Dominion Strategy Forum
Dominion => Variants and Fan Cards => Topic started by: Accatitippi on October 25, 2015, 10:16:33 am
-
Here I am again, with yet another idea that gives you a use out of Curses. I know the usual counterargument "Curses are supposed to be bad", and I see the point, but doing cool stuff with curses is nice and you get to try to avoid obsoleting cursers which is a good challenge. :) And having counters to the most powerful kind of attack is not bad either.
Fairy Village - Action - 5c
+3 Cards
Discard a Curse or Gain a Curse.
If you did, +2 Actions.
Now three cards may seem a lot, but your net gain in cards is actually +1 or +2 and gain a Curse, so it's in the same league as activated City with regard to sheer amount of cards. It offers some extra sifting which only works with Curses.
What do you think? Is it balanced? Interesting? Should it cost 4?
-
Well I don't think it could cost 4 with this wording because it would be strictly better than Smithy. You can always choose to discard a curse when you don't have one in hand.
If it turns out to be too strong, you can do the curse discarding or gaining before the +3 cards.
-
Well I don't think it could cost 4 with this wording because it would be strictly better than Smithy. You can always choose to discard a curse when you don't have one in hand.
If it turns out to be too strong, you can do the curse discarding or gaining before the +3 cards.
My intention is that you have to gain a curse if you don't discard one.
I thought this wording would work, in case it doesn't it could become:
+3 Cards
Discard a Curse. If you didn't, Gain a Curse.
If you did either thing, +2 Actions.
...which I don't really like.
I seem to remember some official cards using the same wording "do A or B" where you can't choose a void option if the other is valid. I'll have to check.
-
I seem to remember some official cards using the same wording "do A or B" where you can't choose a void option if the other is valid. I'll have to check.
That wording would be "Discard a Curse (or gain a Curse)". It doesn't let you gain a Curse if you can discard a Curse, though.
-
How about this wording:
Fairy Village:
+3 Cards
You may discard a Curse from your hand, if you didn't, gain a Curse.
If you discarded a Curse or gained one, +2 Actions.
Cost: $5
Action
The "if you discarded a Curse or gained one" makes sure that if you can't do either, you won't get the +2 Actions.
-
You may discard or gain a Curse. If you didn't…
-
You may discard or gain a Curse. If you didn't…
...if you didn't, don't +2 actions.
:P
(I think you want "if you did either, +2 actions")
-
You may discard or gain a Curse. If you didn't…
...if you didn't, don't +2 actions.
:P
(I think you want "if you did either, +2 actions")
Yes, correct. Although, "If you did" should be sufficient. You don't need the "either".
-
You may discard or gain a Curse. If you didn't…
But this is not what it's intended to do, since the gaining is meant to be mandatory.
I never expected this effect would be so hard to find a wording for.
-
You may discard or gain a Curse. If you didn't…
But this is not what it's intended to do, since the gaining is meant to be mandatory.
Well it sure makes the card a lot cleaner.
-
You may discard or gain a Curse. If you didn't…
But this is not what it's intended to do, since the gaining is meant to be mandatory.
Well it sure makes the card a lot cleaner.
Yup, but also somewhat less interesting and unique (albeit more powerful). It becomes much more like Smithy, and in presence of villages there's no reason not to use it exactly like one.
-
You may discard a Curse. If you didn't, gain a Curse. If the top card of your discard pile is a Curse, +2 Actions.
It falls in the common pitfall #18 of the fan card creation guide, but I don't think it applies here since the part which relies on the discard pile is so simple (no analysis paralysis, just leave a Curse on top in every cleanup).
-
You may discard a Curse. If you didn't, gain a Curse. If the top card of your discard pile is a Curse, +2 Actions.
It falls in the common pitfall #18 of the fan card creation guide, but I don't think it applies here since the part which relies on the discard pile is so simple (no analysis paralysis, just leave a Curse on top in every cleanup).
Or maybe:
You may discard a Curse. If you didn't, gain a Curse.
If you did either of those things, +2 Actions.
Yet I really seem to remember a case where Donald said that "do A or B" is not dodgeable since it counts as "one command", which you have to fulfill at the best of your possibilities. I might be confusing this with another game and another designer though.
-
Gain a curse unless you discard a curse. If you gained or discarded a curse, +2 actions.
-
If the idea is that you are always going to either discard or gain a Curse, then why are the +2 Actions contingent on doing so? There are three things you seem to want:
• The discard/gain is mandatory.
• The card sucks once the Curses in the Supply run out.
• The wording isn't awful.
Pick two, man. You can't have all three.
-
Am I missing something, or does this do what you want?
+3 Cards
+2 Actions
You may discard a Curse. If you didn't, gain a Curse.
This card is better than the original once Curses run out, since you will still get +2 actions even if you have no Curses to discard. But at that point, does it matter? Your deck may be full of Curses then anyway. If you find it too strong, you can nerf it by moving the vanilla bonuses to the bottom, which will force you to gain Curses more often.
In any case, I'm personally not a fan of the "strong card that curses the user on play" concept.
-
Am I missing something, or does this do what you want?
+3 Cards
+2 Actions
You may discard a Curse. If you didn't, gain a Curse.
This card is better than the original once Curses run out, since you will still get +2 actions even if you have no Curses to discard. But at that point, does it matter? Your deck may be full of Curses then anyway. If you find it too strong, you can nerf it by moving the vanilla bonuses to the bottom, which will force you to gain Curses more often.
In any case, I'm personally not a fan of the "strong card that curses the user on play" concept.
I assume he was specifically trying to make it so that you only get the +2 actions if you gained or discarded a Curse. But I agree with you, it only matters once the Curse pile is empty, so I don't think it makes it much stronger to remove that condition. I believe Donald said that he wishes he hadn't put the same condition on Soothsayer.
-
Am I missing something, or does this do what you want?
+3 Cards
+2 Actions
You may discard a Curse. If you didn't, gain a Curse.
This card is better than the original once Curses run out, since you will still get +2 actions even if you have no Curses to discard. But at that point, does it matter? Your deck may be full of Curses then anyway. If you find it too strong, you can nerf it by moving the vanilla bonuses to the bottom, which will force you to gain Curses more often.
In any case, I'm personally not a fan of the "strong card that curses the user on play" concept.
Well, your version is just a "strong card that curses the user on play".
The purpose of mine was letting you build a deck which uses curses as an Engine component, and which ideally is built and plays differently enough than village smithy. I just failed, it seems.
Replying to LF:
-the mandatory curse gain to have it play differently than Smithy. This is probably the easiest part to get rid of while respecting the basic idea.
-the card sucking once the Curses run out, since otherwise the whole point of "lets build a deck that uses Curses as Villages" is lost, as you don't really need the curses in there.
If I'll print this (and it's unlikely as I'm on exchange right now, without printer nor gaming group) I think I'd try "You may discard a curse or gain a curse. If you did..." It's flexible, more broad and probably lets you build some fun decks around it.
It might also be badly OP.
-
Am I missing something, or does this do what you want?
+3 Cards
+2 Actions
You may discard a Curse. If you didn't, gain a Curse.
This card is better than the original once Curses run out, since you will still get +2 actions even if you have no Curses to discard. But at that point, does it matter? Your deck may be full of Curses then anyway. If you find it too strong, you can nerf it by moving the vanilla bonuses to the bottom, which will force you to gain Curses more often.
In any case, I'm personally not a fan of the "strong card that curses the user on play" concept.
Well, your version is just a "strong card that curses the user on play".
The purpose of mine was letting you build a deck which uses curses as an Engine component, and which ideally is built and plays differently enough than village smithy. I just failed, it seems.
Unless/until Curses run out, yours is the exact same thing... Meaning yours is also just a strong card that curses the user on play...
-
Am I missing something, or does this do what you want?
+3 Cards
+2 Actions
You may discard a Curse. If you didn't, gain a Curse.
This card is better than the original once Curses run out, since you will still get +2 actions even if you have no Curses to discard. But at that point, does it matter? Your deck may be full of Curses then anyway. If you find it too strong, you can nerf it by moving the vanilla bonuses to the bottom, which will force you to gain Curses more often.
In any case, I'm personally not a fan of the "strong card that curses the user on play" concept.
Well, your version is just a "strong card that curses the user on play".
The purpose of mine was letting you build a deck which uses curses as an Engine component, and which ideally is built and plays differently enough than village smithy. I just failed, it seems.
Unless Curses run out, yours is the exact same thing... Meaning yours is also it's a strong card that curses the user on play...
Well, that's what I get for posting card ideas before thinking.
Move along folks, nothing to see here. :)
(I'll find a way to make it work... sometime)
-
If that's not what you want your card to be, don't have a mandatory Curse gain.
+3 Cards.
You may discard a Curse. If you do, +2 Actions.
If you want to make it easier to gain Curses, add on +1 Buy. That sounds OK at $5 (compare with Margrave).
-
If that's not what you want your card to be, don't have a mandatory Curse gain.
+3 Cards.
You may discard a Curse. If you do, +2 Actions.
If you want to make it easier to gain Curses, add on +1 Buy. That sounds OK at $5 (compare with Margrave).
Or....
+3 Cards.
You may discard a Curse. If you do, +2 Actions. If you don't, gain a Curse.
I guess this would usually be weaker; but in some weird ways it could be stronger?
-
Yeah, that probably works. Even so, I'm still not a fan of cards that curse the user on play.
The only advantage that version has over +Buy is that you can draw the Curse you gained on the same turn. I think +Buy will be better almost every time.
-
Accatitippi, I think there are lots of good ways to try the card, so don't be discouraged. I just suggest trying one of the simpler versions even if it doesn't do exactly what you originally envisioned.
-
Accatitippi, I think there are lots of good ways to try the card, so don't be discouraged. I just suggest trying one of the simpler versions even if it doesn't do exactly what you originally envisioned.
Why, thank you for the cheer-up. :)
I think I'll try "+3 Cards, you may discard a Curse to get +2 Actions", when I get a chance.
EDIT: Oh, and thanks everybody for the feedback! ^^