Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

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.

Messages - somekindoftony

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 28, 2020, 06:54:02 pm »
Rai Stone's not my favourite submission, but I'd hoped it would at least get judged  :P

Also there's no comment about Rice Bag by majiponi.

Oh crap bum.
So sorry. I tried to be super careful not to miss anyone or judge an earlier entry.  Feel bad.

2
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 28, 2020, 10:42:12 am »
mandioca15

Credit Note (Treasure, $5)

+$2
+1 Buy
---
While this is in play, when you buy a card, +1 Credit.

Credit tokens are essentially like coffers. During your turn, you may return N credit tokens to the supply, to gain a card from the supply costing exactly $N. You can do this whenever you are not resolving a played card. The longer you let your Credits build up,the bigger the potential reward - but don't wait too long! For example, suppose you have built up 6 Credit tokens. You could return 4 to the supply to gain a Smithy, or return 6 to gain a Gold. There's also the question of when exactly during your turn you should gain the card - maybe you can time it to get the card you really want at exactly the right time.

Note that you can't return 0 Credit tokens to the supply to gain a card, so you can't use that to empty the Coppers pile (or things like Wayfarer or Destrier, if they cost 0).

Gaining a card via Credits does not count as a buy.


Might be too strong when compared to the similar Merchant Guild (which takes an action and only generates $1). Credits are both more flexible than coffers because they gain cards without using buys and less because they canít be combined with coffers or standard coin or used in any way other than to gain cards. On balance Iíd say they are weaker than coffers so the card as a whole is probably fairly costed.
I am left wondering though if there just isnít too much complexity for the gain here. Also thematically I was hoping things like Credit Notes would be avoided
.


Fragasnap

Kitsune
Types: Action, Doom
Cost: $3
+1 Card, +1 Action. You may discard the top Hex. If you do, choose one: Trash this and a card from your hand; or +1 Buy and +$2 and receive that Hex.

Aburaage
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
This is worth $1 for each type among the cards you have in play (Action, Attack, etc.).

I really like this. Thematically itís novel. Mechanically itís interesting. Is it balanced? Thatís tricky. Kitsune might be a bit strong but my focus has to be on Aburaage for this competition.  Here I think itís fair. It could be worth $1 or it could be worth more than $3. Itís kingdom dependant and thatís not a bad thing. So balance, flavour and interesting mechanics, well done. I could see this spawning Aburaage decks that would be fun to play and play against.


Mr. Hitech

Divine Favor (Treasure, cost $6+)
$2
-
When you buy this, gain a Wish from its pile. You may also overpay $1 for this, to put the gained Wish on top of your deck.

Nice and simple while still giving me choice. The flavour makes sense and while I was hoping for more concrete objects like fish heads, Divine Favor works conceptually too. Balance is a possible problem because you are basically paying 6 for a silver and a card costing 6 (or less) with the bonus of avoiding things like embargoes and tax on that second card and with the benefit of having a big chunky card in Divine Favour you can trash for gain. Also wishes grant incredible flexibility when used.
So would you ever buy that 6 cost card normally? Yes, if you really didnít want the bonus ďsilverĒ clogging up an engine or it was a duchy you wanted and the game might end before you draw your wish or other rare scenarios.
All in all a solid effort but I have reservations about whether it is a must buy over gold in too many scenarios.


mad4math


Cow
$5 - Treasure
Worth $2
When you discard this from play during Clean-up, if you haven't bought any Victory cards this turn, you may put this on top of the deck.

This reminds me of Stash. A consistent silver is not bad but if I hit 5 I like the gooey feeling of gaining something generally better. I know its design laziness to do so but I think sticking a +Buy on this would make it more viable. Or if Port could give you two villages for 4 maybe this card could give you two for one as well. I like the theme.


Xtra

Meat/Salt

Meat Cost:$3 Treasure
When you play this, once a turn; remove a Spoilage token if you have any or take 4 of them if you donít. This is worth $1 per Spoilage token you have.

Salt Cost: $2 Treasure
$2
When you play this you cannot remove your spoilage tokens this turn. You can still take them.

This is a fun pair of cards. I just donít like how you gain Spoilage tokens out of thin air just because you have none though. It has to happen for the card to be useful but thematicallyÖ well thematically itís no worse than a whole bunch of dominion cards I guessÖ but it grates on me.
I feel like a great idea is here and needs further refinement.  Perhaps a better plan would be have the Meat cost 4 minus the number of spoilage tokens you have (and you start with none) and then playing a meat gains you one and playing a salt removes one.
The core of the idea Ė of a treasure that ebbs and flows in value - is really cool. It reminds me a little of all those Gathering cards which are fun to play with.


Something_Smart

SHAMAN Cost 5 Action
+2 Cards, +1 Action, Discard a card.
-
At the start of clean up , if this is in play and there are no cards you have more than one copy of in play , trash this and gain a Mystic Stone

MYSTIC STONE
Cost  5* Treasure - Victory
$2 Set aside a card from your hand face-down on your Mystic Stone mat
_
Worth 1VP per 2 differently named cards on your Mystic Stone Mat.


My real doubts about this is whether it is overpriced. Its not too hard to get a Mystic stone as I can forgo two turns (one buying the Shaman and one playing the Shaman and only one treasure) to pick the Mystic Stone up. For a good enough prize forgoing two turns is ok. Its about what an Overlord costs early game.
But the Mystic stone is not going to be worth it if all I remove are estates, coppers and curses and the odd silver. And if I remove other better cards I will be hurting myself. I also do wish you had changed it to Exile. I didnít feel I should say anything during the competition but it would clear up the confusion about whether cards on the Mystic stone count towards victory at the end (as curses or provinces for example). I get from your comments they do. Also it would give me other ways to put cards towards its value without having to draw them with my Mystic Stone first.
Nice to see a bit of druidic flavour too.



D782802859
Cowrie Cost
$2 Put this on your Tavern mat.
____
At the start of your buy phase you may call this for +2 cards then you may put a card from your hand on top of your deck.

I really like this. Its novel and it retaught me a word I had forgotten. Also I think it really rises to the challenge of the treasure that costs 4 and makes $2. (which is only slightly less difficult than the challenge of designing a new treasure that costs 3 and makes $2). You need to make something that isnít a silver but is remarkably close to silver because in dominion the difference between a 3 card and 4 card is minimal. Did you do it? Or did you fly too close to the sun, young Icarus?
I think you did it. I donít want a Cowrie more than I want a silver in every buy that I have 4. If I am drawing my deck anyway I would rather have a silver.  I do want a Cowrie slightly more Ė enough to land it nicely in 4? I think so.
To put it succintly an action less +2 cards is probably a $5 cost once you factor in that it happens in your buy phase on a turn you didnít draw it and the whole reshuffle thing. And an actionless $2 is a silver at $3. So given this can alternate between the two its just right at 4.


Carline

TROPICAL FRUITS ē Cost:4 ē Treasure
$1
Choose one:
+1 Coffers; or
+1 Villager.

FRUIT MIX ē Cost: 6 ē Treasure
When you play this, it's worth $1 per different named treasure you have in play (including this).
If it's worth at least $4:
+2 Buys.
 
Itís a split pile with 5 Tropical Fruits over 5 Fruit Mix.

Two card submission (both treasures) is a risky strategy because one could drag the other down. I donít think thatís the case here as both are good and despite all the discussion both are well balanced in my book.
Something about Tropical Fruits niggles at me though. Perhaps it is just that I really like the way it can gain a villager which is so novel for a treasure and I feel like that novelty is almost let down by being able to gain a coffer instead.
Overall though I like both of these cards and the synergy between them is great too. I think you found the right price point for Fruit Mix.


mail-mi
Livestock Cost 5 Treasure
+2 Cards
You may play an Action from your hand.

What a fun challenge youíve given me to evaluate this card. You could draw two actions or an action that simply gives you more actions you canít use (because its now your buy phase) so there is a chance it will be a dud but mostly its going to be a very effective way to fix a kingdom with a lack of + actions or even just draw past junk. Iím leaning towards considering this too strong but then because its strength is as an enabler of other cards it might not be such a problem that itís too strong. After all this card alone isnít going to win you anything and on a board with Witch if I start 5-2 I will probably still want to get a Witch before a Livestock.
I want to applaud its boldness but I also find myself worried. I think the decent bonus of playing an action its just too good for the cost especially with cards that can set up your deck.



[TP] Inferno

Trash Heap
$5
Treasure
$2
Gain a Scrap Metal.
-------
While this is in play, cards cost $1 less, but not less than $0.

Scrap Metal
$0*
Action
+1 Card
+1 Buy
Return this to its pile.
(This is not in the Supply.)

You know I would have found this so much easier to judge if you had made Trash Heap cost 6 and Scrap Metal was a straight up cantrip with a +Action as well. As it is I donít know if I want a Scrap metal. Maybe I still do, especially given its synergy with Trash heap but aside from big money decks I probably donít want to spend an action in this way.
Ah but thatís good isnít it because Trash Heap only costs 5 so maybe Scrap metal is actually a drawback to stop players from going all mass Market, Forager, Trash heap for the win. Is it a drawback though? Is it a big enough one?
So my real question is, why do you hate me?
Seriously Iím going to give this a double thumbs up because if I have to think this hard while judging then Iíll have to do the same in a game which is fun.
Honestly very well balanced.



Swan - Treasure, $0* cost.
$2
When you next buy a non-Victory card this turn, exchange this for a copy of the bought card.
(This is not in the Supply.)

And 2 gainers:

Swannery - Project, $5 cost.
When you shuffle to make a new deck, first gain a Swan.


Swanherd - Action, $5 cost.
Gain a Swan. You may trash a card from your hand, then +1 Card per card you've trashed this turn.

I really like the Swan mechanic and love the theme. It is necessary to consider both Swannery and Swanherd in order to properly evaluate Swan though and that isnít easy. A Swan is at my best quess worth between $4 and $5 if I bought it outright from the supply. But that guess is based on a lot of assumptions. I can envisage times when a swan is played and nets you nothing more than a second village for your trouble. Or is no more than a silver that turn.
With that in mind I turn to the gainers . If you dont have access to it before your first shuffle Swannery wonít always be worth investing in later but I think thatís alright for projects. If you can thin your deck it becomes much better. The problem is that it probably gives people with a 5-2 start too much of an advantage Ė even if all their first swan gains them is a village. Because Swans donít require actions they can even be drawn into by smithys which also increases your number of shuffles. If only there was an elegant way of preventing its super early purchase. Maybe when you buy the project you also gain an estate?
Swanherd on the other hand almost feels overpriced but probably only because it reminds me of Priest. Itís probably good at 5.
Definitely a great effort.


spineflu

Bee ē $0 ē Treasure
Choose one:
Cards cost $1 less this turn;
or +1 Buy.
-
Setup: Remove the top 3 cards of the Coppers Supply pile per player; replace them with as many Bees.

When a card tells you to gain a Copper, gain a Bee instead if it is available in the Supply.

Given that Bee is being used as slang for a coin I am not sure this stays inside the challenges parameters but I like the card enough to consider it as if they were actual bees (which are delicacies in some cultures).
I like the way you could try and buy up all the bees for a bee strategy and I like how this leaves you with a choice about how to play each one. Ultimately though I donít see bees being bought unless there are other +buys on the board, not because they are too weak for their cost but because you generally donít want more 0 cost cards at all. Its therefore good you gave players other ways to gain them (with Count comes to mind).
Iím honestly torn about this. On one hand a great little game changer but often I fear it will lay there untouched. A worthy contender that I would slip into the right kingdoms.



alionme

Seeds Cost $4 Treasure

Trash this. If you did, gain an Action card costing differently from any card you have in play. You may discard a Treasure card from your hand, to put the gained card on top of your deck.


Thereís a lot to like here. The mechanic fits the theme elegantly but Iím concerned this is still too strong. It does have a nice fix though to prevent it being a regular investment through something like workshop gaining seeds to become whatever, as gradually it will be able to gain nothing at all. My concern is those high costing actions including ones with potion costs or debt which now become easy to gain but you could argue this card is no different from Lurker in that regard.   
Ultimately this idea is going to suffer this week from my very subjective dislike of Lurkerís work around high card costs.   


stechafle

$? Wool $?
Worth $4 if no other player has Wool in play. Otherwise worth $2.
At the start of your next turn, +2 Cards, and put a card from your hand onto your deck.
$5 Treasure Duration

Dominion can lack interactivity. I enjoy cards that bring more into the game by obliging me to watch what you buy and change what I buy accordingly. I guess thereís still the question whether I need to nerf your Wool with my own or whether that costs me as much as it costs you. Great questions to grapple with in a game. Nothing like hearing your opponent groan based on your purchase. The more I ponder this card the more I find it surprisingly well costed too. A lot of balancing going on.
The flavour connection is a little thin but I get it. Thereís scope here for a whole Settlers of Catan themed expansion.



Wool, Cowrie and Trash heap/Scrap Metal are my super close top three. And that's from a group of amazing cards.

Literally because I have to pick one I choose Cowrie by the thinnest of hairs.







3
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 27, 2020, 10:16:29 pm »
2 entries left to judge....
Cowrie and Meat/Salt.

Gods, I will always provide text of my cards as well as images in the future I promise.

I may be a little late on this.

4
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 25, 2020, 10:11:16 pm »
A lot of interesting and diverse cards to choose from. I feel like I should be calling 24hour warning time about now. That means it's going to be about 48hours until I finish judging, given that I will need at least a day to ponder the cards.

5
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 20, 2020, 09:22:39 pm »
Am I allowed, contest wise, to make Scrap Metal an Action?

I wont have a problem with that. You're not making up a whole lot of potential kingdom cards to justify a new currency. You're kind of making a new token (a +Buy token would also be ok along the lines of a villager for buys) but just presenting said token on a card. The real subject for judging is the original treasure.

I am trying to stay out of giving subjective feedback but I will also try and answer any of these sorts of questions. Repeat them in big font if I miss them. :)

6
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 20, 2020, 03:20:24 am »
Just to be clear, this is the name and theme of a treasure card right? We don't have to come up with an alternate currency like potion, right?

Your card could produce a unique currency like Potion does but it doesn't have to. It can just as easily use the standard $ or refer to debt or coffers or variations on these. The only real limitation is that it is a Treasure.

A unique currency will be frustrating to judge if it depends on heaps of secondary cards you have to create in order for the treasure card to be evaluated. Please don't do this. DON'T create something like Donkeypoo and then a whole set of 14 cards which cost so much Donkeypoo. I will cry.

However if you came up with a card which generates a new kind of currency called an Elixir and then explained that Elixir was like coffers but for Potions that would be fine. Elixir is technically a new currency but it slots into existing cards. I wont cry. I can judge this. A new currency that works with current cards is ok. It's not required but it's ok.

Just not a whole new set of cards. Judging will be focused on the treasure card in relative isolation.

Hope that helps.

7
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 20, 2020, 12:53:06 am »
Wow. I'm flabbergasted. And thrilled. And mildly scared I'll stuff up the judging.
Thanks for the judging Something_Smart. I'm glad you could see the benefits of Mouse.

Now for this challenge, and I have a bunch of ideas but the one I am going to go with is.....

Contest 74: A lovely pair of coconuts.

Not everyone trades in coins. On Tropical Islands, or in Savage Lands or in times of hyperinflation and hunger when bread is more valuable than rubies, who knows what might be the measure of wealth instead; anything from exotic birds eggs to hot skewered rats. Your challenge is to come up with a Treasure which isn't standard currency but is instead a barterable good of some kind.
If it feels odd out of context feel free to explain how it comes in an expansion where a half-eaten doughnut makes perfect sense as a legitimate trading good (the Seagulls expansion perhaps?).

What is permitted....
A treasure card that is not in the supply and the cards if necessary that get to it.
A treasure card that is at the bottom of a split pile (and the card above it)
A treasure card that is also an action or victory card.
A treasure card with special set up rules (like it replaces starting coppers or whatnot).

But please no precious gems/metals, coins or paper money or generic terms like Spoils or Contraband. Instead unleash the oddly specific!

8
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 19, 2020, 08:35:49 am »
I guess a simple way of seeing how good Turtle is, is to compare it to a straightforward delayed play and that means imagining a different card for a bit.
Imagine the Turtle was an action - duration card that could only turtle one other action.
If you Turtle a Market you start next turn with +1 card, +1 Action, and +$1. You will have at the start of next turn 2 actions, an effect you wont get from playing the market normally. This allows you to play a smithy in that turn and then play subsequent actions.
I would almost always keep an action like market, or any cantrip, back to turtle it the next turn with this version.
Now all of this  feels like its just no net gain because this alternative Turtle takes an action itself to be played but the effect of smoothing out an engine involving villages, and draw card is still good enough to consider especially once your sweet engine has gotten greener or filled with curses.
So that's a 2 cost Turtle that can only play one card and takes an action itself.
Its arguably not worth buying. But give it a reaction effect and it would be fine.
Your turtle though can delay play multiple cards and doesn't take an action itself and goes straight to work as soon as I buy it. It actually might be pretty sweet as a 4 cost Event. I think four seems reasonable, but just my opinion.

9
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 17, 2020, 09:23:35 am »
Ha grep, nope totally unintended.
I'm actually going to make some significant changes to these two. Firstly I don't like the idea of split cards for this challenge. I want to make two pieces that fit together and can stand apart.
For the fitting together I need the benefit of the mouse (upgrading coppers to a 2 cost card) to be appreciated by the cat. If Cat trashes 0 cost cards the same as 2 cost cards that benefit isn't there. But if it trashes only 2 cost cards its benefit is too narrow. Hence I went with being able to trash up to 2 cost but only benefiting if the cost is above zero.
These are two separate normal sized piles (only ten mice) that might not turn up in a kingdom together. This makes the Mouse a tough choice in kingdoms without trashers or other +Actions. I am tempted to up the Mouse to +3 actions but I don't think its necessary. Mouse is a trasher that will never hit anything bad and compares favourably, in some lights, to Lookout. There is a risk you will be the only player to gain all 10 but thats part of the fun of timing when you pick one up. If there is no better source of +Actions your opponents will probably want some of the Mice before they run out.
The Cat is strong regardless. Even if you only convert 3 estates into +2 cards at different times its worth it. Mice make Cats awesome. But Cats are still worth picking.

 

I'm a little worried Cat is too strong.

10
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 16, 2020, 04:46:28 am »
Updated. I'm hoping unused actions carry over into the buy phase.

There are 15 Mice on top of 5 cats. in a split pile. Note thought that Cat also works really well with Squire if there is a pricey attack on the board and Mouse can get rid of curses so its not entirely awful. Cat is potentially better than Lab with the risk it will just fizz out and do nothing.


11
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 13, 2020, 09:11:11 pm »
Hey guys, Iím talking here about almost all cards posted. Iím just wanting to give feedback, the same way I want feedback from you about my entries. Please tell me if in some way Iím bothering you with this.

Not me. I like the feedback. I don't have a lot of time to give my own sorry.

12
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 12, 2020, 09:34:08 pm »
Spineflu, my brain is polluted by other card games. I'll switch it out for deck.

13
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 12, 2020, 07:13:34 pm »
   

14
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 10, 2020, 03:00:00 am »
This is potentially quite powerful. A 3 cost card that does more than an Overlord. However it is slowed down by the fact that you have to put the card it copies onto your Exile mat. Is that enough to weaken it? I hope so.


15
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 29, 2020, 08:06:28 pm »
Regarding my cards above...

The idea of a short Traveller line with a final card that is a one-shot, is a unique idea and the returning fits well into the Horse. But at the current state Liberated Herd is broken. The effect is just way too strong, especially as you get it so quick. And what is even worse is that the second player who gets to the point where he can play it will get little to nothing. This shapes the game in a very unfun way, as it involves a lot of luck to get to play it first.

 I would suggest to make it "gain x Horses", which removes both problems. Going with my gut, I would say something like 7 would appropiate.

I am fond of the idea of Gain all horses but I agree it seems too easy to get to, I am thinking I will add an extra step to the traveller line. Escaped Foal will stay the same, then there can be a Evasive Colt ("+2 cards, -2 cards, +1 action", so slightly weaker than a Horse) Wild Brumby will get better ("+2 cards, Trash 2 cards in your hand, +1 Action") and then Liberated herd. I think if you are behind in playing the chain then it would be wise to hold on to Wild Brumby for a turn (not exchange it) so that when the horse come back you can free them. This only makes sense to do if Wild Brumby is a good enough card and being a trasher when they might be rare would make that so.
What makes this interesting to time for me is that having a deck of horses is not game winning unless you have a good fat deck to draw. This line doesn't get you that so you need to spend turns getting it elsewhere, including multiples buys to pick up another escaped foal sometime.

16
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 28, 2020, 12:44:01 am »
   

I see your Gain X horses and I raise...

17
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 25, 2020, 10:07:23 am »


Hope I'm not too late.

Cost increased by 2 but other benefits added. It can't be a first turn buy now.

18
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 20, 2020, 11:02:24 am »
Is a treasure-duration impossible? UPGRADED VERSION ADDED BELOW but I might have missed the cut off. :(



I figure the cost reduction rewards early greening and compensates for being cursed or ruined a little by making all those junk cards still worth an effective $1.

19
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 12, 2020, 02:42:29 am »
Here is an upgraded version of my previous card. You can buy a treasure yourself if this card is in your hand for a free play of it in your next turn. There's a sort of tension in that Prospectors are like Peddlers most useful for building treasure-less decks but you need someone to buy treasures to benefit from the non-terminal version of Prospector.
I am leaning towards thinking that "buy" is a necessary hobbling rather than simply "gain" but gain would open up a lot of possibilities... so open to thinking about it.



Oh poo. It should say set this aside from your hand. I'll fix it soon.

20
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 09, 2020, 11:52:29 am »
Would this sort of thing work?


I already think its a bit weak and should be triggered by any player so that you can trigger it yourself but just wondering if its in the rules. Is a free play enough like a non-terminal play?

21
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: March 31, 2020, 09:25:13 pm »
OMG I just made this for fun last night. Proof I'm psychic? Sure I'll take it.



Now I hope this works like I want; When you play an Augur you can gain the Augur and trigger its on-gaining ability before drawing your cards so that you set up the draw.
This makes it a useful effect to trigger at the right time but you can end up with too many Augurs too quickly as well. Once the Augur pile is empty they are worse than moats.

22
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: March 27, 2020, 09:34:19 am »


You need two to get one.

I really like the idea here but I am not sure Titanic Slime is better than two Big Slimes. Maybe give Titanic Slime an attack? If it was +2 Cards, +2 Actions, Each other player gains a curse, it would truly be horrific.
I am also not sure if Big Slime isn't too strong a card to get of two small slimes but it might be given you have to pull off a Treasure Map like combo.

23
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: March 26, 2020, 09:30:42 pm »
They are all too good. Discord is a great trasher (sure, Order nerfs it) and while Order does not do anything for you, a double Militia is pretty nasty.

Open Double Peddler, be pretty certain to get a $5 after the first shuffle, get a discard attack and a trasher after the second shuffle. That's too straightforward.

Would you really pay more than $2 for Order if you were buying it straight out?
Discord is possibly worth getting one but when you play it you will be reducing your hand to two cards. Its even worse than chapel in many situations (trash 4 crap cards but then have to regain two of them). I'd rate it as worth $2.5 at absolute best.
A nonterminal trasher that trashes 2 is on the same power level as Steward and Remake.

There are a ton of variables that make the cards hard to compare and I'm not saying I know for sure what I'm saying at all. You might be right. But for me its a real drawback to have to trash your whole hand with discord. It means that if you have the elements of an engine (a village and a smithy perhaps) in hand you have to play discord first and then recover those elements for little gain. You could play Steward or Remake last and only trash the curses you draw into. Do that with Discord and you will probably be worse off. Situationally you might draw 5 curses and Discord becomes awesome, better than Steward or Remake. And you could even gain really good cards from the trash. But generally I think it will be worse than other trashers because its your whole hand or nothing.
Its actually enough for me to consider never wanting to buy more than one or two Balances in a game. If you draw a Discord and an Order along with 2 coppers and an estate at the end of that turn you will have trashed an estate and copper, made others discard (with a repeat on your next turn) and have one to spend. That's not a great turn for drawing both your $3 purchases from previous turns.

24
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: March 26, 2020, 06:46:40 pm »
They are all too good. Discord is a great trasher (sure, Order nerfs it) and while Order does not do anything for you, a double Militia is pretty nasty.

Open Double Peddler, be pretty certain to get a $5 after the first shuffle, get a discard attack and a trasher after the second shuffle. That's too straightforward.

Would you really pay more than $2 for Order if you were buying it straight out?
Discord is possibly worth getting one but when you play it you will be reducing your hand to two cards. Its even worse than chapel in many situations (trash 4 crap cards but then have to regain two of them). I'd rate it as worth $2.5 at absolute best.

25
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: March 26, 2020, 06:02:16 pm »
           

This is my entry. Not the previous set of three cards. They will definitely return some day in some form but not for an exchange challenge.
Exchange was tacked on there but here it allows you to have "Balance" which is actually slightly better than it should be for cost. Barring shenanigans with cards like "Procession" Balance will become a card that is slightly weak for cost with the upside that you get a choice of which slightly bad card to get. Discord and Order can even be situationally good. They aren't hideous.

The set could have 10 balance cards but only 5 Discord and 5 Order. This also means that as numbers dwindle you don't get a choice. Or a full 10 of each (Discord and Order). I think I like the former of those options.

Theme:
The Taoist leader has right principles but their government inevitably becomes excessive in creating discord or order. Will they try again - perhaps erring in the other direction - or have they learnt that the will of Heaven cannot be imposed from above?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5

Page created in 0.056 seconds with 20 queries.