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.

151

Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #5: Intrigue

« on: October 17, 2013, 06:30:36 pm »

Logothete
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+2 Actions. Reveal your hand. +1 Card and +$1 per Victory card revealed. Reveal your hand again and put all the revealed Victory cards at the bottom of your deck in any order.

That's a pretty stiff penalty!  And not much of a benefit.  Would this ever be good if there weren't Great Halls/Nobles/Harems on the board?

Cold Iron
Types: Treasure – Attack – Victory – Reaction
Cost: $4
Worth $1. When you play this, each other player with 5 or more cards in hand draws a card then puts cards from his hand on top of his deck until he has 4 cards in hand.
Worth 1 VP. When another player plays an Attack card, you may discard this from your hand. If you do, gain a Silver, putting it into your hand, and you are not affected by the Attack.

It's a lot of things, all of which seem reasonable.  I didn't at first think they came together in a cohesive way, but maybe they do.  It's a really weak attack, maybe even, of all attacks, the attack which is most likely to be helpful.  But it's a strong reaction to attacks.  I don't think it's something you'd buy if there were no other attacks on the board.  But, if there are, you buy Iron -- and then you end up playing the attack, cause you have it, and therefore triggering more reaction plays of Iron.  I dunno.  It's weird.

Sphinx (1)
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $4
+1 Card. +1 Action. If this is the first time you played a Sphinx this turn, each other player guesses how many Action cards you will play this turn. At the end of your Action phase, each player who guessed incorrectly gains a Curse.

Clarification: The players guess in turn order.

Can be political.

Sphinx (2)
Types: Action
Cost: $3
Choose one: +3 Cards and discard a card that is not a Victory cards (or reveal a hand of all Victory cards); or +$3 and cards cost $1 more this turn; or trash 3 cards from your hand and gain a card costing $0.

Steward, but more complicated without adding much to the game.

Paladin
Types: Action – Attack – Victory
Cost: $4
+1 Action. Choose one: Each player (including you) discards a card; or each player (including you) draws until he has 4 cards in hand.
Worth 1 VP for every 4 Attack cards in your deck (rounded down).

4 is a lot!  And this card isn't very strong.  Some interesting combos, with, like, Ironworks and other things.

Landlord
Types: Action – Victory
Cost: $5
+2 Cards. You may discard a Victory card. If you do, +1 Action.
Worth 1 VP per empty Supply pile.

Kind of interesting.  Might be too strong, since it's always worth at least 1VP, and 2 if you buy all of them, so 16VP if you run the stack.  And they are pretty good on their own.  Would everyone go for them?  The thing is, if everyone goes for them, they're worth the same for everyone.

Dance
Types: Action – Attack – Reaction
Cost: $4
Choose one: Each player (including you) puts a card from his hand on top of his deck; or each player puts his deck into his discard pile.
When another player shuffles, you may reveal and discard this from your hand. If you do, +2 Cards.

This makes it too easy to force your opponents into 0-card hands.

Quartermaster
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $3
+$2. Discard a card. Each other player with 4 or more cards in hand discards a card that shares a type with and costs more than the card you discarded (or reveal a hand with no such card).

Not bad!

Concerto
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Action. Look through your discard pile. You may reveal a card from it and put it on the bottom of your deck. If it is an… Action card, +1 Action; Treasure card, +$1; Victory card, +1 Card.

Moving a card from the discard to the bottom of the deck feels a little esoteric.

Architect
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+1 Action. +$2.
While this is in play, when an Action Card (including this) would give you any amount of $, you may draw that many cards instead.

Stacks crazy.  The second one you play is +4 Cards, + 1 Action.  And then +6 Cards, +1 Action... It's a lot stronger than Gold.

Acropolis
Types: Action
Cost: $5
When you play this, +1 Card per unused action you have (Action, not Action card). +2 Actions.

Another card that stacks like crazy.  The first one is a Village, the second one is a Level 2 City, the third one is +3 Cards + 2 Actions.  You would never be able to ignore it.

Prefecture
Types: Action – Victory
Cost: $5
Reveal a cards from your deck until you reveal a Victory card. If you do, put it and one other revealed card into your hand. Discard the rest.
Worth 2 VP.

I like it. 

Nabob
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
+2 Cards. Trash a card from your hand. Choose one: Gain a card costing up to $2 more than the trashed card; or each other player gains a card costing up to the cost of the trashed card.

Remodel plus two really good benefits for a buck more.  That's really strong, not sure it needs the +2 Cards. 

Courtier
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $4
You may gain a Duchy. If you didn't, gain a Silver. Each other player may gain an Estate. If he didn't, he gains a Copper.

That's really strong.

Monastery
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Gain a card costing up to $6. For each $1 over $4 it costs, each other player may choose one: he trashes a card from his hand; he gains up to 2 Coppers, putting them into his hand; he discards his hand and draws 5 cards.

Too much stuff.  Simplify.

Lawyer
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+$2. Reveal the top card of your deck. If you reveal a Victory card, discard it and gain an Action card costing up to $5. Otherwise, put the card back and gain an Action card costing up to $3.

I like it.  I guess I'm a sucker for cards that involve gambling.

Lord
Types: Action – Victory
Cost: $4
Reveal your hand. If you revealed a Treasure card, a Victory card, and an Action card (each separate cards), then +$3. Otherwise, +$1.
Worth 1 VP.

I'm not really crazy about these Victory cards that aren't very good or that fun, but that bribe you into buying them by being worth VP.

Bailey
Types: Action – Victory
Cost: $4
Do this three times: Choose one: +1 Action; or discard a Victory card, and +$2 if you did.
Worth 1 VP.

Another card that is bribing you into buying it by being worth VP.

Wall
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $4
Choose two: Look at the top card of your deck and discard it or put it back; or gain a card costing up to $3; or trash a card from your hand. (The choices must be different.)
When another player plays an Attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, you may discard any number of cards from your hand. At the start of your next turn, draw that many cards.

Too much stuff.  Simplify.

Overseer
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Put a marker on an empty District of the Overseer Mat. If you put it on the…
Residential District, +1 Card and +2 Actions
Craftsmen's District, +3 Cards
Commercial District, +1 Card, +1 Action, and +$1
Industrial District, gain a card costing up to $4
Logging District, +1 Buy and +$2
If four districts of the mat have a marker, remove all the markers.

Rules Clarification: There is one communal Overseer mat, split into the five districts.

It doesn't feel very Dominion-y, but I still really like it, bordering on love.

Shrine
Types: Action – Victory
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Choose one: trash a card from your hand; or +1 Card.
Worth 2 VP.

The cumulative effect of reading all these weak cards that are begging you to buy them by being worth VP, is that of going to a dog pound full of really old dogs.

Committee
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+$2. The player to your left names a card. Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck and choose one that is not the named card. Trash it or gain a copy of it. Put the untrashed cards back in any order.

Seems a little strong.  Maybe it has to be "name a card that is not a victory card."

Taylor-Compton
Types: Action – Victory
Cost: $5
+1 Card. +1 Action. Discard any number of Victory cards. +$1 per card discarded.
Worth 1 VP.

Another old dog.

Usurer
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
Discard any number of cards. Choose one: +$1 per card discarded; or each other player discards until he has the same number of cards in hand as you.

This makes it too easy to get other players down to zero-card hands, turn after turn.

Dungeon
Types: Action – Victory
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Trash up to 3 cards from your hand.
Worth 1 VP per $ in the cost of the cheapest card in your deck (in Coins).

Interesting.  Two questions -- is it be too easy to get this up to 5VP?  Since it's definitely very easy to get this up to 3VP, does it become too much of a must-buy?  Maybe it trashes too many cards.

Majordomo
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action. Discard a card. If it is a… Victory card, +1 Card; Treasure card, +2 Cards; Action card, +3 Cards.

I think this is about as strong as Stables, and should cost 5.

Wedding
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
+1 Action. You may trash up to 2 cards from your hand. If you trashed exactly 1 card, each other player discards down to 3 cards in hand. If you trashed exactly 2 cards, each other player gains a Curse.

I like this version better than the earlier draft.  Much cleaner.  Lose the +Action though.

Liege
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
+2 Cards. Each other player discards a Victory card (or reveals a hand with no Victory cards). If any player discards a card this way, play this again.

Interesting.  I like it.

Observatory
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Action. Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. If you revealed a Victory card, put all the revealed cards into your hand. Otherwise, discard them.

Interesting.  I like it.

Tiller
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Trash a card from your hand. The player to your left chooses a card in the Supply costing at least $2 more than the trashed card. Gain it.

Interesting.  I like it.

Architect
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Trash a card from your hand. Choose one: gain a card costing up to $2 more than the trashed card, which you may put on top of your deck; or +2 Buys and +$ equal to the trashed card's cost in Coins.

Another $5 that is a Remodel plus too many benefits.

Groundskeeper
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card. +$1. Discard a card. Choose one: set aside up to 3 cards from your discard pile, discarding them after your next reshuffle; or shuffle your discard pile and put it at the bottom of your deck.

Too esoteric.

Heir
Types: Victory
Cost: $4
At the end of the game, choose one: Trash an Estate from your deck and this is worth 1 VP per Estate in your deck; or trash 2 Curses from your deck and this is worth 2 VP; or trash 3 Coppers from your deck and this is worth 3 VP if you have no Treasures in your deck.

Manic.  Maybe pick the best one of these things and be that thing.

Mob
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
The player to your left reveals his hand. Choose one of the revealed cards costing up to $6. Either gain a copy of it or each other player gains a copy of it, your choice.

Too strong.

Nouveau Riche
Types: Action
Cost: $4
You may discard an Estate. If you do, +3 Cards. You may discard a Duchy. If you do, +$2. You may discard a Victory card. If you do, +1 Action.

Clarification: It should be clear from the wording here, but you don't choose between these three options. You choose whether or not to do each in order.

OK.  I'm not sure I want to build this deck but I appreciate that this card is at least not worth VP.

Hidden Passage
Types: Action
Cost: $3
You may trash a card from your hand. Each other player may reveal the top 2 cards of his deck. If he does, he trashes one and discards the other.

I think this is Bishop but with a much worse benefit to you and often a better benefit to your opponent.

Legate
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action. +$1. Each player (including you) reveals the top 3 cards of his deck and puts one of them (your choice) in his hand, then puts the rest back on top in an order he chooses.

That's a pretty intense benefit for your opponent.

Secret Plot
Types: Treasure – Victory
Cost: $3
Worth $1. When you play this, each player may set aside a card face down on his Secret Plot mat. You may look at the cards on your mat at any time; reveal them and return them to your deck at the end of the game.
Worth 1 VP for each differently-named card on your mat that no other player has a copy of on his mat.

A card from your hand, I assume.  Seems like it turns the game into kind of a no-fun game.  You kind of have to buy Secret Plots since they can be worth a lot of points.  And then all the other players have to do the same thing.  And then the end result is they are all worth 0VP.

Castellan
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
Do the following three things in any order; you get the version in parentheses: Each player draws until he has 5 (6) cards in hand; each player discards down to 3 (3) cards in hand; each player trashes up to 1 (2) cards from his hand.

Pretty weak -- almost a gimped Steward.

Inquisitor
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
+$2. Each other player may discard any number of cards. Choose one: Each other player gains a Curse for each card in hand over 3; or each other player trashes a card from his hand and draws until he has 3 cards in hand.

Narcissist
Types: Action
Cost: $5
You may reveal then discard any number of differently-named cards. For each card discarded this way, if it is an… Action card, +2 Actions; Treasure card, +$2; Victory card, +2 Cards.

Interesting.  A bit weak.

Ironworker
Types: Action
Cost: $2
Discard a card. If it is an… Action card, +3 Actions; Treasure card, +$3; Victory card, +3 Cards.

Well, either this, or Narcissist, or both, are priced wrong.  I think both.

Warden
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+1 Action. Choose two in any order: Draw until you have 6 cards in hand; play an Action card from your hand; trash a card from your hand and gain a card costing up to $2 more, putting it on top of your deck. (The choices must be different.)

The +action is too much. 

Cannoneer
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
+2 Cards. +$1. Each other player with at least 5 cards in hand reveals one of them. He either discards it and gains a copy of it or he trashes it, your choice.

Too strong.

152

Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #5: Intrigue

« on: October 15, 2013, 01:30:39 am »

My Intrigue submission is my first one since Indulgence that I'm looking forward to discussing.  I don't have particularly high hopes for it in this contest, but I think there is some interesting and largely unexplored design space there even if the particular card I chose to submit is not ideal.

I'm looking forward to discussing your card, also!

153

Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #4: Seaside

« on: October 10, 2013, 04:15:14 pm »

So I want to compare Mortuary to Observatory now. Mortuary is a $5, and it has none of the filtering / setting up next turn abilities of Observatory. The only thing it does do that Observatory can't is trash from the discard. So, is that ability really worth the difference between a $2 and a $5, while also loosing the ability to filter and do possible big things with more expensive cards?

Obviously trashing from the discard is a great thing for 2 reasons... it's almost like a virtual +1 card, because you aren't decreasing your handsize as much; and you have a bigger selection to choose from. But it's also swingy... I know I've had Hermit in my hand many times while my discard pile is empty.

I think just being able to trash out of the discard without losing an action might be worth 5.

Observatory might be better at 3.  It doesn't seem much better or worse than Lookout.  But, it'd be kind of a weak 3. 

I think it might be a more fun and unique card if it discarded, instead of trashed.  I'd vote for that card.  As a trasher, it's too close practically to Mortuary.

154

Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #4: Seaside

« on: October 09, 2013, 09:43:22 pm »

I am not sure if our commenting actually had anything to do with the stagnation, but it certainly appears to have had an impact. Or maybe it was because everyone that already had anything to say said it before we commented...

I think the mini-deadlines have become a little too spaced out.  (Which is why I would guess that voting is down.)

155

Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #4: Seaside

« on: October 07, 2013, 05:06:02 pm »

I find $1/$1 less interesting because I like it as an Expand over two turns, vs. Remodel over two turns.  But I suppose it could work.

But Expand costs 7!  Expand-over-two-turns is sometimes worse than Expand, but it's flexibility makes it often better.  I just don't see how it can cost 5.

I like it much more as a 1-and-1 costing $4, though.

156

Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #4: Seaside

« on: October 07, 2013, 01:51:09 pm »

I didn't vote for either of these!

Observatory
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Action. Trash a card from your hand. Look at one card from your deck per $ in its cost. You may put one of them into your hand and discard any number of the others. Put the rest back in any order.

Observatory is practically very similar to Mortuary, the Dark Ages Winner.  Both of them amount to "+1 action.  Trash a Card.  Draw a card if you trashed a card that cost more than 0."

Both of them are pretty weak, because both of them are trash-for-benefit cards whose benefit doesn't scale up in cost.  So they're basically good for trashing Estates and Rats.  Observatory might also be a nice combo with Tunnel.

Honestly, I might prefer Observatory to Mortuary because it's cheaper and doesn't involve as much attention.  But since we already have Mortuary, it seems like you'd want to avoid adding Observatory.

Recycle
Types: Action – Duration
Cost: $5
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing up to $2 more than the trashed card, setting it aside face down. At the start of your next turn, return the gained card to your hand and trash a card from your hand, gaining a card costing up to $1 more than that trashed card.

Recycle seems overpowered at 5.  It's a Remodel with two enormous added benefits.  But, at 6, that could be OK.  I vote for this one.

(Though I think Investment was the most interesting card in this round.)

157

Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #4: Seaside

« on: October 03, 2013, 09:50:15 pm »

I'm fairly certain that it's a penalty, because it doesn't happen until your opponent (or you) starts greening, at which point they're greening, which means that Harbours are getting closer and closer to just a plain terminal Copper.  It won't come into play again until you re-shuffle, so you're opponent doesn't have to sit there buying Duchies and Estates to make it not draw.  They can keep building until you get another Harbour back into play, then either wait until the next time they can buy a Province, or just grab one Duchy and make you wait until the next time you can play a Harbour.

Yes, but they're "greening" because the card forces them to, not because it's the end game.  I'm not sure they're going to be able to end the game that easily with all that junk in their deck.

158

Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #4: Seaside

« on: October 03, 2013, 07:55:38 pm »

Harbour
Types: Action – Duration
Cost: $4
+$1. You may trash this.
Do not discard this from play during your Clean-up phase. While this is in play, at the start of your turn, +1 Card. When another player buys a Victory card, discard this from play and gain a Harbour.

If you stack enough of these, you force your opponent to suffocate in Victory cards.  I'm not sure the penalty of force-gaining a Harbor is a penalty, because wouldn't you want all of these anyway?

They're really junky though.  I wouldn't want all 10 of these.  Even if I get them all into play, you just buy one Duchy or something and now I have 10 terminal Coppers in my deck.

It's a terminal copper, but it's a terminal Copper that casts a permanent wonderful effect.  I mean, "$1, live forever" is a terminal Copper.  In the meantime your opponent is being forced to waste their buys on Duchies and Estates.

I wouldn't want to waste buys getting 10 of these, most of the time, because you don't need that many.  But being given one free is not much of a penalty, just like "gain a free Mountebank" wouldn't be much of a penalty on Mountebank.

Shipyard (C)
Types: Action – Duration
Cost: $5
+2 Buys. Now and at the start of your next turn: Look through your discard pile, reveal up to 3 Coppers from it, and put them into your hand.
While this is in play, when you would gain a card, you may gain a Copper instead.

I like this one, too.  I think it's a little better than Counting House.  But similarly, it would get smoked by any viable engine.  Maybe it would work in a board with limited +actions.  Ideally you'd want to play one every turn.  But, Provinces would still be tough to grab.  You'd need two in play, with 6 Coppers in the trash, and two more coin out of the rest of your hand.

Combos with Counting House, and Coppersmith.  Alt-VP, too.

Why would you need Coppers in the trash?  Do you mean in the discard?

In the discard is exactly what I meant.

159

Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #4: Seaside

« on: October 03, 2013, 03:15:05 am »

Clipper
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card. +1 Action. Put a Coin token on an Action card pile in the Supply.
Cards cost $1 less per Coin token on their Supply pile, but not less than $0.

I don't know why would you buy this.  You're giving yourself $1, then giving the same $1 to all your opponents.  Sure, you get first crack, but that just means that, if there's 10 more turns, over the course of the game you get $11 to their $10.  I wouldn't buy a card that gave me $11 and my opponents $10. 

I'm not saying it couldn't come in handy, and it has novel interactions with Band of Misfits and Border Village and Catacombs.  But I don't see how you would build a strategy around it.  Needs a lot of work.

Investment
Types: Action
Cost: $5
You may choose an Action card from your hand. Set aside this and the chosen card on your Investment mat. Return them to your deck at the end of the game.
When you play an Action card, +$1 per copy of it on your Investment mat.

I think I like this one best.  I wonder if you kind of have to buy it though, if there's cheap cantrips on the board.  Or maybe it's too slow?  Either way, I think it would work as a fun card.

Recycle
Types: Action – Duration
Cost: $5
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing up to $2 more than the trashed card, setting it aside face down. At the start of your next turn, return the gained card to your hand and trash a card from your hand, gaining a card costing up to $1 more than that trashed card.

Would this be too good at piling out Provinces?  I wonder if it would be better if the $1 had to be "exactly" instead of "up to."

Observatory
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Action. Trash a card from your hand. Look at one card from your deck per $ in its cost. You may put one of them into your hand and discard any number of the others. Put the rest back in any order.

Great for trashing Estates and Rats, but that's about it.  I don't think the benefit scales upward very well.  Well, it's cheap.  But even Forager seems a lot better.

Seafarer's Charm
Types: Treasure – Reaction
Cost: $0
Worth $1.
When you discard this from play, you may put it on top of your deck. When another player plays an Attack card, you may discard this from your hand. If you do, you are unaffected by that Attack.

Sunken Treasure
Types: Treasure
Cost: $3
Worth $1.
When you shuffle, put this at the bottom of your deck.

Shelters seemed weird and random the first time I saw them.  These seem weird and random to me, also.  Sunken Treasure is kind of just homework.  But Seafarer's Charm could be interesting.  Everyone starts with a Moat; that makes you think.  I think having it go back on your deck is too much.

Harbour
Types: Action – Duration
Cost: $4
+$1. You may trash this.
Do not discard this from play during your Clean-up phase. While this is in play, at the start of your turn, +1 Card. When another player buys a Victory card, discard this from play and gain a Harbour.

If you stack enough of these, you force your opponent to suffocate in Victory cards.  I'm not sure the penalty of force-gaining a Harbor is a penalty, because wouldn't you want all of these anyway?

Shipyard (C)
Types: Action – Duration
Cost: $5
+2 Buys. Now and at the start of your next turn: Look through your discard pile, reveal up to 3 Coppers from it, and put them into your hand.
While this is in play, when you would gain a card, you may gain a Copper instead.

I like this one, too.  I think it's a little better than Counting House.  But similarly, it would get smoked by any viable engine.  Maybe it would work in a board with limited +actions.  Ideally you'd want to play one every turn.  But, Provinces would still be tough to grab.  You'd need two in play, with 6 Coppers in the trash, and two more coin out of the rest of your hand.

Combos with Counting House, and Coppersmith.  Alt-VP, too.

Voyage
Types: Action – Duration
Cost: $5
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 3 costing from $3 to $6. Put those cards on top of your deck in any order and discard the rest. At the start of your next turn, +2 Cards.
When you would discard this from play, instead, trash this and gain a Voyage.

This works better as not a Duration, losing the +2 cards.  But I think clearly it works.

Settlement
Types: Action – Duration
Cost: $5
Now and at the start of every turn this is in play: +2 Buys and +$2.
Do not discard this from play during your Clean-up phase. Instead, discard it from play when any player buys a Victory card.

Again, if I just keep buying these and putting them in play, I'm just forcing you to buy Estates and Duchies.  There's no real decision to be made.

Raider
Types: Action – Attack – Duration
Cost: $5
+$2. Each other player discards down to 3 cards in hand. At the start of your next turn, +$1 and each other player discards down to 4 cards in hand.

These duration-attacks have it all wrong.  You don't want to wait till next turn, you want to wait days... weeks... years... let them in live in fear.  Only when they finally start to relax BAM discard a card!  Now that's how you attack.

160

Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages

« on: September 30, 2013, 05:25:43 pm »

Well, in the meantime, here is a novel I wrote about developing Danse Macabre.  A card which I also voted for!  (Along with Bargain, Garderobe, Incendiarist, and Stronghold.)


After making a few cards that went mostly unremarked upon, I'm very happy to have a card provoke some conversation, even though not everyone liked it.  Thanks for the attention, it was incredibly rewarding! 

I knew I wanted to do a card that was kind of morbid, like Rats and Knights.  So, first I thought of the name.

The second thing I thought of was a card that trashed on buy, an idea I really dug.  Like Grand Market, activated City, Prizes, Hermit and Madman, this would be a card you couldn't get the usual way.  Who doesn't love that?  And because Dark Ages has Rogue and Graverobber in addition to the usual amount of gainers, it fits nicely into the set.  There's more likely to be a path to Danse Macabre, if you really want it.

But I didn't want Macabre to be a dead card when there's no way of gaining it.  So, an on-trash benefit seemed like it would fit the card and the set in a satisfying way.  Just had to come up with a nice on-trash benefit.

For a while, Macabre cost 6 and could top-deck an action.  At first, it's on-trash could top-deck ANY action.  Hey, why not?  How often would it appear with King's Court anyway.  But, I dunno.  With Baker in the kingdom, you could get a second-turn Forge paired with your three starting Estates, and that seemed like way too much, even for me.  Then it could just top-deck cheaper actions, and that seemed ok, if a little derivative of Border Village.  But, it had this really boring interaction with Graverobber, where you'd buy Danse Macabre, topdeck Graverobber, then use Graverobber to topdeck Danse Macabre.  Kind of programmatic.   And Graverobber should be one of the more fun interactions, so I ditched that idea.

Next, Macabre cost 4 and could get two cheaper cards.  But that seemed like it would often be too strong.  So, I thought, what about a cheaper card and an even-still-cheaper card?  That would be good sometimes, and suck sometimes.  Again, it fits with the set, because, hardy-har, Poor House-Hamlet.  And though the effect would often suck when there's no $2s, it would never be COMPLETELY irrelevant, because in pretty much any kingdom, there's a plausible game state where you would want to buy Estate on 4, and now you can get a Silver with it. 

It was hard to come up with a simple way to describe a second, even-cheaper card.  Finally, I thought of "two cards of different costs" and decided, OK, that doesn't exactly mean what I want it to mean, but it's simple.  Then I realized, actually it means exactly what I want it to mean!  A card and a cheaper card = two cards of different cost.  That epiphany was a the high point of my card-designing hobby so far.

And then finally I had to decide what the card actually did.  But, I couldn't think of anything, so I gave up.  I started working on this other card that plays an action for no effect, then gets a cool benefit.  Then I decided to just put that onto Danse Macabre.

Problems with the card
The biggest problem with the card is the on-trash effect.  I love it, but it's really pile-draining.  If there's a good $2-$3 combo, like Hamlet-Menagerie, the game will end as soon as it starts.  I'd prefer not to change the benefit, but the only solution I really came up with is limiting the number of Macabres to 8.

Some people are vexed by the "play an action for no effect."  That's understandable, as it's the only thing in the game like that.  But, that's also what makes the card cool.  Playing an action for no effect is, as these things go, not ALL that confusing.  It's easy to track.  Yeah, it creates rules questions, but all of them have clear answers.  An action played this way plays as if it has no text in its box.  It triggers Conspirator, Horn of Plenty, Urchin, and Horse Traders, because it still has a card-type and a name.  But it does nothing else.  It has no "while-in-play effects."  Durations played this way leave play during clean-up, as Tactician does when you play it with no cards in hand, (that is, "for no effect.")

EDIT: I see now that the technical Dominion term for the text in the box is "abilities" not "effects."  It would be clearer wording to use the correct term on the card itself.

I prefer "play an action for no effect" to "set-aside an action now and discard it during clean-up."  Though they have similar effects, the first phrasing is simpler.  So that's my marginal preference.  Of course, discarding an action is simpler still, but it's not as harsh a penalty, and so the benefit can't be as cool.  That's my least favorite way of doing the card.

Then third, there's the benefit.  +4 Cards and +1 Action is pretty strong.  Is it too strong?  Well, that's the benefit of Village-Smithy.  It's also only one more +card than Stables, which discards dumb Coppers instead of wasting actions.  But, at 4, Danse Macabre is cheaper than Stables.  On the other hand, it's harder to get.  But, with Ironworks, Talisman, Haggler, etc, it's not THAT hard.  So, is the bonus too good?

Ironworks-Macabre I thought about a lot.  It's really strong.  It's different from Ironworks-Village-Smithy, because the Ironworks IS the Smithy.  (Or the Village.  Or it's an Ironworks!)  If you open Ironworks-Silver and then just buy Ironworks and use Ironworks to gain Danse Macabre, by turn 7 you can draw your deck, buy a Province, and also gain more Macabres.  You can do that 8 turns in a row, with luck.  I think you probably are unlikely to have that optimum luck -- sometimes you'll have dead hands.  And, hey, other combos can get all the Provinces by turn 14.  (Right?) 

But, the whole sequence feels like it might be programmatic and boring.  I think the problem is, wasting an action is sad.  Actions are fun.  Drawing cards is a little less fun.  I worry that +4 cards, +1 Action doesn't quite make up for wasting an action, in terms of enjoyability.  I suspect the bonus is not so game-breakingly strong, even with Ironworks.  But I wonder if it should be more interesting than "lots of cards."

Finally, some people don't want the card to have two lines.  They just want one big mushy sentence.  I don't get that at all.  Lines are great.

161

Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands

« on: September 14, 2013, 03:23:11 pm »

I'm still wondering why you think BM+ULS is better than BM Smithy, because it's not at all obvious to me which is better.  If you have simulations to back it up, or at least some play testing, I would believe it, but you just asserted it without explaining where it came from.

To be fair, he didn't assert anything, he just hypothesized.

162

Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity

« on: September 12, 2013, 08:44:51 pm »

The wikipedia article on Indulgence is very interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indulgence

Nerfed by The Council of Trent!

163

Mini-Set Design Contest / Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #3: Dark Ages

« on: September 10, 2013, 07:54:41 pm »

Magical Mr. Mistoffelees.

164

Game Reports / Re: Baronly Any Time to Pirate Ship

« on: August 22, 2013, 12:15:45 pm »

I think you are misreading ragingduckd's posts, then, because it seems clear to me that he HAS heard of the myth, and that his first post was an intentional reference to it.

"Nobody would suggest that letter order is irrelevant to written communication, or that the brain can effortlessly descramble any legal English sentence."

I disagree with this, ragingduckd.  This very thing has which you claim nobody would suggest, has, contrary to your statement, been absolutely suggested!  Evidence, you demand?  If you go to the link I posted, you can see someone suggesting this very thing.

165

Dominion General Discussion / Re: is merchant guild terrible?

« on: August 19, 2013, 07:42:23 pm »

It helps a little building your engine, but the ability to mass up lots of tokens while building makes it possible to build longer and megaturn.  If you can't do this, it is just a bad bridge.

166

Game Reports / Re: Baronly Any Time to Pirate Ship

« on: August 18, 2013, 02:03:39 pm »

Okay... why?

Edit: I'm not saying that there can't be a good reason, I just can't think of one and would thus like to know what yours was.

I was responding to ragingduck's "Nobody would suggest that letter order is irrelevant to written communication, or that the brain can effortlessly descramble any legal English sentence." 

But there actually is actually a popular urban myth claiming that letter order doesn't matter, and that the brain can automatically rearrange words.  One that I believed, and I think probably shark_bait believed.  The blog post that theory quoted talks about this urban myth in the part that theory didn't quote. 

Ragingduck is I guess unaware of this urban myth, and believes that the original claim was actually much milder: "The real point is that English as it is usually written has enormous redundancy, much of which is provided by short words that provide context for the long ones, which our brains pretty much skim over as a result."  But ragingduck is off-base.  His argument is pretty much in line with the debunking of this urban myth; he's not debunking the debunkers.  He just doesn't know which side he's on, because he's never encountered the urban myth, or has only encountered it in some weird watered-down off-brand form.

167

Game Reports / Re: Baronly Any Time to Pirate Ship

« on: August 18, 2013, 02:57:35 am »

There actually isn urban myth claiming that letter order within words is irrelevant, as long as the first and last letters are fixed.  I'd kinda guess that shark_bait saw it somewhere.  I know I've seen it all over the place.  Never seen it debunked before, though.

The original link:

http://scienceavenger.blogspot.com/2007/12/cambridge-word-scramble-study-its-fake.html

You may want to read the posts directly above yours....

I did.  Then I wrote that post.

168

Game Reports / Re: Baronly Any Time to Pirate Ship

« on: August 13, 2013, 07:35:09 pm »

There actually isn urban myth claiming that letter order within words is irrelevant, as long as the first and last letters are fixed.  I'd kinda guess that shark_bait saw it somewhere.  I know I've seen it all over the place.  Never seen it debunked before, though.

The original link:

http://scienceavenger.blogspot.com/2007/12/cambridge-word-scramble-study-its-fake.html

169

Game Reports / Re: Vineyards vs. Vault-Big Money

« on: July 27, 2013, 08:45:50 pm »

I would definitely want to try Vineyards here, though Vault could be faster. 

One strategy to consider is going for a Native Village megaturn, with the goal of drawing your whole deck, which would include two Rats, and then draining the Rats pile.

That last turn would require a lot of ingredients.  You'd need Worker's Villages, because you'd need to spend a few extra buys on Coppers, to feed the Rats.  You'd need Advisors, for draw on the megaturn, and you'd need a few Great Halls, to draw the cards that Advisor discards.  You'd need at least a couple Potions.  A lot of Native Villages.  Two Rats that you never play.  Probably a Silver or two.  So, it would take a lot of time to set up.  But, the payoff is 10-point Vineyards, which is probably enough to win.  Anyway, it'd be fun to try.

170

Puzzles and Challenges / Re: Atomic Wishing Well

« on: July 15, 2013, 05:08:50 pm »

How about Solitaire, then.

And also, let's stipulate one forced move: before any other actions are played, you must us University to gain an Inn.

171

Puzzles and Challenges / Re: Atomic Wishing Well

« on: July 15, 2013, 01:41:17 am »

1. Buy all the cards from the Black Market.
2. Overpay for Herald by like $200.  Remember the order of all the cards.
3. Play Atomic Wishing Well and guess everything correctly.

Are we supposed to find the fastest way to do this?  Or is the challenge supposed to be figuring out how to remember all those cards?

Ah.  Let's say, without Herald, then.

172

Puzzles and Challenges / Atomic Wishing Well

« on: July 14, 2013, 09:31:33 pm »

Imagine this card: Atomic Wishing Well.

1. Name a card.
2. Reveal the top card of your deck. If it's the named card, put it into your hand and return to step 1.

In other words, every time you correctly name the card on top of your deck, you get to make another wish.

The challenge: design a kingdom, excluding King's Court, Throne Room, and Procession.  The goal is to engineer a scenario in which you can guarantee the longest string of correct wishes, all of which are differently named cards.

Assume that you get one Atomic Wishing Well, it starts in your deck, and isn't a kingdom card.

173

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Thread to organize telling Goko they're wrong

« on: May 11, 2013, 05:10:44 am »

A tie is worse than a win. It's what you settle for.

If you play someone whose rank is lower than yours and you don't beat them, you should get a smaller number of points than if you win. If this person has a MUCH lower rank than you, this might be a negative score, and you'll lose points. Seems fair to me.

174

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Format of the logfilename

« on: May 03, 2013, 10:44:43 pm »

What if you're looking for a game you didn't host?

175

Game Reports / Re: Spotlight on...

« on: April 30, 2013, 04:40:16 am »

Who has that one game where Scout carried them to victory?

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120713-195219-c6ef8676.html