26
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: The Contest Set Card List
« on: October 11, 2012, 10:52:45 am »Mountain Pass:
pics
While I think these look gorgeous, they should be drawings though.
Unless they're like, ultra-realistic.
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.
While I think these look gorgeous, they should be drawings though.
Unless they're like, ultra-realistic.
27
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: PenPen's Contest Submissions - Review and Revise
« on: October 10, 2012, 10:21:17 am »QuoteEach other player trashes a Treasure card from his hand. He then gains a Treasure card costing at most $3 less than it (cost of gained card must be no lower than $0), and may choose to put it in his hand. Otherwise he reveals his hand with no Treasure cards.It seems like you want to achieve that you can always get at least a Copper, but you are doing the opposite. When you trash a Copper, you "gain(s) a Treasure card costing at most -$3 (cost of gained card must be no lower then $0)".
That means you are looking for a Treasure that costs less than -$3, but not less than $0, which is quite impossible for standard notions of '-', '0', '3', '$' and 'less'.
Better, but still not perfect wording would be "gain a Treasure costing at most $3 less, or $0".
If I'm wrong with my interpretation, and you really want to allow to trash Coppers without replacement, the "(cost of gained card must be no lower than $0)" is unneccessary, as there anyway is no card that cost less than $0, so this restriction is none.
Yes it was intended originally that it's going to downgrade treasures, but Coppers would be unaffected. I was essentially combining Mine's wording with Saboteur, but Saboteur doesn't cover lower cost cards, so I made a few wordings of my own. It was really weird. I did a double take when I wrote that out and jumbled a few words here and there...
28
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: PenPen's Contest Submissions - Review and Revise
« on: October 10, 2012, 10:15:30 am »From challenge #9: Non-terminal silver
Scammer
$6 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player trashes a Treasure card from his hand. He then gains a Treasure card costing at most $3 less than it (cost of gained card must be no lower than $0), and may choose to put it in his hand. Otherwise he reveals his hand with no Treasure cards.
Simply put this was intended as a reverse Mine. It was pretty weak. I worded it this way instead of simply saying "exactly $3 less" because there are treasure cards that cost differently like Bank, Fool's Gold etc and it'd be awkward. I also had the replaced card gained directly to hand, but if two Scammers are played, then it can probably turn a Gold into a Copper, which really sucks for whomever that's affected.
Here's what I have in mind...
Quote
Scammer
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player trashes a Gold or Silver card from his hand. If he does, he gains a Treasure card costing exactly $3 less than the trashed card, and may put it into his hand. Otherwise he reveals his hand with no Gold or Silver cards.
Make it a reverse mine that specifies on Gold and Silver, and downgrade them. I know I missed out on Copper, and that would make this card a little bit focused for mid-to-late games. It is still a pretty specific card however, that targets on the opponents' treasures and lost a bit of flexibility on what can be targeted. This would also make the card a real reverse Mine.
I'd think this can probably be a $4, but would you choose this over a Silver if it's a $4? Or maybe a $5? I dunno.
From challenge #10: Potion card
Red Stone
$5P - Action
Trash this card. Discard a Potion from your hand.
If you do both, trash a card from your hand, then gain a card of any cost.
As simply put in the comments for this card, the cost is high, it requires matching with a Potion like Treasure Map, and at this cost you might just as well get a Province instead of this. It also takes away 3 cards from your hand, so the possibility of this card activating at full power is close to zero.
Now I'm bad at costing, but especially on Potions because I never played Alchemy. So obviously the cost is bad.
The theme for Red Stone is that you use it on something and make it much better, but the Red Stone breaks and you can't use it anymore. I'm not sure why I put in the Potion requirement when it's played, likely because of the "gain a card of any cost" that makes me worried and added a barrier to make it less abusive. But it made the card suck, probably being the weakest card in that contest as a result.
Here's what I thought...
Quote
Red Stone
$2P - Action
Trash this card and a card from your hand.
If you do, gain a card of any cost from the supply.
At $2P that would make this roughly a $6 card. I think it feels a bit fairer, but Potion cards are hard to cost, how often are you going to line up $2 with a Potion card, and buy a card that can only be used once? At $6 would you be better off with a Gold? I think I would still probably go for the Gold if I get to choose either still.
But this would give a better chance of getting a Province (eg if you have cash flow problems), and especially in Colony games you can gain a Colony with this at comparatively little cost. So I think it's a viable alternative on some boards, but it's not viable on all of them.
It still gives you an impression that this card is crazy (and it probably is themetically), and it'll make you feel like a demigod when you line this up with a Copper/Curse/blah card and gain a Province/Colony, but it sort of feels like a Remodel - you get yourself a card with a Gold-like cost and then Remodel said card into a Province, but the Remodel-like card is gone too.
Still not sure about this one, but I at least feel much better with this revised version.
29
Variants and Fan Cards / PenPen's Contest Submissions - Review and Revise
« on: October 10, 2012, 09:32:54 am »
Over the past few weeks/months it's been a great time and lots of fun in designing different types of cards for the mini-set contest. I've started submitting my designs starting from challenge #9, and I find myself thinking up different cards for the contest while my mind isn't occupied (e.g. at work).
I'd love to keep making up new cards but I'd need to take a look at my old cards first and see what I can do to improve them. Obviously I'm still comparatively green to a lot of guys in here when it comes to familiarity and card design balance, but I'd like to sometime make a fan expansion that's not called "Weirdness in a box" or something similar. So anyway, here's the cards I made for the contest as they were, originally:
From challenge #9: Non-terminal silver
From challenge #10: Potion card
From challenge #11: Dual-type card
From challenge #12: Non-terminal draw
From challenge #13: One-shot card
From challenge #14: Self-synergizing card
From challenge #15: $2 card
From challenge #16: Treasure card
From challenge #17: +buy
From challenge #18: Reaction card
I'm going to take a look at these cards and try to revise them at maybe a card or two at a time and considerations etc. Feel free to comment on how absurd it was (a lot of them were pretty crazy and convoluted), and what you would recommend and whatnot. Cheers!
I'd love to keep making up new cards but I'd need to take a look at my old cards first and see what I can do to improve them. Obviously I'm still comparatively green to a lot of guys in here when it comes to familiarity and card design balance, but I'd like to sometime make a fan expansion that's not called "Weirdness in a box" or something similar. So anyway, here's the cards I made for the contest as they were, originally:
From challenge #9: Non-terminal silver
Quote
Scammer
$6 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player trashes a Treasure card from his hand. He then gains a Treasure card costing at most $3 less than it (cost of gained card must be no lower than $0), and may choose to put it in his hand. Otherwise he reveals his hand with no Treasure cards.
From challenge #10: Potion card
Quote
Red Stone
$5P - Action
Trash this card. Discard a Potion from your hand.
If you do both, trash a card from your hand, then gain a card of any cost.
From challenge #11: Dual-type card
Quote
Bronzeworks
$3 - Victory-Reaction
Worth 2 VP if you have the most Copper cards in your deck compared to other players (a tie for most would qualify as well).
--
When you would gain a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead, gain a Copper. You may discard this card to put the Copper into your hand.
From challenge #12: Non-terminal draw
Quote
Theorist
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
All players reveal a card from his hand. If all players revealed a Treasure card, +1 Card for all (including you) and +$1 for you. Otherwise, all players gain a Copper, putting it into his hand (including you).
From challenge #13: One-shot card
Quote
Investment
$4 - Treasure
Worth $2
Trash this card. Gain a Silver, and the player to your right gains a Gold.
--
When you would gain this, the player to your left gains this card instead, and only that player can gain this card.
--
(Rules clarification: The player to the left cannot have the player to HIS left gain this card, he is the sole person gaining the card. Reactions to card gains apply in this situation however, e.g. Watchtower. When this card is played, the original buyer of this card will gain the Gold, and the "player to the left" gains the Silver.)
From challenge #14: Self-synergizing card
Quote
Samurai
$5 - Action-Attack-Reaction
+1 Card
Each other player discards a card.
You may return up to two Samurai tokens to its supply. Each other player discards an additional card per token returned.
Gain a Samurai token.
--
When another player plays an Attack card, you may return a Samurai token to its supply and discard this, then at the start of your next turn, +1 Card. You may instead trash this card if you do not return a Samurai token to its supply, if you do, gain a Samurai token.
If you do either, you are unaffected by that Attack.
From challenge #15: $2 card
Quote
Abandoned Village
$2 - Action
+2 Actions
+1 Buy
Discard any number of Curse cards. +1 Card per Curse card discarded.
--
When you gain this, gain a Curse.
From challenge #16: Treasure card
Quote
Mortgage
$3 - Treasure
Set aside a Victory card from your hand. This card is worth half the cost of that card (rounded up) in $, otherwise this is worth $0.
--
During your buy phase, you may buy any set aside Victory card at half its cost (rounded up) in $, you do not need to play this card to buy it.
--
When the game ends, any Victory cards that are still set aside by this card are not returned to your deck.
--
(Rules clarification: Getting back the Victory card works like buying it from supply, it uses a buy and you put it into the discard pile. You can just buy any Victory card you choose, provided that you can afford it and have enough buys. You can use multiple buys to gain as many Victory cards. You can put Vineyard aside, but it'll give you $0, and you can buy it back at $0.)
From challenge #17: +buy
Quote
Poseur
$2 - Action
+1 Buy
All players (including you) reveal a card from their hand. All cards revealed this way cost $1 less this turn, but not less than $0.
--
If you did not buy any copies of the revealed cards, you may put this card on top of your deck.
From challenge #18: Reaction card
Quote
Village Idiot
$2 - Action-Reaction
+2 Actions
--
When another player plays a card with the wording "+2 Actions" you may set this card aside from your hand. If you do, at the start of your next turn, return this card to your hand and +1 Card.
I'm going to take a look at these cards and try to revise them at maybe a card or two at a time and considerations etc. Feel free to comment on how absurd it was (a lot of them were pretty crazy and convoluted), and what you would recommend and whatnot. Cheers!
30
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest: RinkWorks Cards!
« on: October 10, 2012, 08:53:56 am »
Question, I assume that even if I vote "none" with some other cards, you'd only take the vote as "none" only, or would the other cards gain points as well?
31
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest: Second Chance For the Runners-Up!
« on: October 10, 2012, 08:49:56 am »
I don't have a card in here, but all of these runner up cards are still very interesting, so I'd love to put my votes to the cards I like in this one.
I suppose what rinkworks put up would be final and we'll fine tune the winners from this contest afterwards.
I suppose what rinkworks put up would be final and we'll fine tune the winners from this contest afterwards.
32
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #18: Reaction Card!
« on: October 09, 2012, 12:07:59 pm »
Congrats to jamespotter and eHalcyon (again)!
This card was made with the intention of a joke card. I thought that a reaction to certain wordings would be pretty cool and villages are the most common Action cards out there.
I actually was almost crazy enough to make the reaction where if you play a village (any +2 actions) you can reveal this card, search your deck for any copies of this and play all of them immediately without using any actions. But it doesn't get a +card, so you just played a bunch of Village Idiots, got dozens of unused actions and your hand is left with what you haven't played.
...that was a little extreme so I toned it down to this one. But it was fun making that up.
Quote
#19 (tie) - Village Idiot by PenPen with 3 points (Old Maid)
$2 - Action-Reaction
+2 Actions
--
When another player plays a card with the wording "+2 Actions" you may set this card aside from your hand. If you do, at the start of your next turn, return this card to your hand and +1 Card.
This card was made with the intention of a joke card. I thought that a reaction to certain wordings would be pretty cool and villages are the most common Action cards out there.
I actually was almost crazy enough to make the reaction where if you play a village (any +2 actions) you can reveal this card, search your deck for any copies of this and play all of them immediately without using any actions. But it doesn't get a +card, so you just played a bunch of Village Idiots, got dozens of unused actions and your hand is left with what you haven't played.
...that was a little extreme so I toned it down to this one. But it was fun making that up.
33
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #17: +Buy!
« on: October 09, 2012, 11:58:57 am »A question about Barge however, as I didn't vote for it because my understanding was that you can gain-trash as many cards as you would like, while it's put in play? It felt like there's lots of opportunity where you can manipulate your hand with the right combination.
The while-in-play effect does certainly work for as many cards as you gain, but you're still limited by how many cards you can gain in the first place. With +Buy, that does mean you can buy two Coppers at minimum, but doing that undermines whatever deck-thinning you hoped to accomplish. So it's really more of an sneaky upgrader (like Rats) than a trasher.
As for manipulating your hand, you can't add cards to it, only remove cards, so I guess you could sneakily activate a Menagerie that wouldn't otherwise have activated, but that seems like something you ought to be able to do if you're clever enough.
Maybe there's something I'm missing, though.
Right...it doesn't seem that crazy now that you've explained it (and maybe I misread a word or two). I look forward to seeing this card get some playtime!
Quote
#14 (tie) - Poseur by PenPen with 4 points (Street Racer)
$2 - Action
+1 Buy
All players (including you) reveal a card from their hand. All cards revealed this way cost $1 less this turn, but not less than $0.
--
If you did not buy any copies of the revealed cards, you may put this card on top of your deck.
On my card, it seems like most people liked the idea but it was too weak. It was the original intention for everyone to reveal the card, but as some mentioned, it's mostly revolving around you because the other players will reveal a useless card like Copper or Curse or whatnot. That's halfway intentional, which is why I made the cost so low.
I think that if you combine this with some discarding attacks it'd be much more useful, but Poseur could use some tuneups though. Maybe +$1, but that'd make this a Bridge-lite.
I also wanted to name the card "Wannabe" as in "all the other cool kids got their cool cards and I want one too" but that sounds too modern for the theme.
34
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #17: +Buy!
« on: October 09, 2012, 11:29:23 am »
Congrats to Jack Rudd, Polk5440 and NoMoreFun! We now have 3 +buy cards. Awesome.
A question about Barge however, as I didn't vote for it because my understanding was that you can gain-trash as many cards as you would like, while it's put in play? It felt like there's lots of opportunity where you can manipulate your hand with the right combination. But I do like the soft-counter reaction as a duration thing.
A question about Barge however, as I didn't vote for it because my understanding was that you can gain-trash as many cards as you would like, while it's put in play? It felt like there's lots of opportunity where you can manipulate your hand with the right combination. But I do like the soft-counter reaction as a duration thing.
35
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #17: +Buy!
« on: October 09, 2012, 07:48:00 am »Maybe rinkworks lost the votes?
Hopefully not, but he should be able to check the PM inbox in case he lost the tally.
36
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #17: +Buy!
« on: October 08, 2012, 08:15:08 am »
Patiently waiting for the results...
37
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #17: +Buy!
« on: October 03, 2012, 11:59:14 am »Submit your votes via PM to me by Thursday, October 6, 2012, 10am EDT in the following format:
I may have missed a clarification, but is it Thursday... or October 6? Same applies to the Reaction competition.
I didn't notice this as well! It's always been on a Thursday EDT deadline though. I submitted mine just now assuming the deadline is Thursday.
38
Dominion: Guilds Previews / Re: So. Guilds.
« on: September 28, 2012, 01:38:33 pm »I'm going to guess that Guilds will have a subsystem where certain cards can interact with each other and make other related cards played stronger.
In the mini-set contest I designed a card that uses tokens. I think Guilds would probably have something like that and make it a communal token where certain cards can make use of the tokens to be a little better when it's played.
Communal like this, where multiple cards use the same tokens, or communal like all players use the same mat?
Yeah, like your idea! Different cards using the same tokens! I assume you mean personal tokens as well, because that's what I had in mind.
I think around 4-6 cards would be enough, but if you're doing a random draw of cards from this set plus other earlier ones, you'd get like 1 card that uses these tokens, and it won't be as fun playing that card, obviously (even though it has its uses).
39
Dominion: Guilds Previews / Re: So. Guilds.
« on: September 28, 2012, 10:44:31 am »
I'm going to guess that Guilds will have a subsystem where certain cards can interact with each other and make other related cards played stronger.
In the mini-set contest I designed a card that uses tokens. I think Guilds would probably have something like that and make it a communal token where certain cards can make use of the tokens to be a little better when it's played.
In the mini-set contest I designed a card that uses tokens. I think Guilds would probably have something like that and make it a communal token where certain cards can make use of the tokens to be a little better when it's played.
40
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: The Contest Set Card List
« on: September 28, 2012, 10:37:30 am »Some possible images for Missionary
Missionary:Quotepics
I like the third one best. The second one feels more like...something else totally different.
41
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 1: Assassin
« on: September 27, 2012, 11:40:06 am »
I envision the Assassin to be stealthy. It'd be like you won't know what's coming and then you're dead. I guess.
The problem with a real-life assassin (or a video game one?) for me is that it's really specific and you won't get to kill all objectives at the same time.
With that in mind, I'm thinking of a place token on supply pile thing where if a player plays a card from that pile, they get something bad as a result. Like a curse (an Embargo?) or trash on use. On this version, it's not an attack (I can't imagine this being an attack type).
Assassin (variant 1)
$4 - Action
Place an Assassin token on top of a Kingdom card pile, or move the token to another Kingdom card pile.
--
When any player plays a card from the supply pile with an Assassin token, the card is trashed after it is in play.
Another idea I have is to make a 'reverse-bane' card where you can add another kingdom pile, and if they play that card, they get something bad.
Assassin (variant 2)
$4 - Action-Attacion
All other players gain a copy of the Target card from its supply.
--
When a player plays a copy of the Target card, he gains a Curse.
Setup: Add an extra Kingdom card pile costing $2 or $3 to the Supply. Cards from that pile are Target cards.
Again, I suck at costing, but you'd get the idea on both designs.
The problem with a real-life assassin (or a video game one?) for me is that it's really specific and you won't get to kill all objectives at the same time.
With that in mind, I'm thinking of a place token on supply pile thing where if a player plays a card from that pile, they get something bad as a result. Like a curse (an Embargo?) or trash on use. On this version, it's not an attack (I can't imagine this being an attack type).
Assassin (variant 1)
$4 - Action
Place an Assassin token on top of a Kingdom card pile, or move the token to another Kingdom card pile.
--
When any player plays a card from the supply pile with an Assassin token, the card is trashed after it is in play.
Another idea I have is to make a 'reverse-bane' card where you can add another kingdom pile, and if they play that card, they get something bad.
Assassin (variant 2)
$4 - Action-Attacion
All other players gain a copy of the Target card from its supply.
--
When a player plays a copy of the Target card, he gains a Curse.
Setup: Add an extra Kingdom card pile costing $2 or $3 to the Supply. Cards from that pile are Target cards.
Again, I suck at costing, but you'd get the idea on both designs.
42
Other Games / Re: What other games are as good as Dominion?
« on: September 27, 2012, 10:53:57 am »One other game I really liked when I was younger was Bang. It's partially a hidden information game, like Mafia. Anyone familiar with it? More recently I've been playing a Chinese rip-off of it called San Guo Sha. While it is largely a re-themed carbon-copy, it actually makes the game so much more fun via the myriad of different characters.I played San Guo Sha once. It was a bit difficult, since I know approximately 15 words of Mandarin, none of which were particularly helpful in reading the cards, but I was teamed up with my girlfriend (who is Singaporean) against some other Singaporeans of varying skill levels in the game. I can imagine that if I had the full translation of all the cards in front of me it's a pretty cool variation on Bang.
I am a huge fan of Innovation, but it is definitely a game that will not be to everyone's tastes - almost every turn the board can change drastically, so it's much more of a tactical game than a strategic one. I haven't been brave enough to get the "Echoes of the Past" expansion as I haven't heard fantastic things about it - mostly that it tries to introduce about 3 new mechanics at once - but the second expansion, "Figures in the Sand", sounds like it might be a bit better.
I can read Chinese without problems (even though it's in simplified Chinese, which takes me a bit of time to decipher because I learnt traditional Chinese) and while I can tell that San Guo Sha started off as a rip-off/copycat of Bang, they expanded upon the game with additional characters and mechanisms. There's like 6 character expansion packs out there at a speed of around 1-2 expansions each year (at around 5-8 new characters per expansion). The pace of expansions slowed down now (because it's like uber popular in China and they host annual tourneys and stuff based on a 3v3 variation of the game which feels like what they're focused on now), but the popularity never waned. In fact they actually had fan card contests from last year and earlier this year, and the winners get their cards (re-balanced) as an expansion pack. Pretty nifty idea (I wish Dominion has an expansion set like that in the future).
The problem with San Guo Sha is that you really need at least 5 people to play the game with its functions and balance out the roles. I suppose you can play with 4, but the balance felt a bit gimped. It also has an issue where if you selected a character that's perceived as strong (eg someone who has awesome firepower), you're likely to get killed off really early as a result, because most of the focus would be on you. Players who got killed off will have a pretty long time of watching the game unfold, which can drag on for pretty long, especially if one of the characters have a pretty good defense or survival mechanism.
The game isn't bad at any rate - the role guessing, the chemistry happening between characters and the interactions make it good. But I wouldn't say it's the best game in the world, by far...it needs a mid to large group of people to start with and there's quite a lot of dead time for players who got eliminated. It's my preference to play something that can keep other players engaged at all times instead.
43
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #18: Reaction Card!
« on: September 27, 2012, 10:35:06 am »Don't worry, if Rinkworks hasn't posted the cards he's usually pretty lenient on deadlines.
Yeah, that's what I think as well.
When do we vote on the entries?
We can vote for them when rinkworks posts the entries!
44
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #18: Reaction Card!
« on: September 27, 2012, 08:17:24 am »
I hope my entry made it in time, I almost forgot about the deadline (and timezone conversion)!
It's a pretty stupid entry though!
It's a pretty stupid entry though!
45
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #16: Treasure Card!
« on: September 24, 2012, 12:36:04 pm »
Congrats to popsofctown for his design!
I thought my card (Mortgage/Strawberry Fields) would actually get into top 5 judging from the initial response. I think that the fact that my card and Jewels Redux/Ticket to Ride being quite similar concept-wise hurts both of our chances, but overall I'm pleased with the result nonetheless.
I wonder if there's anything else I can do to improve on this though.
I thought my card (Mortgage/Strawberry Fields) would actually get into top 5 judging from the initial response. I think that the fact that my card and Jewels Redux/Ticket to Ride being quite similar concept-wise hurts both of our chances, but overall I'm pleased with the result nonetheless.
Quote
#10 (tie) - Mortgage by PenPen with 10 points (Strawberry Fields)
$3 - Treasure
Set aside a Victory card from your hand. This card is worth half the cost of that card (rounded up) in $, otherwise this is worth $0.
--
During your buy phase, you may buy any set aside Victory card at half its cost (rounded up) in $, you do not need to play this card to buy it.
--
When the game ends, any Victory cards that are still set aside by this card are not returned to your deck.
--
(Rules clarification: Getting back the Victory card works like buying it from supply, it uses a buy and you put it into the discard pile. You can just buy any Victory card you choose, provided that you can afford it and have enough buys. You can use multiple buys to gain as many Victory cards. You can put Vineyard aside, but it'll give you $0, and you can buy it back at $0.)
I wonder if there's anything else I can do to improve on this though.
46
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #15: $2 Card!
« on: September 24, 2012, 12:25:32 pm »
Congrats to Graystripe77!
My entry is a pretty lazy one, it's just modified from the original Cursed Village I designed (I actually was even lazier and submitted the original version). It shows!
My entry is a pretty lazy one, it's just modified from the original Cursed Village I designed (I actually was even lazier and submitted the original version). It shows!
47
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #13: One-Shot Card!
« on: September 13, 2012, 01:44:24 pm »Some people brought up that the price reduction on Mountain Pass could be abused because it will stack with KC. I didn't want to put up a big defense while it was still in voting, but I'll discuss it now.
Stackability was fully intended. Since MP is one-shot, it is awkward to word it such that it doesn't stack. Lacking +Buy and being one-shot actually hurts a lot while you are building your deck. With Bridge, you can play it and build up your deck quickly. You can't do that with MP -- if you use it, it disappears and you'll have to buy a new one. To use MP effectively, you'll need to build an effective engine without it and THEN bring it in for one big turn. You can do the same with Bridge, except it needs less support (coming with its own +Buy) and it can help you during the ramp-up.
MP would be most used as support for a cool engine with +Buy, probably in a mega-turn strategy. If there is cheap +Buy on the board (Market Square, Hamlet), it can also be a nice slingshot. I thought it would be good for the set, which has plenty of expensive cards. We still need +Buy though!
Oops, actually, the easy wording to limit it would be "if you do". But again, I think it is better without that limit. There is a soft-limit in that it forces you to trash another card from your hand. That can screw up your hand if you're not careful.
I'll have to admit that my eyes failed me and I thought that it didn't require you to trash another card!
My bad on that one.
48
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #14: Self-Synergizing Card!
« on: September 13, 2012, 01:42:16 pm »Ummm...The results are in! As a reminder, here was the objective for this challenge:QuoteCreate a one-shot card. This is a card that trashes itself, returns itself to its pile, or sets itself aside permanently when played. The card must always do this when played; it can't, for example, only trash or return itself under certain circumstances, or if the player chooses a particular option. You may only submit a single card -- that is, you can't submit multiple cards that work together (such as Pillage and Spoils).
You are in the wrong thread! Is that what you are confused about?
No he's right actually...rinkworks used the wordings from the other contest for his rankings in this one.
49
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #14: Self-Synergizing Card!
« on: September 13, 2012, 01:05:32 pm »
Congrats to dnkywin! I didn't vote for it however. I wonder if there are/were medieval salesmen though.
On my card (Samurai/Titanium) I designed around the theme that samurais would be based on tokens (which is kinda like honor or bushido) where you get more honor by attacking other players. Meanwhile when you're attacked, the samurai defends for you, but once the honor's used up in defending you, the samurai commits seppuku (thus the trashing).
It just scaled pretty badly and the card got really complex (it was actually even crazier when I first designed this), and the end result is meh. I do think there's a chance that Guilds may be using a system like the card I designed, but the tokens can be used by multiple cards you own (that's purely speculation from me).
On my card (Samurai/Titanium) I designed around the theme that samurais would be based on tokens (which is kinda like honor or bushido) where you get more honor by attacking other players. Meanwhile when you're attacked, the samurai defends for you, but once the honor's used up in defending you, the samurai commits seppuku (thus the trashing).
It just scaled pretty badly and the card got really complex (it was actually even crazier when I first designed this), and the end result is meh. I do think there's a chance that Guilds may be using a system like the card I designed, but the tokens can be used by multiple cards you own (that's purely speculation from me).
50
Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #13: One-Shot Card!
« on: September 13, 2012, 12:49:02 pm »
Congrats eHalcyon!
I thought my idea (Investment/Alleyn) would be interesting enough. The wording probably got a bit convoluted and lost points as a result.
I thought my idea (Investment/Alleyn) would be interesting enough. The wording probably got a bit convoluted and lost points as a result.