Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

476

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 07, 2021, 03:57:42 am »

Ive been very tired this week, but i hope this card is at least somewhat interesting

An overpay-golem variant.

I feel like this allows you to gain too many Will-o-Wisps too easily; you can very quickly win the split there. Maybe it would be better to do "you may overpay for this to gain a Spirit costing less than the amount you overpaid".

Also, I suggest discarding the revealed cards before any other cards are played, to prevent confusion.

Thanks for the suggestion. how is this?

I would take out the "and isn't a Magician" part.  It would only be applicable if there are cost-reducers available; if you think Magician would be overpowered in those situations, then maybe the better way to nerf the card would be to have it reveal fewer than 5 cards from the top of your deck.

It's not just an issue of power level, but also tracking. If Magician plays Magician then you have multiple sets of set-aside cards. A simple fix is to replace "that cost or less" with "costing less than this."

How is this? i just added the text silverspawn suggested

Thanks for the feedback everyone. i chose to reduce the cost 1 by one, and make it look at top 3 cards like someone suggested. Also, some minor formatting fixes.


THinking about adding "when you gain this, gain a will o wisp" but thats too strong

477

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 05, 2021, 03:48:54 pm »

Ive been very tired this week, but i hope this card is at least somewhat interesting

An overpay-golem variant.

I feel like this allows you to gain too many Will-o-Wisps too easily; you can very quickly win the split there. Maybe it would be better to do "you may overpay for this to gain a Spirit costing less than the amount you overpaid".

Also, I suggest discarding the revealed cards before any other cards are played, to prevent confusion.

Thanks for the suggestion. how is this?

I would take out the "and isn't a Magician" part.  It would only be applicable if there are cost-reducers available; if you think Magician would be overpowered in those situations, then maybe the better way to nerf the card would be to have it reveal fewer than 5 cards from the top of your deck.

It's not just an issue of power level, but also tracking. If Magician plays Magician then you have multiple sets of set-aside cards. A simple fix is to replace "that cost or less" with "costing less than this."

How is this? i just added the text silverspawn suggested

478

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 05, 2021, 02:05:55 pm »

Ive been very tired this week, but i hope this card is at least somewhat interesting

An overpay-golem variant.

I feel like this allows you to gain too many Will-o-Wisps too easily; you can very quickly win the split there. Maybe it would be better to do "you may overpay for this to gain a Spirit costing less than the amount you overpaid".

Also, I suggest discarding the revealed cards before any other cards are played, to prevent confusion.

Thanks for the suggestion. how is this?

Or this?

479

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 05, 2021, 07:20:57 am »

Ive been very tired this week, but i hope this card is at least somewhat interesting



An overpay-golem variant.

480

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 31, 2020, 12:18:01 pm »

Contest #100: Fun with Non-Supply Cards

Create a card-shaped thing that interacts with an existing (i.e., official) non-Supply card. It can be any type of card-shaped thing and can interact in any way whatsoever, big or small, with any existing non-Supply card (or more than one). Please name or show the existing non-Supply card and describe the interaction. Feel free to wander – please do not focus too much on the contest criteria.

As long as there is any interaction whatsoever, very little attention will be paid in the judging to the quality or degree of the of interaction – I prefer flexible creativity to adherence to restrictions. While I believe that personal preference is always a substantial factor in judging these contests, I will try to focus on balance, playability and, most of all, fun. Also, just a hint, but certainly not necessary to win, I tend to enjoy cards that honor an overall theme or story.

Good luck to everyone!  Have a happy and safe 2021!

(I almost went with a 2020-themed contest, but didn’t really want to look at 100 cards featuring Ruins, Rats and Curses.)

Stupid question, but when you say non supple card, are you specificly talking about card that you can play with "(this is not in the supply)"?

481

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 31, 2020, 11:37:59 am »

Neat theme!

heres the wiki for non supply cards in dominion for anyone that wants to look at it

http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Category:Non-Supply_cards

482

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 30, 2020, 01:01:59 pm »

Contest suggestion: either do the first challenge again (treasure reaction) or do a card based on a real historical figure

483

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 28, 2020, 02:46:11 am »

Yay, that's satisfying! The Latin for eagle is Aquila~.
Thanks anordinaryman, that was an interesting contest!

We're almost at contest 100, and we're at a somewhat significant time of year, so I propose something big (and challenging to judge):

Contest #99: Free For All
Just one restriction: no new mechanics. Go nuts; put together the best design you can think of! Sift through all the options and select something you know works. I will attempt to keep an open mind towards different audiences, and I anticipate a very big shortlist of potential runners-up. To choose a winner I guess may involve some personal preference if things are really close.

No bonus points for holiday theme by the way, but a narrow margin may be decided by relevance of theme to the mechanics. I will heavily favour mechanical balance and interest however.

whens the deadline? its been a week,  i thought it was a weekly contest?

484

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 27, 2020, 03:06:40 am »

My submission: An artist Themed traveller line

Updated and changed some of them, heres the newest versions.

"Dissatisfied Worker
+1 Action +1 Card
Turn your Journey token over (it starts face up). If it's face up, all players gain a silver.
-
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for Beginning Artist."


Beginning artist
$2
Turn your Journey token over.
When you Turn your Journey token this turn, +1 buy, +1$
-
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for Starving artist.
(This card is not in the Supply.)


Starving artist
+1 Action
Trash up to 3 cards from your hand, and Gain a card with cost exactly equal to the total cost in $ of the trashed cards.
Turn over your Journey token. If it is face down, Gain two Curses (or if you can't, two Curses from the trash
-
When you discard this from play, you may exchange this for Patronaged artist.
(This is not in the supply).


+2 action, +2 cards
Turn over your Journey token.
-
When you discard this from play, if your Journey Token is face up, you may exchange it for Renaissance man.
(This card is not in the supply.)


Renaissance man
Turn over your Journey token. Then if it's face up, you may gain 2 cards costing up to $6 unto your deck.
-
(This card is not in the supply.)

485

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 26, 2020, 03:45:13 pm »

My submission: An artist Themed traveller line

486

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 22, 2020, 07:22:54 am »

Cascade (Action, $5)

You may play an Action card costing less than this from your hand three times.

A KC variant that only works for cheaper cards.

i like the idea. i made cardimage for it (not sure i understand what cascade means in this instance tho)

(heres the card image generator link for it https://shardofhonor.github.io/dominion-card-generator/?title=Cascade&description=You%20may%20play%20an%20Action%20card%20costing%20less%20than%20this%20from%20your%20hand%20three%20times.&type=action&credit=art%3A%20marcus%20stone%2C%201891&creator=v1.0%20mandioca15&price=5%24&preview=&type2=&color2split=1&boldkeys=&picture-x=0&picture-y=0&picture-zoom=1&picture=%5Blocal%20image%5D&expansion=&custom-icon=&color0=0&color1=0&size=0

487

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 20, 2020, 01:07:47 pm »

ive decided upon using this (sorry for any confusion)
"way of the hamster
+1 coffer"

btw, this is a Way for Guilds. i decided to keep it uber simple

488

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 20, 2020, 07:22:52 am »

My submission:



This is, ofc, for Nocturne.

i would make it cheaper

489

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 19, 2020, 02:35:50 pm »

ive decided upon using this (sorry for any confusion)
"way of the hamster
+1 coffer"

490

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 16, 2020, 04:26:12 pm »

A simple one for the base set:

Dome (Landmark)

When scoring, -1VP per Copper you have.

This nudges newer players towards the idea that trashing weak cards is a good thing to do.

liked your idea enough that i made a card of it in the card image generator

491

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 16, 2020, 02:54:44 pm »

I'm replacing my previous submission with a Landmark for Alchemy.

Alchemy provides some of the most powerful engine parts in Dominion, but novice players often don't like the expansion due to the awkwardness of Potions.  This provides some additional incentive to add Potions to your deck.  It would be good to playtest a few variations (e.g. 9VP per 3 Potions you have), but this is the version I am submitting:

that seems like to much vp for potions to me. 2 potions is 8 money, , and 8 money for 5 vp is a good deal. i fear that potions will keep being picked up too much untill endgame and risk dragging the game out.

also, there are plenty of games where 1 potion is the optimal number, so having it be per 2 potions might give novice players the wrong idea and maybe burn them on potions. i think i like just giving "2vp" per potion more . i am by no means an expert designer tho

492

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 14, 2020, 10:18:02 am »

For intrigue

at first glance i didnt like it, but now when i think about it, i actually like it. it created an incentive to get way more estates, and makes provines less important, since estates are 150% more points with empire, but provinces are just 25% more points with empire. its really simple, but it changes the game.

Im not sure i like the name though for it. Maybe "realm" or "commonwealth" or "confederation"?

also, the intrugue expansion symbol is missing.

---
heres the math i did on how much more points you get from this being a landmark
3 estates obviously 9 points here
8 estates goes from 8 to 24 points    (an extra 16 points, 150% increase)
8 duchies goes from 24 to 40 VP       (66% increase)
8 provinces goes from 48 VP to 64 Vp (33% increase)
.
it also makes mills and other action-victory cards much more valuable. good job

493

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 13, 2020, 04:15:46 pm »

Way of the Vermin
Way
Trash this.
If there wasn't a copy of this in the Trash, gain a Spoils.
Each other player gains a Ruins.

A Way for Dark Ages. It is a self trashing conditional Spoils gainer that hands out Ruins, like a one-shot Marauder. I am not sure how good of an idea this is as it definitely can snow-ball, but seeing as it is a counter to itself it won't devolve into a slog straight away. Villages will be highly sought after as using the Way will eat up Actions. I think of this as more of a tactical Way as you want to be the first to trash a particular card to get the Spoils reward, but handing a Ruins to other players means they will get the Spoils from that card and send Ruins back your way. I would want to play test it to see if it is actually fun, but I like the idea. Feedback is more than welcome!

I love Ways and I think this is a nice idea.  It could allow for some interesting tactical decisions.  However, I think the part I would personally enjoy less is the extra layer of randomness that arises from it.  If you're unlucky, when someone plays this Way, you could gain a Ruins that is already in the trash whereas someone else could gain one that isn't.  Or you could be lucky and be the first to draw a Ruins that isn't in the trash.  The benefit isn't huge, but if it happens often enough in a game, that could have a significant impact on the outcome.

I agree completely, and this randomness has been a consistent issue when I have used Ruins in card designs. I really like Ruins, but I do understand their randomness is unwanted by some players. I am gonna stick with this design for now, but the critique that it has randomness is valid and appreciated. I welcome additional criticisms and appreciate the responses!

To mitigate the randomness, maybe add "if there is a copy of this in the trash, +1 action" so its a non terminal self trasher.

494

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 13, 2020, 03:49:22 pm »

Consulate: a project for empires. It was originally just provinces, but I think adding colonies, farmland, and fairgrounds makes it a bit more interesting.

Out of curiosity, how did you determine the cost for Consulate? 

I was thinking about a two-player Province game, where one player buys Consulate and the other doesn't.  Assuming they buy Provinces only and no Duchies, the player who bought Consulate wins if they have an equal number of Provinces.  But in scenarios where they have even one less Province than the player that didn't buy Consulate, the extra points gained with Consulate won't be sufficient to make up the difference.

I feel like i would like this more in Adventures, and have the cost be much lower (say, 3€) and instead give you a range of negative penalties via Tokens like the minus card token and the -coin token. it would have to be renamed tho

495

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 13, 2020, 03:47:01 pm »

A Way for Seaside. A card jumps like a Doplhin out of your deck and goes to your next hand.

It interacts with Seaside in many ways: thematically, affecting next turn, turning the played actions into Durations and caring about the top of your deck. This last feature interacs with Pearl Diver, Lookout, Navigator and Ghost Ship. It also could help you to match Treasure Maps or a Province with Explorer.

The effect next turn is similar to Caravan but a bit weaker. With Caravan you can draw next turn a card played this turn.

Dang i really like this. feels way better than my seaside way idea, lol. Its quasi-thinner if you plan well too, i love quasi-thinning.

496

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 13, 2020, 03:44:48 pm »

The connection to Cornucopia isn't super strong, but it's engine-friendly, which is arguably a subtheme.

Note that this doesn't give you your buy back, so even though it costs 0$, it's not really free.

I kinda like this. maybe this change would improve its connection. the +1 per action card feels a bit stiff too me. "once per game: +1 action, +1card and +1€ per card with a different name you have in play. return to your action phase."

497

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 13, 2020, 03:41:33 pm »

A card im considering submiting for this contest, im probably submiting another one. this one is obviously "nocturne" themed

Shouldn't it be an action card from their hand? (Or an "Action, treasure, or night" card). Playing a victory card doesn't work.

oops, thats right. i updated it


also, just a whole bunch of Ways for every expansion i could think of, its fun to make up ways. Ill decide what to submit later








obviously im not submitting all of these, but i wanted to share regardless. couldnt come up with a good one for empires and alchemy tho. it was pretty fun finding good art online for these.

498

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 13, 2020, 08:31:28 am »

A card im considering submiting for this contest, im probably submiting another one. this one is obviously "nocturne" themed

499

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 13, 2020, 04:24:05 am »

To make sure I understand, the task is to design a card that (a) belongs to a particular expansion, and (b) is on-theme but off-mechanic for that expansion? So a sifting duration card for hinterlands, or a variety-encouraging way for Cornucopia?

If I understand correctly, it is...

- An Event, Landmark, State, Project, Artifact, or Way for one of the pre-Advantures expansions
- A Landmark, State, Project, Artifact, or Way for Adventures
- A State, Project, Artifact, or Way for Empires
- An Event, Landmark, Project, Artifact (*), or Way for Nocturne
- An Event, Landmark, State (*), or Way for Renaissance
- A Landmark, State, Project or Artifact for Menagerie

(*) States and Artifacts are functionally similar, so not sure how that counts for Nocturne or Renaissance.

Yes! My apologies for not making it clear. Thank you grrgrrgrr for the clarification. Both asterisk'ed cases are allowed. You can do States and Artifacts for Renaisance/Nocturne. If you do, make sure that it really makes sense that the card be a state and not and artifact and vice versa.

The only true difference is the name of card

That's not the only true difference. Look at the design space of the two: There can be multiple copies of a state for each player. States can be double-sided. States can be given to other players. None of those are true for artifacts. Because of lost in the woods, it means that states can do anything an artifact can do (not the other way around), but it makes sense to me that a single-sided state where there is only one copy per player is probably actually an artifact. If you follow that reasoning, it also looks like there's the common breakdown that artifacts are good for you and states are bad for you.

You can implement many sidewise cards as a normal-ways duration card that stays in play. But you have to think about whether it's smoother to use the side-ways card. Often it is. Likewise, if you have a "state" that is one per player and it is positive to have it, it probably makes more sense to make it an artifact. And if you have an "artifact" that breaks convention by having one copy per player, well, you should probably make it a "state." It's the smoothest thing to do.

maybe a stupid question, but are we supposed to design an event or card for any artifacts or states we make? ie, "here the way to get the artifact/state"

500

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 12, 2020, 04:57:28 pm »

what are the core design principles that Donald has for dominions? as much as i love Secret history of dominion, i would prefer to not reread all of them

also, is there any list of the subthemes for every expansion?