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 - The Alchemist

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7
126
Variants and Fan Cards / Dominion: Alchemy Reforged!
« on: April 13, 2021, 10:19:37 pm »
Dominion: Alchemy Reforged


Alchemy has always been my favorite expansion from a theme perspective. Being such a big part of the Medieval world of thought, Alchemy dominated scientific understanding for hundreds of years yet has such a small part in our popular culture, especially with respect to other aspects of pre-Renaissance life. So it was always a bit sad to see it quite often ranked as people's least favorite expansion, and for good reason. The potion mechanic is clunky, the attacks are annoying, it has the bottom two weakest cards in the game (out of 12), and Possession. This combined with many fan attempts I've seen at Potion cost cards that just don't hit the mark, and finally my love of historical alchemy, have inspired me to make a new expansion:
Alchemy 2: Electric Boogaloo Reforged!

This fan expansion is my attempt at a "second half" to Alchemy, a set which really deserved to be a full expansion in my eyes. Of all Alchemy's critiques rightly accused, the biggest one for me is... Alchemy hardly has any cards actually *about* alchemy! In the original set, only Transmute, Alchemist, and Philosopher's stone actually reference a concept derived from Alchemy - and two of those cards suck! So my first step was to actually fix what I found to be Alchemy's biggest atrocity, by remaking those two sorry excuses for cards and adding several others that actually have a theme derived from some Alchemic concept.

The second step was to fix that darned Potion mechanic. This first way to address this actually quite simple: More potion cards! A big drawback of Potion cost cards is simply the investment required for just one card (two if you're lucky) in the kingdom is just too great an opportunity cost to swallow, leading to many boards where these cards are simply flat-out ignored. To that end I've added 6 additional Potion cost cards, 8 counting the remade ones. Next, short of simply changing the rules of Potions, I included three projects in this set which, when included with Potion cost cards, eases some of the burden having Potions in your deck brings. Each is a nice quality-of-life change which should make playing with Potions a lot less annoying. And lastly, each Potion cost card in this set was designed with keeping one philosophy in mind: only put Potion costs on cards which have to be Potion cards. When used right, having a potion in the cost is a great way to temper a card that otherwise would not be balanced at any regular coin cost (more on this later), but they should not be used frivolously. Of the 10 potion-cost cards in Alchemy, only 5 really needed to have a potion in their cost to be balanced: Apothecary, Alchemist, Familiar, University, and Scrying Pool, though an argument could be made for the others. That's why for this fan expansion, with each Potion cost I will also be including a snippet as to *why* I believed the card does and has to have a potion in its cost. This is not an easy task, and I am by no means perfect, making balanced Potion fan cards that are also fun to play is a daunting task oft failed, but it's a challenge I am willing to take!

And the third step, bring Alchemy's intended goal to fruition. Action cards and Engines was always one of the main themes of Alchemy, but due to the other theme of Potions, this ended up falling flat on its face. So to revive this goal, I am also introducing to this expansion a host of non-Potion engine enablers, mainly Laboratory and Library variants (fitting for ones studying the alchemical arts), and in the process filling a much-needed engine niche that remains remarkably empty: Draw-to-X. There are currently only 4 Library variant/Draw-to-X cards in the game currently (only 7 if you count discard your hand then draw), meaning we're often stuck with just the one type of village-draw-village-draw-payload engine we're used to, when honestly I find the DtX variety much more fun. And thus, with the hope of increasing engine diversity, I've included 7 additional DtX cards.

Without further ado, here are the cards!

Potion costs:

Alkahest:
Alkahest is an arabic name given to the substance known as The Universal Solvent, a reagent able to dissolve anything it came into contact with, including its container! Thought to be an essential ingredient to making the philosopher's stone for its ability to decompose any complex matter into its base constituents, and thus considered one of the Holy Grails of Alchemy. Fitting to theme, don't be surprised when this card dissolves your entire deck of junk in one or two goes!
Why does it cost a Potion?: This card is basically a chapel variant with some sifting conditional on the trashing. As such it would be similarly priced, however, it is significantly stronger than chapel with any draw, being able to trash as many cards up to your current handsize. As such, in order to temper its momentum, a potion cost is justified.

Elixir of Life:
As the name suggests, the Elixir of Life grants longevity, even immortality, upon those who consume it. It's creation was one of the primary purposes of the Philosopher's Stone, being able to perfect base metals such as Lead to flawless Gold, it also, it was believed, would perfect the human to its most flawless form. This card is the perfect cure to any engine at risk of being dead, drawing dead that is. If you're out of +Actions or if you're out of any draw/terminal payload, this card will fix ya out of that bind and keep your engine alive!
Why does it cost a Potion?: This card is way too strong on the first shuffle, almost guaranteed to be a Lost City x2, since you haven't bought many actions yet. For that strength, it can't be an opener, and you'd have to price it at 6. But, once it's in your engine, it's much weaker than that, since once you have actions or have these collide, it's much more difficult to get both bonuses, sometimes even getting neither (if you were to draw 3 for example). Thus for it to have a fair price and still not be able to be an opening buy, the potion cost is necessary.

Ingredients:
Ingredients is a virtual silver but with the option of being a horse-traders/festival variant. +2 Actions, +$4, discard 3 vs +1 Buy, +$3, discard 2. Works very well with any Draw-to-X, as you can play it, discard 3, and be left with a single card to draw back up. Rinse and repeat. Also a nice coffers bonus on the side, great for providing your engine what it needs. One of 4 cards in this set that play themselves again.
Why does it cost a Potion?: Without the potion cost, this would be balanced at $4, but it's too good for the open, since this is a guaranteed $5 on the first shuffle. Even if you land this with 3 estates, you're guaranteed to be able to play this for $4 and still have a coffer left over. The only other $4-cost guaranteed $5 is Deathcart, and that can still be a one-shot without the right collision. So to be a non-automatic open, it would have to cost $5, but that would make it a very weak $5. Ergo, potion cost. And hey, now you don't have to hit the $6 pricepoint to get those coffers. One usually has spare coin lying around when buying potion cards anyway.

Aqua Vitae:
Alchemical name for distilled spirits useful for many reactions, and getting inebriated of course. Similar to Apothecary in its interaction with Potions and Coppers, and makes engines with little Copper thinning or DtX engines with potion cards a lot more viable. The and/or means to play up to 3 cards, of which either could be a Copper or Potion. Based off a similar card by eHalcyon with some inspiration by Shael.
Why does it cost a Potion?: This one's straightforward, it costs Potion to force Potions into the game. Played with other potion cards, it can make making engines with them a little less cumbersome.

Panacea:
The cure-all substance, able to return anyone to peak physical health. The Panacea, like the Elixir, was highly sought after by Alchemists, who believed all physical ailments were just chemical imbalances in the body that, if returned to balance, would heal any injury or sickness. This card is the cure-all for any engine you'd like to build, giving you exactly what you need. Based off a card by Graystripe77.
Why does it cost a Potion?: This card is strictly better than Laboratory, like Alchemist, so must cost more than $5. However like Alchemist, the card is not quite good enough to cost $6. This is one of the situations where the potion cost is perfect for making a card cost effectively close to 5, without needing to worry about strict power/price comparisons.

Transmute:
Ah Transmute, the card you love to hate. Trash for benefit is always nice, but when you're limited to only gaining 3 cards, none of which particularly appealing, its no wonder you're left with a trasher that leaves you with more junk than you started with. This version boosts its power level up to that of expand, with a type restriction of course.
Why does it cost a Potion?: This one's simply because the original also costed a Potion, but with this version, you can trash a Transmute for a Province instead of a lowly Duchy, and don't worry, you can still trash your Coppers for Transmutes and Estates for Golds. Only remodeller in the game that can get you Potion cost cards too, which may come in handy in this set.

Homunculi:
Alchemists' aspirations didn't end at immortality and command over the material earth oh no. They believed it was possible to animate a human from base organic matter. With this card use your Artificial human army to work your engine. If you set it up just right, you might just be able to play your whole deck.
Why does it cost a Potion?: Similar to Golem (its intention anyway), this card is just too strong if you can snowball into it early, so to dampen it a bit, you need to at least build up a bit before it is available, which honestly is what you'd want to do anyway.

The Philosopher's Stone:
The crème de la crème, the pièce de résistance, the hors d'oeuvres of the hour, The Philosopher's Stone has captivated the attention of not only Alchemists for hundreds of years but modern audiences as well. Believed to be the most perfect material possible, even being called quintessence, the element of the heavens, it was ascribed many magical seeming properties and qualities yet it was essential to the Alchemist's material view of the world. The stone was believed to be able to transform any material substance into any other, though unsurprisingly gold stood out in the forefront. Such a powerful object deserves an incredibly powerful card to match. The original card... didn't. Hopefully this version does it justice, while having a much more thematic effect, turning junk into Gold and letting you buy other Potion cards more easily as well. Fitting to the theme, colliding potions is pretty much one of the hardest costs to reach, and the Philosopher's stone was the biggest goal of the Alchemists. Turn your hands into Gold today!
Why does it cost two Potions?: A card with this powerful of an effect needs a strong enough barrier to gaining. Fortune needs 5 cards removed from its pile before being purchased, and even then costs 16 equivalent. I wanted to make a Treasure card similarly powerful, fitting of the name Philosopher's stone, and needing to collide two potions was the perfect condition. It is similar to Treasure Map in that regard, and similar thinking that goes into building around that should go into this.


Draw-to-X and Lab Variants:

Holy Relics:
In the Rites of Excommunication in the Catholic Church, one deemed heretical enough to no longer be in communion is ostracized by sacred ritual involving a Bell, a Book, and a Candle. Many alchemists in their time were excommunicated for partaking in the Devil's art. With this card, if you can manage to hold on to all 3 pieces, you can have a mini DtX engine of your own on a board that otherwise would not have catered well to it.

Four Elements:
The alchemists believed that all the world was up of only four distinct elements in various proportions. A burning log demonstrates this fact by its decomposition, the Air released as smoke, the water that sizzles out, the earthen ash left behind, and of course the fire liberated as it burns. Here they form a split pile of 16 cards, in the order Air, Water, Earth, Fire, repeated four times. These four cards represent all the key components needed for a good DtX engine: thinning, discarding, virtual coin, and of course the draw.

Bibliothecary:
Well someone has to maintain all these libraries! Archaic name for librarian, this card nets out to a terminal Discard 2, Draw 3, unless you've managed to shrink your handsize by playing non-draw actions first that is. And hey, here are some villagers to help you out with that!

Athenaeum:
A center of learning in Classical Greece and even today, an athenaeum is a place for all scholars alike to gather and share their knowledge. A combined Festival and Library in one, this single-card engine is great in almost any deck.

Research Library:
Part lab, part library. The Research Library is the laboratory equivalent to DtX, drawing 2 cards with 1 Action when played from your starting hand. Be wary though, because unless you've got some non-draw actions afterwards to play, this card is only a cantrip from then on out. However if a DtX engine isn't your thing, no need to fear, because if you do somehow manage to get past 6 cards in your hand, this card is once again your run-of-the-mill Laboratory.

Study:
Another DtX Lab variant, except this time letting you play a card before drawing. A Lab if you play a Treasure, but can be a Lost city if you play the right action. And if you do have more than 5 cards in hand, hey its at least a Necropolis.

Workroom:
A combination Workshop/Lab, this card alternates between gaining a card and drawing a card. DaVinci would be proud!

Royal Archives:
The royal Scholar, when not in the Council Room advising the monarch, spends his time here in the Royal Archives! Payload, draw, and sifting all in one, with the right cards it can easily draw your deck, but also discard it all too! Make sure to bring enough +Actions!


The Rest:

Chain Reaction:
Sometimes when things seem mostly under control, it just takes one trigger to start a chain reaction that can lead to catastrophe! Chain a bunch of these Reactions together and see how far you can go. The first play is pretty weak as far as trashers go, but if you can trigger it off another trash, it becomes +3 cards and replace a card in your hand with one in the trash into your discard. i.e. a lab with "trash sifting". Combos incredibly well with trash-for-benefit. Costs $2 to be available in the open with any of the plethora of $5 trashers and so it can be remodeled from copper.

Black Powder:
Speaking of explosions, it was after all Chinese alchemists who first invented gunpowder while attempting to create the elixir of life. This attack is the first to trash from opponent's hand, but out of 5 cards to choose from, it's likely you'll be helping rather than hurting, so make sure you play them at the right time!

Orrery:
A mechanical model of the Solar System, orreries were some of the first ever mechanical devices invented. In fact, the first mechanical computer invented in Greek antiquity, the Antikythera Mechanism, was indeed an orrery. And as the celestial bodies do their circular dance around the sun, so too will your cards revolve around your deck with these in play. Talk about cycling! The sifting effect combined with being able to seed your next shuffle with cards you gain makes it great for deck control, just make sure not to fill the bottom of your deck with junk. Watch out Star Charts you've been upgraded!

Distill:
Reduce those cards to their base essence with distillation! Highly useful not just in DtX engines but any time spare villagers or coffers are in demand, or heck, just get it for some alt-VP. A niche item for sure but one with many uses!

Aqua Regia:
Aqua Regia is the name given to the most powerful acid known to alchemists until the modern era, the only acid known to be able to dissolve Gold! Meaning "Royal Water", this red acid was thought to be instrumental in the pathway towards finding the Alkahest and ultimately the Philosopher's stone! Here you can dissolve your Golds into any number of cards, anything from two Duchies to 5 Estates to 2 silvers and a copy of itself. Oh and Aqua Regia is known to dissolve Copper too don't ya know.

Sanctum:
A better well-secluded place for further research won't be found beyond Sanctum. In exile is the perfect place for your actions and treasures to focus on unlocking the secrets of the universe, just make sure you have them in the right balance!

Quicksilver:
Mercury, the alchemist's best friend. The liquid metal has been perplexing those studying it since its discovery 3500 years ago, the first discovered with the likes of Gold, Silver, Copper, and Lead, preceding even Iron! This dual nature led many alchemists to ascribe almost mystical properties to the metal, and along with Sulfur and Salt, it was thought to be the root of not just the Philosopher's stone but all metals. This Action-Treasure shares a similar dual nature, being the classic peddler variant in the Action phase, and a +Buy silver in the buy phase. This combined with the topdeck ability make it perfect in both engine decks but also big money decks, as now you can rest assured your smithies if they collide with this will still be able to play them, and if they collide with each other you can always save one for the next turn.

Prima Materia:
It was believed that before the universe separated out into 4 distinct elements, there was a single substances which permeated the cosmos, the prima materia. This substance was without quality or property, having no color, density, viscosity, or texture. Many alchemists believed that in order to transmute one material to another, one had to first break it down not just to its elemental components but then return the elements themselves to prima materia so that they can be formed again into different proportions and forming a new material of your choosing. And so too does this card. The perfect blank canvas, this card transforms itself into the last thing it touched, or played, taking on its likeness, ready to be used immediately.


Projects:

Potion Seller:
Sometimes one of the biggest drawbacks of Potions is the opportunity cost of getting a potion the turn you drew a lot of other coin, and needing to choose between waiting another shuffle for that potion cost card or getting something more expensive. With a +Buy however, Potions become a lot less inconvenient, and heck, you might even grab one just for the buy if its the only one around!

Fermentation:
Allowing something to sit instead of causing it to stagnate can surprisingly allow it to flourish instead. If you do happen to forgo using your potion this turn, you can rest assured you can have it saved until it is needed, or better yet, set up an even better next turn with the best of what you had now. Choose between using your potion or double Scheming as you research for the future.

Magnum Opus:
The great work, the alchemist's dream, the pinnacle of human achievement, it's what we have been building up to all this time. This the final project does the impossible, turning Potions to Gold.  With some preparation and investment, Golds can be yours for the rest of the game for the low price of $4 instead, making them significantly more enticing.


And we have come to the end of our journey. Hopefully with the work we've put forth, Alchemy can attain the glory it once had and lost, and be relevant once again as an integral and unique part of this Dominion!

127
If it's within the rules for me to ask SilverSpawn directly, I actually had two different versions of my submission I was going back and forth on, and was wondering if I could ask which you prefered?



These two cards are not meant to coexist, just two different implementations of my Curse token idea that takes them in very different directions.

128
Weekly Design Contest / Curses! Tokened again!
« on: April 11, 2021, 11:29:16 pm »
Incantation:


The negative token I have decided to go with is the Curse token, represented by a raven icon. Each Curse token is worth -1 VP. Like VP tokens, they are added to a pool owned by a player and are unlimited. Unlike VP tokens, you can lose as well as gain them, but you cannot go below zero.

129
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 11, 2021, 02:57:50 pm »
Results!

Very well designed cards everyone! There's not a single card I would describe as lackluster, and with a few minor tweaks I think any of these cards could have been in the number one spot! Very close call, congratulations all! This judgement was so delayed because I had to just spend a whole day thinking about the cards and seeing how they looked on second sight, and then another day for the feedback they all deserved. This is a very tough choice to make but I think I have to go with:

Honorable mentions: Orcs/Elven Village, Faustian Dealings
Runner up: Fishwife/Townspeople
Winner: Craftsman

Congratulations to user DunnoItAll! Seems you do know something after all!



(Posted is an updated wording done with the card creator's feedback and permission)


130
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 10, 2021, 08:38:29 am »
Judgement:



Card: Textile Mill
Creator: Aquila
Mechanic: Exhaust state, -1 Action on the next immediate available +Action, even carrying over to future turns.
Judgement: I really like the card theme and name here, you have textillers working and you can overwork them for a bigger benefit, and I think overpay for villagers is a very good mechanic that I'm surprised never made it into the game (at least yet anyway). This is also one of those cards where having overpay for villagers really makes sense. The implementation of -1 Actions you've decided to go with, while very clever and mirroring exactly the implementation of -1 card tokens, is harsh enough where I don't see cards being able to use it without also including villagers, and that's pretty restrictive from a design standpoint. I believe almost all the cards in your expansion do in fact include a villager mechanic where exhaust is included, so at least that issue is addressed, but for this card, I don't think the benefit I'd get, 2 extra cards, would be worth risking a dead turn. I would only ever play the card if I could get rid of exhaust this turn, or had a villager on hand (limiting my plays of this card to often once or twice since $7 is usually how high I'd overpay), so that severely limits this card in a way a $5 smithy variant doesn't need to be limited. I however do like that the exhaust is optional, so maybe it's fine if the benefit is not *too* good, and maybe +3 cards instead is too strong, but that's where I'd put it. Regardless, very well designed card thematically and mechanically.



Card: Elves and Orcs
Creator: silverspawn
Mechanic: -1 Action, applied conditionally on presence of unused Actions.
Judgement: Elves and Orcs are a great theme, I love it. This would go great in some Fantasy-like expansion. I really like Orc, very simple and aesthetically pleasing use of -1 Action. It's basically a smithy that can only be used if you've already played a villager and even then is still terminal, and if you think you can't do that regularly, then it's junk, and you can spend your normal action in a turn getting rid of it. I like it a lot. Elven village on the other hand I'm less crazy about. The concept of a junker giving out orcs I think is okay, but the big problem is when you'd want to do that. When there's lots of terminal space on a kingdom and Orc's the only draw, its actually a pretty good draw as far as things go, and I'd want some for myself. On boards where there's no villages however, you know I'm going to be going for that junker. Elven village is a village, so it kinda forces the game into the "Orcs are good" state. Sure, if you win the Elven split, you're at an advantage, but you've also handed out a winning split of orcs too. If you've played a village, then playing an Orc is like playing two Moat variants, so a village that hands out 2 moats to your opponents, where they can spend an action to trash their extras, seems like one I would probably just skip all too often, until my opponents buys them and hands me free Orcs of course. In short: Orcs great, Elves not so much. A suggested change (though you might have to change the card's theme) would be to make Elven village a supervillage (+3 Actions) for $4 (okay since I think opponents gaining orcs is more often a drawback), and allowing you to optionally gain an Orc for yourself as well. Great card(s)!



Card: Legendary Hunter
Creator: mxdata
Mechanic: Spending unused Actions for an equal-amount benefit
Judgement: You submitted 3 cards here and I will taking my opinion of your best one as your submission. I do like how you've chosen to use spending Actions as the mechanic on all your cards, it does dodge the hairy question of negative Actions nicely. Spending Actions for Buys was pretty nice on your other cards, but I thought spending Actions for cost reduction on this card was very clever and something I myself would never have thought of. I really like it's uniqueness. It is a terminal draw, so the more of these you get, the more expensive they become as you'll have less and less spare +Actions. I like the theme pairing with Hunting Grounds as well. The only downside I see is it's cost. +5 cards would be balanced at $7 I believe, however I find that on most turns in most games you'll have maybe one or two spare Actions at the end of your turn, if that, so I think this card is usually more expensive than its worth. It would be better at $8 or even $7 honestly. Where this card really shines is when you would buy multiple of these, because then each spare Action you have is not just an effective $1, but $1 for each one you'd buy in an effect similar to bridge. However at this price, that would rarely happen. I think this effect belongs on a cheaper, less powerful card, and then it'd be really really good. A +3 Card +1 Buy variant I think would be perfect.



Card: Faustian Dealings
Creator: Xen3k
Mechanic: -1 Action and -1 Buys, applied conditionally on presence of unused Actions/Buys.
Judgement: Faustian dealings is a great name for a card, especially one that trades Actions and Buys. I am fond of Action-Treasures and I like how this spends Actions in the Action phase and Buys in the Buy phase. You need either 2 Actions or 2 Buys to get the benefit and I think that's really neat. The card wording could use quite a bit of cleaning up though. There's a lot of conditionals and is very wordy, with 3 different groups of effects in the Action phase. I think you'd be fine if you just moved the on-play abilities to the conditional benefit. Sure it makes a much riskier card, but that's fitting of the theme, and Action-Treasures are flexible enough to be able to take on the extra risk. I would suggest:
"If it is your Action phase and you have 1 or more Actions remaining: -1 Action, +2 Buys, +$2.
If it is your Buys phase and you have 2 or more Buys remaining: -1 Buy, +$3."

That reduces a lot of text and makes it significantly clearer what exactly the card is giving you. If the risk is still a problem, then you can include "If neither, +1 Buy, +$1" and I think the card would still be balanced. There's a lot of potential with this card and I think with some simplification this could be the best in the set!



Card: Leverage
Creator: spineflu
Mechanic: -1 Buy, allowing negative values not specified
Judgement: It's simple, I like that. Basically a non-terminal inventor, except with a -1 Buy drawback on Victories. Buys and cost reduction are a strong combo, so I can see why the antisynergy is there, to prevent bridge-like megaturns, but this card doesn't give you +1 Buys anyway, and so if there was +Buys on the board I would just ignore them, because an inventor megaturn is just as strong as a bridge one, and that one doesn't really care if you have Buys, the goal is to empty greens with the gain anyway. I want to like it but it's hard to see where it shines and where it duds. I think I'm missing something here. If I am not, then maybe I would consider dropping the Victory conditional and just make -1 Buy on all gains? And then maybe make the gain conditional so it's not too oppressive. It does seem to be a different card at that point, so I don't know what to think of this card, but that is the direction I'd take it. On a different note, leverage is a cute name for a -1 Buy card, though nothings really being borrowed/invested. The picture is just some guy though, is that Mr. Leverage?



Card: Craftsman
Creator: DunnoItAll
Mechanic: -1 Action on gain, so long as not already at 0 Actions
Judgement: First of all, definitely an easy text fix that doesn't change the card almost at all:
"Choose one: Gain a card costing up to $4; or, if you have 1 or more unused Actions, -1 Action and gain a card costing $5."
The only case that isn't preserved is when you want to play the card but don't want to gain at all, and you do happen to have 1 or more unused Actions and thus can't choose the second for nothing (which is what you'd get if you didn't meet the condition), but that's a rare enough situation to not really matter. Since this wording is similar to a previous version of this card you've posted already that I've seen, I will base my Judgement on this wording instead. Now to the card, gaining any card costing up to $5 is an effect reserved only to Artisan, Altar, and Vampire, and for good reason, it's a really strong effect that needs some drawback, even at $6 (though Artisan and Altar are only sometimes drawbacks), but I think this is the perfect compromise for a $5 gainer that costs $5. It is severely limited in how many of itself it can gain per turn, needing another village play every additional time you want to gain a $5. It also defaults to a $4 gainer, though it is very weak to other $5 cost $4 gainers in comparison. The only issue I have is that, without any villages, this can just never trigger its $5 gain effect, and that makes the card very weak, much weaker than Falconer or Sculptor, both of which can gain a $4 to your hand. It's basically a very expensive workshop on villageless boards. For that reason I think you should drop the condition in the second half, and simply have a line at the bottom reading "(You cannot go below 0 Actions.)". This way it doesn't need a village play to get its $5 effect, but still needs 2 village plays if you want to keep playing Actions afterwards. This way it's still a limited $5 gainer, being hard to play multiple a turn, but not so limited as to being hard to play at least one a turn. With that change, combined with the fact that I love the theme of the card with its thematic link to Artisan, I think this could be a real winner of a card.



Card: Fishwife and Townspeople
Creator: emtzalex
Mechanic: -1 Buy, Buys cannot go negative, specified externally. 
Judgement: Love how much this has going for it considering it only uses vanilla bonuses, love the simplicity! As for the cards themselves, it's tough. Fishwife is a good silver alt, and I like giving up a coin for +2 Buys. Fits in thematically with a fish seller too. The problem is I think it may be strictly better than silver, since it's as you say +1 +$2, but with the option to spend $1 for +2 Buys. The problem is an action version of silver and silver aren't strictly comparable, and the closest thing to this would be Patron, which this isn't strictly weaker than either, so tough to say. Maybe $3 is fine. For Townspeople however, a Lab or Village card is definitely strictly better than a lab, and I'm not sure if a -1 Buy is enough of a drawback to bring it down to $4. Especially since the way you have it, you can play as many of these as you want as labs, only lose one buy, then play a single fishwife for +2 Buys all back. You'd just never want to play fishwife, or any +buy, before your Townspeople, and that's fine, because Fishwife doesn't draw, you'd want to play it at the end of your turn anway, since you usually play all your draw first before your payload. You would therefore just always play townspeople as a lab, as the drawback is not really a drawback unless you get really unlucky and don't draw any fishwives, but that's a risk I'd almost always take for a cheap lab, unless a buy this turn was crucial. It either needs some condition not allowing it to be played without surplus buys, or some other combination of bonuses. With a condition, then I think it's pretty balanced, you'd be forced to have to play fishwives beforehand, and every one you play lets you lab twice, so 3 cards for double lab at $11 combined, that I think is pretty good. Thematically I can see it being called Townspeople from the village aspect, but since it's a split pile, I'd have liked it if the second card fit with the first, but I can understand the difficulty in that since Fisherman and Fishing village are already taken. Maybe change one card to Fishmarket and another to Fishwife? Makes sense because one buys and one sells, in a way.
Suggested wording for Townspeople: "+1 Card, +1 Action, Choose one: +1 Action; or, if you have 1 or Buys, +1 Card and -1 Buy". That at least lets you still risk having 0 Buys for that one last Townspeople play, and I kind of like that risky choice available.
Also minor change but for clarity I would suggest this wording for Fishwife: "+1 Action, Choose one: +$2; or +$1 and +2 Buys"



Card: Bridgeman and Drawbridge
Creator: mathdude
Mechanic: -1 Buy, Buys can go negative, specified on a previous version of the card.
Judgement: Looks good, I especially like the theme with bridge, and how you need to play a bridgeman to get the full effect of the drawbridge, nice design thematically. Would be nice if you included pictures however, I'm sure it'd look great! As for the card, I like that it's a split, with the first giving Buys and the second taking them, similar to the previous entry. This is also a safer version, since the taker is a Treasure you can always know how many Buys you have before deciding to play it. I don't like how Bridgeman is strictly worse than Candlestick maker, I think it could have given +2 Buys and still costed $2, but then drawbridge would need to be weaker as it would be too easy to fit the condition, but that would have been my next feedback anyway. I think I would have prefered it reduce cost by 1 instead of 2, since the only time you'd want to play Drawbridge is if you had 2 or more buys anyway (since you'd never sacrifice your only buy for an effective 3 coins). In fact, it would make more sense to just put "If you have at least 2 Buys remaining: " at the start of the card, that way you dont need a new line specifying whether or not buys can go negative, and the card effectively does the exact same thing, since no one would every want to play the original card at 1 buy anyway for 1 coin if they can't buy anything afterwards. Either way, reduce by 2 is significantly better than 2 reduce by ones, since its half the card space, it would be like putting a +1 card on bridge. Moreso, it'd be like making bridge cantrip, cause they're not terminal by being treasures. So Drawbridge is basically a Highway and Bridge, but with +1 Action -1 Buy instead of +1 Buy, which I want to say makes it (almost) strictly better than bridge at $4. Better to just make this weaker by reducing cost by 1 (It would still be comparable to bridge, trading +1 Action for -2 Buys), and slightly buffing Bridgeman in response. That would also make losing the Drawbridge split a lot less oppressive, since presumable there are only 5 in the pile. Other than that, I really like the interplay between these cards and the theme you chose, good work.

131
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 08, 2021, 08:00:51 am »
12 hour warning!

132
Here is my submission

Feedback welcome

I think this does need to say "At the start of each of your turns for the rest of the game" like hireling. As it is written, (if it didn't have the parenthetical) then the copper effect would never activate. A duration card only stays out for as long as the effect on the card instructs it to, and the turn you play it, the start of turn has already passed.

133
Weekly Design Contest / Orrery
« on: April 05, 2021, 04:33:52 am »
Orrery:



Orrery lets you move cards from your discard to hand to deck, opposite the normal flow, the rotation between the 3 parts of your deck mimicking the celestial dance. Similar to Star Chart, lets you set up your hands with a bit of reverse-sifting, and can clear a bit of junk from your remaining deck. Two or more in play and you can effectively choose any card from your entire deck you want in your hand to start your turn with. Cards must be done in the order written, so starting a turn without any discard results in needing to topdeck a card, if you only have one Orrery in play. With 6 in play any hand of 5 you wish can be yours.

Discarding from your deck works just like discarding from hand, you may look through your deck and pick a card from it to put onto the discard pile, but you cannot change the order of the cards in any way. They are simply put back in the order they were. "Put a card from your deck to your discard pile" was a wording I was seriously considering, but I feel "discard a card from your deck" is understandable enough, and it is shorter after all. After all Orreries (and any other start of turn cards) have been resolved, then you shuffle the deck once (since back-to-back shuffles instructed by multiple cards is effectively the same as just one shuffle). With the errata, you are no longer required to look through your discard to pick a card from it, but I decided just to leave it in for more clarity.

Let me know what you think!

134

Quote
Salt Mine • $5 • Action - Duration
At the start of your turn, trash the top card of your deck. You may gain a copy of the trashed card to your hand.

(This stays in play)

Salt the Earth or just general deck-cleaning. Get a bunch to do a 3pile.

Isn't this for the most part better than Hireling? Granted, it sucks when piles start to run out but in the early game it's a Hireling+ for $5.

Not when it hits green (and inadvertently thins the provinces). Or when it hits junk. It's also different in Necromancer games. Think I should drop the "to your hand" part?

Yes I do believe this is (almost) strictly better than hireling. It's virtually: "+1 Card and either trash the drawn card or a copy of the drawn card from the supply". So, excluding times when the pile for the drawn card is empty, it's always a hireling+. This needs to be more than 6 if it gains to hand. I'd say drop the to your hand part.

135
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 04, 2021, 10:09:01 pm »
I would also like to point out that however you choose to implement -Actions, you'll need to consider how they would work with cards that can cause you to play another card, like Vassal.  If you go with the "you can not play a card if it would make you go negative", then what happens when Vassal turns over a -Action card and you have no Actions remaining?  Does it treat it like a non-Action?  Does it go into play but do nothing (because you don't have the Action needed for it)?  Or do you make a special rule for those types of situations and say you can play it if you're forced to play it, but you still only have 0 Actions not -1?  (And likewise, if you Throned it with only one Action remaining, does it only play it once, because after the first play you're at 0?)

I am not sure if you are replying to me or not, but that's the reason why I explicitly did *not* have the rule "you can't play a card if it will make you go negative". With my card, you can go negative at any time if the cards tell you to, it's just, as usual, you can only play a new Action card if you have 1 or more action available. If you vassal a Steel forge, you spend one to play the vassal, the forge is played, and now you have -1. If you king court a steel forge, you end up with -3 Actions.

With Segura's intended version, you either just always remain at 0 after any number of plays, still allowing you play the card via vassal or throne room as many times as required (Which I disliked due to significantly hindering the impact of the -1 in these situations), or you have a "You may spend an Action to..." clause as he suggested, which would mean if you tried to vassal or throne room without any actions to spend, any text after that clause would just simply not occur, but you would still treat it like any other action card in play.

All 3 of these implementations of -1 Action are perfectly valid, and all can lead to interesting cards and effects, so I would not discourage anyone from trying any of these ones laid out.

136
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 04, 2021, 04:47:15 pm »
Actions are a resource in a Dominion that you can spend. It makes absolutely no sense to have negative Actions. You can only spend resources that you actually have.

And you're free to have your cards follow that rule if you wish. As of now, there is no ruling one way or another on whether Actions or Buys can go negative, so you can't really say whether it makes sense or not if there's no precedent. Actions are only a counter after all, and there's nothing inherent to them that demands non-negativity.
None of the 4 basic resources of the game can become negative. It is common-sensical, you can only spend stuff that you have.
Coins also cannot become negative, Debt is a totally different mechanism.

I'm not sure what your concern is, of course none of the 4 basic resources go negative in the base game, that's the entire point of fan mechanics. If it were already part of the game, then we wouldn't be discussing it here. Coins and the like cannot become negative because there are no cards with negative vanilla bonuses, that's the entire point of this contest. And regardless, the possibility of negative actions doesn't mean you can continue to use actions while negative to become even further negative. If you have 0 or less actions, you can't play any actions. Your statement "you can't spend what you don't have" isn't applicable here. None of these fan cards allow you to do that.
So your card implies that you can once go under zero with Actions but once you are in the negative realm you cannot play another card with -Actions.
Dude, that’s hyperunintuitive.

Spend X Actions is a fine mechanism. -X Actions with some weird „you can go once below zero but once you are you cannot play other -X Action cards“ rule is not.

Think about when you would go below zero. I never stated my card allows you to go below zero once. The rules around my card were "Do what the card says. If you do not have 1 or more actions afterwards, you cannot play another card", just like any other card. If you play a -1 Action card, that means you had 1 action, and were thus allowed to play a card, now having 0, do what the card says, and now have -1. You cannot play another action. It's exactly the same as playing any other terminal. You are not "allowed to go below once and then not again", you are simply allowed to play any action card if you have 1 action available, and if you are at 0 you can't play an action card period. It would be less intuitive if you couldn't play a -1 Action card while having 1 action. And anyway, the only time it matters whether or not you have 0 or -1 is when it comes to how many villagers you need to get back to 1 action. Once again, you are free to implement it however you wish.
Dude, you explicitly said that Steel Foundry means that you can end up with -1 Action and you just said it again. So according to you you can most definitely go below zero with the Action counter.
My point is that this is a total mess rule-wise (gee, the very fact that we have this discussion shows this). It makes far more sense to implement it Storyteller-style as „spend an Action“ which means that you need two Actions to play Steel Foundry.

Spending resources is cool, it is a basic mechanism familiar to anybody who plays Euros. But being able to spend stuff that you don’t have, man, just no. There is no precedent for this in Dominion, it will lead to quite some confusion and it also makes the card itself behave very weird (no idea about why you sting to it, all it achieves is make the card better suited for money).

Yes, Steel Foundry does make you end with -1 Action if its the only card you play. What I was countering is your supposition that it only allows you to go negative *once* as if that were a special rule, which you were implying. Why would it make more sense for some Actions to take 2 to play but most to take 1? There's no precedent for that either. And anyway, why are you using precedent to justify what does or doesn't make sense on a competition that's literally about fan mechanics. There's no precedent for anything we do here, by definition. Being able to go negative on a resource is not so outlandish a concept that it doesn't appear in other games. And once again, you aren't spending what you don't have, you are simply following the cards instructions. If you look at my original post, I also have Stock Exchange, which *does* ask you spend Actions, and for *that* card, you can only spend Actions that you have. I agree that for a story-teller type card, you shouldn't be able to spend more than you have. But -1 Action as a vanilla bonus isn't spending anything, it's updating a counter. That's why it doesn't say "Spend an action, you may go negative."

You keep interpreting it as something that it is not, and that's fine, you are free to make your own card that does work the way you want it to. That's the point of this contest, I never said you have to treat -1 Actions the way I did, nor that I was biased to my own implementation. If you submit your story-teller style smithy variant, I will gladly judge it on its merits and not consider the way you decided to implement -1 Actions as any way inferior to my own. At the end of the day, this is a fan card, and a fan card mechanic, and like the English language, their our know rules.

137
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 02, 2021, 07:36:53 pm »
Actions are a resource in a Dominion that you can spend. It makes absolutely no sense to have negative Actions. You can only spend resources that you actually have.

And you're free to have your cards follow that rule if you wish. As of now, there is no ruling one way or another on whether Actions or Buys can go negative, so you can't really say whether it makes sense or not if there's no precedent. Actions are only a counter after all, and there's nothing inherent to them that demands non-negativity.
None of the 4 basic resources of the game can become negative. It is common-sensical, you can only spend stuff that you have.
Coins also cannot become negative, Debt is a totally different mechanism.

I'm not sure what your concern is, of course none of the 4 basic resources go negative in the base game, that's the entire point of fan mechanics. If it were already part of the game, then we wouldn't be discussing it here. Coins and the like cannot become negative because there are no cards with negative vanilla bonuses, that's the entire point of this contest. And regardless, the possibility of negative actions doesn't mean you can continue to use actions while negative to become even further negative. If you have 0 or less actions, you can't play any actions. Your statement "you can't spend what you don't have" isn't applicable here. None of these fan cards allow you to do that.

Poor House has -$, and it has been established that you cannot go below $0 (even though it *could* make sense, since you can play other Action cards with +$ or Treasure cards), and cost-reduction likewise cannot go below $0, so there's already precedent for "no negative amounts"

Those cards had to explicitly state "but not below zero". If it has to be stated, then it isn't obvious, implied, or necessarily true. That means it's up to the card creator to decide for themselves what the default behavior for their card will be.

138
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 02, 2021, 07:31:47 pm »
Actions are a resource in a Dominion that you can spend. It makes absolutely no sense to have negative Actions. You can only spend resources that you actually have.

And you're free to have your cards follow that rule if you wish. As of now, there is no ruling one way or another on whether Actions or Buys can go negative, so you can't really say whether it makes sense or not if there's no precedent. Actions are only a counter after all, and there's nothing inherent to them that demands non-negativity.
None of the 4 basic resources of the game can become negative. It is common-sensical, you can only spend stuff that you have.
Coins also cannot become negative, Debt is a totally different mechanism.

I'm not sure what your concern is, of course none of the 4 basic resources go negative in the base game, that's the entire point of fan mechanics. If it were already part of the game, then we wouldn't be discussing it here. Coins and the like cannot become negative because there are no cards with negative vanilla bonuses, that's the entire point of this contest. And regardless, the possibility of negative actions doesn't mean you can continue to use actions while negative to become even further negative. If you have 0 or less actions, you can't play any actions. Your statement "you can't spend what you don't have" isn't applicable here. None of these fan cards allow you to do that.
So your card implies that you can once go under zero with Actions but once you are in the negative realm you cannot play another card with -Actions.
Dude, that’s hyperunintuitive.

Spend X Actions is a fine mechanism. -X Actions with some weird „you can go once below zero but once you are you cannot play other -X Action cards“ rule is not.

Think about when you would go below zero. I never stated my card allows you to go below zero only once. The rules around my card were "Do what the card says. If you do not have 1 or more actions afterwards, you cannot play another card", just like any other card. If you play a -1 Action card, that means you had 1 action, and were thus allowed to play a card, now having 0, do what the card says, and now have -1. You cannot play another action. It's exactly the same as playing any other terminal. You are not "allowed to go below once and then not again", you are simply allowed to play any action card if you have 1 action available, and if you are at 0 you can't play an action card period. It would be less intuitive if you couldn't play a -1 Action card while having 1 action. And anyway, the only time it matters whether or not you have 0 or -1 is when it comes to how many villagers you need to get back to 1 action. Once again, you are free to implement it however you wish.

139
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 02, 2021, 09:50:54 am »
Actions are a resource in a Dominion that you can spend. It makes absolutely no sense to have negative Actions. You can only spend resources that you actually have.

And you're free to have your cards follow that rule if you wish. As of now, there is no ruling one way or another on whether Actions or Buys can go negative, so you can't really say whether it makes sense or not if there's no precedent. Actions are only a counter after all, and there's nothing inherent to them that demands non-negativity.
None of the 4 basic resources of the game can become negative. It is common-sensical, you can only spend stuff that you have.
Coins also cannot become negative, Debt is a totally different mechanism.

I'm not sure what your concern is, of course none of the 4 basic resources go negative in the base game, that's the entire point of fan mechanics. If it were already part of the game, then we wouldn't be discussing it here. Coins and the like cannot become negative because there are no cards with negative vanilla bonuses, that's the entire point of this contest. And regardless, the possibility of negative actions doesn't mean you can continue to use actions while negative to become even further negative. If you have 0 or less actions, you can't play any actions. Your statement "you can't spend what you don't have" isn't applicable here. None of these fan cards allow you to do that.

140
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 02, 2021, 07:24:02 am »
Actions are a resource in a Dominion that you can spend. It makes absolutely no sense to have negative Actions. You can only spend resources that you actually have.

And you're free to have your cards follow that rule if you wish. As of now, there is no ruling one way or another on whether Actions or Buys can go negative, so you can't really say whether it makes sense or not if there's no precedent. Actions are only a counter after all, and there's nothing inherent to them that demands non-negativity.

141
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: April 01, 2021, 11:21:06 pm »
In my version, I had actions reset at the start of your next turn to 1 regardless of how negative, and like caravan -1 Actions have no effect outside your turn.

142
Variants and Fan Cards / Contest #6: Spend, spend, spend!
« on: April 01, 2021, 11:05:21 am »
Fan Card Mechanic Contest #6: Spend, spend, spend!

Alright, you've heard of -1 card tokens, you've heard of spending coin for cards, now get ready for spending Actions and Buys!
The theme for this week will be -1 Action and -1 Buy, up to you how you would like to implement it. Straight vanilla bonus or -1 token, you set the rules. You can even include spend for benefit. Be explicit about details. If vanilla, do you go negative at 0, interaction with villagers, etc. If tokens, do they work like the -1 card and coin token, when are they returned, etc.

Here are some implementations of the concept as examples by myself and others:

   

In my implementation in Steel Foundry for example, your Action count can go negative, and thus you'd need to spend 2 villagers to play another action card, but you are free to implement a "not-less-than-zero" approach. Stock exchange is another from my Industrialization fan expansion. Savings is an implementation by X-Tra. You can read the secret history for Workshop here to see an implementation of -1 Buy that Don X. considered. An example of a token version of the concept can be seen with Aquila's exhausted token here, which removes one Action from your pool immediately once you have a non-zero number available. You could alternatively have it instead ignore your next +Action, ala Snowy Village, your choice. 

I personally take a liking to well-chosen theme and card art, so card images would be greatly preferred, though of course not required. Feel free to include multiple cards to illustrate your concept further. The contest window will be closed April 8th at 8:00 AM PST, and I will attempt to have the judgement out by that day's end. Good luck and happy fan carding!

143
The first rule doesn't work in practice. I and many others have had the exact same idea, but it doesn't work.

What the first rule essentially says is only the 2nd player is allowed to win the game by pileout. Considering around 30% of games are won that way, you've just replaced a 10% first player advantage with near total second player advantage.

As for the second rule, it doesn't work with any of the cards that change your second hand, like noble brigand or cavalry.

144
Variants and Fan Cards / It's a Wonderful Life
« on: March 26, 2021, 12:06:56 pm »
Without further ado, my take on the wonders!

   

I decided to go with the collaborative-project angle, with a wording more like the other landscapes. There are no kingdom cards, and like landmarks, there are no costs, the trigger to build is just always stated below a dividing line. The effect upon completion (fully advanced, a player cube on each space), is provided to all players and on every turn from the point of completion onwards, and is given by the main text above the line. The only distinction between players is provided by any bolded text that has slashes dividing the bonus. All players tied for first, the most cubes placed on the Wonder, get the first number, all players tied for second the second, etc., with no skipping of places in case of a tie. A player who places no cube gets no bonus, you can think of a Wonder as a delayed Project with an alternate cost as the buy-in. There is a front/backside to each card, with a two player and a three+ player variant of the Wonder.


While the above is my submission, here are few more cards to demonstrate the concept further:

   

   

The latter demonstrates that, where appropriate to reduce the First Person Advantage, an even number of spaces may be present on the Wonder. The decision for odd or even depends on the nature of the buy-in: for Great Library, an odd number reduces FPA, as the second player can always choose to discard 4 to catch up to match the first player.

145
Variants and Fan Cards / It's a Wonderful Life
« on: March 23, 2021, 08:51:16 am »
Alright I'm gonna put my stake in this. I've started working on a set of 7, the seven wonders of the ancient world naturally, so apologies for any duplicates. Are seven entries as a set allowed, or should I just limit my entry to one?

Also a clarification, are the squares on the card meant to be for player cubes? Not sure if that part was explained.

146
My submission:

     

Split pile of 16 cards, in order Air, Water, Earth, Fire four times, Air on top.

Each element on their own is a nice little support card, but combined together they each provide a key component to making a pretty strong draw-to-x engine. Just make sure to not let your opponent grab all the Waters!

147
pretty sure having 20 smithies in your deck is not good for a big money deck. I think this is unplayable in money decks, and rarely playable with trashing.

You don't necessarily need trash for benefit; something like Junk Dealer would probably be fine.

it could cost debt, but I don't think that's needed. Debt cost is a possibility, but I like it at 2$.

But the point stands, in a majority of boards a smithy is not junk. Gaining anything on top of smithy effect that isn't an estate, copper, curse, or ruin is a bonus and makes this card stronger than smithy. It can't cost less than a smithy. It either needs a real drawback, like the -1 VP suggested, or a higher price.

148




This is basically strictly stronger than a smithy, since gaining too many smithies is rarely a downside (even without villages, this would be good in a money deck). I think it needs to be $5, since what, only a quarter of games max actually have trash for benefit? But if it is a big concern, make it cost 5 debt. That way it doesn't get anything from tfb and still costs more than a plain smithy. At 2, this makes the 5/2 opening just way too good.

149
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Industrial Revolution Expansion!
« on: February 17, 2021, 03:43:54 pm »
Made a project to go along with this expansion, it's a bit of a joke card but it fits in here nicely.


150
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Game-changing Landscape cards, just for fun!
« on: January 25, 2021, 09:50:48 pm »
They sure do, since they are also Treasures. But what monster would defile the good name of socialism with capitalist scum?

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7

Page created in 2.339 seconds with 19 queries.