolyte card, putting it on top of your deck.
---
The first player go gain a Zealot chooses a Kingdom card pile from the Supply. Cards from that pile are Acolyte cards.
Scribe ★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆[/quote]
Types: Action
Cost: 5$
You may play this as if it were an Action card on your Scribe mat that you choose. If you do, this is that card until it leaves play. If you don't, you may put an Action card from the Supply on your Scribe mat.
---
When you play an Action card, +1$ if you have a copy of it on your Scribe mat.
Being discussed elsewhere. I'm a little surprised that it turns out to be really strong. I suppose that's from the flexibility of the psuedo-TR vs. pseudo-Scheme?
You wrote that you feel like dropping it. I think you should drop it too. It does a smattering of things that feels scattered and undirected. It also feels like you have too many Lab variants in this set already, with Prayer and Crusade.yea, you're right. it was too slow anyway, costing $6 didn't go well with the "play me a lot" theme. I'll try to rework it though, something with a structure like this
XXprobably costing less.
{{vanilla boni}}
you may play an XX from your hand.
{{count XX's in play and do cool stuff}}
Prayer
Types: Action
Cost: 0$*
+3 Cards. +1 Action. Discard a card. Return this to the Prayer Pile (This is not in the Supply.)
Believer ★★★★★★☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 2$
When you buy this or play it, choose an Action card you have in play. If it is not a Believer, put it into your hand or on top of your deck, your choice.
Temple ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 2$
+1 Action. Name a card. Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. Set aside all matches, discard them immediately after the next time you shuffle your deck. Put the rest back in any order.
Royal Sanctum ★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 3$
Dig for an Action card that's not a Royal Sanctum. Play it twice. If you have more cards in hand than in play, return this to the supply.
Monastery ★★★★★★★★★☆
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
+1 Card. +1 Action. If you have exactly 5 cards in hand, you may trash a card from your hand. If you didn't trash a card, +1 Action.
Shrine ★★★★★★☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
Choose one: Gain a card costing up to 4$; or trash up to one card from your hand for every two Action cards you have in play then trash this
Crusade ★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
+2 Cards. Reveal your hand. If at least half of it are copies of crusade and cards that cost 0$, +1 Action.
Zealot ★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆Note: you are missing the +2$ in the quote text
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
Dig for an Acolyte card. If no cards where discarded, play it. Otherwise put it on top of your deck.
---
The first player go gain a Zealot chooses an Action card pile from the Supply. Cards from that pile are Acolyte cards.
Sacred Village ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 4$
+2 Cards. Set your number of unused Actions to 2. Discard a card per Action gained this way.
Holy Ground ★★★★★★★★☆☆
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: 5$
+1 Action. Reveal then discard any number of cards. +1 Card per card discarded. If you revealed a Treasure, an Action, and a Victory card, gain a Prayer from the Prayer Pile.
--
When another player plays an Attack card, you may discard this. If you do, gain a Prayer from the Prayer pile, putting it into your hand.
Inquisition ★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: 5$
+2$. Each player may trash a card from his hand costing at least 3$. If you do, gain a Prayer from the Prayer pile, putting it on top of your deck. Each other player gains a curse, then trashes it if he trashed a card from his hand.
Priestess ★★★★★★★★☆☆
Types: Action
Cost: 5$
Reveal your hand. +1 Card per differently priced card in it.
Grail ★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Types: Treasure
Cost: 5$
Worth 2$
+1 buy
While this is in play, when you buy a card, gain a Silver.
First of all, did you notice that your definition of dig is wrong?I didn't... thanks.
Basically a delayed "+2 cards, discard a card" for whichever card makes you gain one. Only Holy Ground and Inquisition can gain it, I think you should try to work it (back again) in at least one more card.You're right, having just 2 cards using it is not great. There used to be a side-effect on Crusade that included Prayers, but I cut it. I'm still hoping to include it on a new card at some point.
I think this works better with a mat and an underline text, "After you shuffle your deck, discard all cards in your Temple mat."I agree that it's cleaner, but that way you need a mat. well maybe it's worth it. Haven doesn't have one, but haven is a duration, so you can put the card behind haven when playing IRL.
Trashing a card>$3 from hand is super-harsh, does anyone ever do it?yeah, if you can't get rid of the curses, you usually rather trash something.
If I understand you, the player playing inquisition is mostly expected to trash silvers this way. Trashing a silver costs you $2 this turn, and instead you are gaining a handsize increase of 1 next turn. Seems like a very weak bonus for getting rid of a card that might still be doing stuff for your deck, and the possibility to do this is the only reason why this gets +2$ instead of +2 cards, like the slightly stronger curser that is witch.You can also trash other (weak) terminals from your hand, like FT or something. And silver is sometimes a bad card. I do use the self-trashing, but not as often I'd like. I think I'd miss it if I cut it, but it would make the card much simpler. "Each other player gains a curse. He may trash a card costing at least 3$ from his hand to trash the curse he gained."
Not sure if weakening the attack is really worth the extra complexity from the gain-trashing either. Making the gain itself conditional seems better.I'm going to say yes, but it's not about weakening the attack so much as it is about changing the game. I had a 4 player game once, and there was no trashing, and we all went for Inquisition, and it just took forever, because the curses would not run out. An opponent plays Inquisition, you trash something form your hand, then in your turn you buy it back. Nothing has changed. Now at least the curses are out after 10 plays of inquisition, like with most other junkers. I think I'd rather cut the self-trashing aspect than the kill-curses-from-supply thing.
Ah, I have no idea how to play silver flooding strategies, so no idea here. Looks strong, maybe?It's strong for sure. It could probably be worth 1$ and be fine. But I like the stronger version; it doesn't break the game, and the official 5$ silvers (Royal Seal, Stash) are both really weak.
Does this really need to cost $5?Definite yes.
You made a thread about this one, right? I dig the condition, but I am not sure this specific card needs the extra complexity, what it does is already interesting enough. I would consider the possibility of scrapping the condition and always/never returning the card to the supply, and price accordingly, then make another card whose main thing is to use that condition.This is a really good point, because the card is definitely too complex (also because you have to remember the penalty after the card resolved twice, sometimes you just forget it). The problem is the pricing, digging for a card and playing it twice is just really, really good. It would probably be too strong at 5$.
Yeah, I remember this. It's cute, but a bit on the weak side. This can only draw if there are other villages in the kingdom, and even then it's only moat, it's nice but what are you doing buying two villages. If you use it after itself, it is a cantrip sifter, sorta like an attack-less spy, meh. If you want to use this as a village, it is an inn, so your handsize decreases. There's an argument to be done for versatility but eh, this could cost $3, or even $2 no probs, I think. Compare this with hamlet, which actually let's you choose what you want to do and can even get you buys, this only get you a little bit of extra sifting instead.You're not the only one who thinks this is weak. However... I don't think it is (this one has zero testing, so I'm just speculating). It's not so much that it's versatile as it is that it's always sifting, and sifting without decreasing handsize is just very good. Apparently the "+2 cards, +1 action, discard a card" thing was too strong at 4$ and that's why it's not an official card, and that's exactly what this card turns into if you have 2 actions before playing it. If you have 1, it's an Inn (5$ card, but the effect is not really worth 5$). And if you have 3, it's a moat, but moat is not bad if you have 3 actions. The only time when it's really bad is if you have 4+, because then it kills your actions. that shouldn't happen very often though.
Trashing a card>$3 from hand is super-harsh, does anyone ever do it?yeah, if you can't get rid of the curses, you usually rather trash something.If I understand you, the player playing inquisition is mostly expected to trash silvers this way. Trashing a silver costs you $2 this turn, and instead you are gaining a handsize increase of 1 next turn. Seems like a very weak bonus for getting rid of a card that might still be doing stuff for your deck, and the possibility to do this is the only reason why this gets +2$ instead of +2 cards, like the slightly stronger curser that is witch.You can also trash other (weak) terminals from your hand, like FT or something. And silver is sometimes a bad card. I do use the self-trashing, but not as often I'd like. I think I'd miss it if I cut it, but it would make the card much simpler. "Each other player gains a curse. He may trash a card costing at least 3$ from his hand to trash the curse he gained."Not sure if weakening the attack is really worth the extra complexity from the gain-trashing either. Making the gain itself conditional seems better.I'm going to say yes, but it's not about weakening the attack so much as it is about changing the game. I had a 4 player game once, and there was no trashing, and we all went for Inquisition, and it just took forever, because the curses would not run out. An opponent plays Inquisition, you trash something form your hand, then in your turn you buy it back. Nothing has changed. Now at least the curses are out after 10 plays of inquisition, like with most other junkers. I think I'd rather cut the self-trashing aspect than the kill-curses-from-supply thing.
It would also be nice if you didn't "pay" the inquisition just in games without trashing. Maybe I rework it and make you draw a card if you pay or something.
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a prayer card per $ it costed.
All other players gain a curse or trash a card from their hand costing $3 or more, their choice.
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a prayer card per $ it costed.
All other players gain a curse or trash a card from their hand other than curse, their choice
Yeah, I remember this. It's cute, but a bit on the weak side. This can only draw if there are other villages in the kingdom, and even then it's only moat, it's nice but what are you doing buying two villages. If you use it after itself, it is a cantrip sifter, sorta like an attack-less spy, meh. If you want to use this as a village, it is an inn, so your handsize decreases. There's an argument to be done for versatility but eh, this could cost $3, or even $2 no probs, I think. Compare this with hamlet, which actually let's you choose what you want to do and can even get you buys, this only get you a little bit of extra sifting instead.You're not the only one who thinks this is weak. However... I don't think it is (this one has zero testing, so I'm just speculating). It's not so much that it's versatile as it is that it's always sifting, and sifting without decreasing handsize is just very good. Apparently the "+2 cards, +1 action, discard a card" thing was too strong at 4$ and that's why it's not an official card, and that's exactly what this card turns into if you have 2 actions before playing it. If you have 1, it's an Inn (5$ card, but the effect is not really worth 5$). And if you have 3, it's a moat, but moat is not bad if you have 3 actions. The only time when it's really bad is if you have 4+, because then it kills your actions. that shouldn't happen very often though.
+2 cards. You may discard two or more cards from your hand. +1 action per card discarded this way.
Have you considered something like:I didn't, because I expect the current version to be really strong. so, unless it turns out to be weak, there's no reason to make it even stronger.
Hum, problem is, just +2$ is a weak bonus, considering the attack is weaker than witch. The other problem is that this card is already very wordy.+2$ > +2 cards on junkers I think, both in fun and in power level. I'm sure that's debatable though, but yeah, I think Witch would be a stronger card with +2$. Inquisition could be an exception from this rule, because it doesn't give out as many curses, but still, I'm happy with the vanilla bonus.
two examples that go about it differently:ehh... I don't really see it. I mean, it's a terminal apprentice, not really what I was going for with the concept. There may be something there for a different card, if the effect works out. I kind of suspect it to be broken.
I know this is not a very helpful comment, but what should i do... Just wanted to point out that i find the art Showdown35 did beautiful.to avoid misunderstandings, he of course didn't draw the pictures, he just searched for them and made them into dominion cards. Not to take anything away from what he's doing though, because he's amazing at it.
Hopefully i'll have some time later to comment on the cards themselves :)
Have you considered something like:I didn't, because I expect the current version to be really strong. so, unless it turns out to be weak, there's no reason to make it even stronger.
Have you considered something like:I didn't, because I expect the current version to be really strong. so, unless it turns out to be weak, there's no reason to make it even stronger.
You noticed that it can't discard only one card, right? That's the one option that according to Donald is too strong at 4$, and that is going to be the baseline power for your version. Removing that option makes the card weaker but easier to balance, hence the choice coming back to the player.
Of course, I am just theorycrafting, playtesting beats that ten times out of ten.
I know this is not a very helpful comment, but what should i do... Just wanted to point out that i find the art Showdown35 did beautiful.to avoid misunderstandings, he of course didn't draw the pictures, he just searched for them and made them into dominion cards. Not to take anything away from what he's doing though, because he's amazing at it.
Hopefully i'll have some time later to comment on the cards themselves :)
For Sacred Village, do you really need to "set" the action counter? I don't see what would be so strong about it if it could only increase your count. Inn has a strong gain effect and always gives actions, after all.
Sacred Village
+2 cards
Do this twice:
If you have less than two actions left, discard a card and +1action
For Sacred Village, do you really need to "set" the action counter? I don't see what would be so strong about it if it could only increase your count. Inn has a strong gain effect and always gives actions, after all.
Sacred Village
+2 cards
Do this twice:
If you have less than two actions left, discard a card and +1action
It's not important that it can make you lose Actions. The reason I prefer the original wording is that I think it's more elegant. That's a matter of taste though, so if most people prefer this wording, I'd still be willing to change it. Any opinions?
It is a new concept, but I think only because it doesn't work for draw-to-x. You can't say "set your number of cards to 7", so library says "draw until" instead. the until version is weird for this card, so you chose a middle way, which is like saying "do this 7 times: if you have less than 7 cards in hand, draw a card" on library (except it's not as awkward on this card, because it's only 2 times). Still, for Actions the "set" wording seems really simple. I don't really see how you can misunderstand it.
(http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/Shrine.png) | (http://www.scon.comze.com/dominion/requests/silverspawn/Inquisition.png) |
Why is silverspawn such a good card designer
Better than Steward? I'm either on the wrong side of an inside joke or on the wrong side of Dominion knowledge.
inquisition sounds way worse than mountebank to me.
yeah, I honestly think mountebank is stronger than it (or any junker) has any right to be. I don't think an early Inquisition is less likely to be bought because of mountebank than, say, minion. I don't know if I ever bought my first minion over mountebank. Inquisition is better than mount in games where copper is not a bad card, like vs gardens or apothecaries. these are all edge cases, but all junkers are weaker than mount save for edge cases. the card is just so ludicrously powerful.
it's a little bit unfortunate that Inquisition becomes almost strictly worse-ish than mount once curses are gone, as supposed to witch which has another vanilla bonus, but I can live with that.
If you don't like it becoming weaker when Curses are gone, why don't you do what pacovf suggested and make the gaining conditional via "If another player does not, he gains a Curse".
Your current wording makes the Curses run out much faster and is arguably more complex, too.
all junkers are weaker than mount save for edge cases.
Dear diary, today I learned that Cultist isn't a junker.
Dear diary, today I learned that Cultist isn't a junker.
My Mountebanks can beat your Cultists any day of the weak and twice on Sunday.
I don't think I would bother with cultist in a mount/cultist kingdom. Just double mount (maybe triple) and BM.
I don't think I would bother with cultist in a mount/cultist kingdom. Just double mount (maybe triple) and BM.
Not that i particularly care whetherSuperman or BatmanMountebank or Cultist is better, but that's like saying Counting House was better than Mountebank because it defends against it when both are in the same kingdom.
Edit: I see Awaclus does the same thing. Oh my.
I don't think I would bother with cultist in a mount/cultist kingdom. Just double mount (maybe triple) and BM.
Not that i particularly care whetherSuperman or BatmanMountebank or Cultist is better, but that's like saying Counting House was better than Mountebank because it defends against it when both are in the same kingdom.
Edit: I see Awaclus does the same thing. Oh my.
They don't really counter each other in any way. You go for Cultist not because Cultist works particularly well against Mountebank, you go for Cultist because it's stronger than Mountebank.
I don't think I would bother with cultist in a mount/cultist kingdom. Just double mount (maybe triple) and BM.
Not that i particularly care whetherSuperman or BatmanMountebank or Cultist is better, but that's like saying Counting House was better than Mountebank because it defends against it when both are in the same kingdom.
Edit: I see Awaclus does the same thing. Oh my.
They don't really counter each other in any way. You go for Cultist not because Cultist works particularly well against Mountebank, you go for Cultist because it's stronger than Mountebank.
Mountebank's junk makes Cultists harder to line up, which most definitely counters the card. With a lot of Junk in your deck, Cultist is just a Witch without the VP advantage.
Someone plug this into a simulator.I don't think I would bother with cultist in a mount/cultist kingdom. Just double mount (maybe triple) and BM.
Not that i particularly care whetherSuperman or BatmanMountebank or Cultist is better, but that's like saying Counting House was better than Mountebank because it defends against it when both are in the same kingdom.
Edit: I see Awaclus does the same thing. Oh my.
They don't really counter each other in any way. You go for Cultist not because Cultist works particularly well against Mountebank, you go for Cultist because it's stronger than Mountebank.
Mountebank's junk makes Cultists harder to line up, which most definitely counters the card. With a lot of Junk in your deck, Cultist is just a Witch without the VP advantage.
If only you could play enough Mountebanks to make a difference before you already have all of the Ruins, and before the Cultist player also buys a Mountebank and empties the rest of the Curse pile in your deck as well.
Someone plug this into a simulator.
I definitely am team Mountebank, you're junking twice as many cards per play. Cultist would need +5 cards to keep up with that.
I'd definitely go for cultist most of the time in a kingdom with mountebank and cultist in it. I always feel like mountebank is overrated, in general. Mountebank can only junk two cards in a turn and can be blocked. Cultist will empty the ruins pile ridiculously fast. Plus, draw > money. That's why mountebank also gives copper to make it balanced with witch.
(okay, mountebank is better than witch, but not by much)
money > drawYou're planning on having a money density of less than 1 coin per card? And also aren't interested in the power of the slog engine on some kingdoms? Also, cycling so that you see your witch(es) more often just about offsets the increased chance of terminal collision for me.
in a witch/mount slog? yes. I think you'll be happy with 5$/hand for the majority of the game. and +2$ also makes picking up a second mount more likely.money > drawYou're planning on having a money density of less than 1 coin per card?
money > drawYou're planning on having a money density of less than 1 coin per card? And also aren't interested in the power of the slog engine on some kingdoms? Also, cycling so that you see your witch(es) more often just about offsets the increased chance of terminal collision for me.
Cultist is like an annoying fly. Mountebank is like a mighty hammer.
Cultist is like an annoying fly. Mountebank is like a mighty hammer.
A big enough swarm of annoying flies hurts a kingdom a lot more than one mighty hammer.
Cultist is like an annoying fly. Mountebank is like a mighty hammer.
A big enough swarm of annoying flies hurts a kingdom a lot more than one mighty hammer.
Thor disagrees.
Dunno if this was mentioned elsewhere in the thread, but in your text file that rewords existing cards with "dig", you mentioned Scheme when you meant Sage.
inquisition sounds way worse than mountebank to me.
it is, and so are 204 of the official cards.
inquisition sounds way worse than mountebank to me.
it is, and so are 204 of the official cards.
But those 204 official cards aren't almost exactly like Mountebank while costing the same and weaker. Though of course there's edge cases, this comes darn close to "strictly worse" than Mountebank.