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.

76

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: February 13, 2020, 02:09:12 am »

Enchantments

Enchantments are a new card type.

When you gain a card, you may optionally enchant it with an Enchantment card in your hand or one that you have in play. You may only enchant each gained card once. Some Enchantments might have restrictions what cards they can enchant.

When you enchant a card, immediately set aside the Enchantment card along with the card being enchanted. Both cards will remain there for the rest of the game, and the Enchantment will provide some permanent effect based on the card enchanted. Neither the Enchantment nor the card enchanted is considered in play. Return them to your deck at the end of the game.

Enchantment/card combos do not stack; you may set an Enchantment aside with a card if you already have a copy of that Enchantment set aside with a copy of that card, but it will have no effect.

77

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 20, 2020, 09:19:30 pm »

Think the vanilla bonus should be stronger? +1 Buy +$3, maybe, but I think that compares too favorably to Sacred Grove. (Since Sacred Grove gives +1 Buy +$3 and a bonus that's more likely to help others than to help you, whereas this would give the same but with a bonus more likely to help you.)

78

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 20, 2020, 11:01:15 am »

Knight Errant
$5 - Action
+$3. Each player (including you) reveals and discards the top 2 cards of their deck and gains a copy of a card they revealed costing from $3 to $6 that you choose.

79

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 16, 2020, 09:39:23 am »

Harlequin/Capital...

Why yes, I would like two free Provinces.

80

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 07, 2020, 01:24:57 pm »

Maybe. It'd be very difficult to set up an overpay of more than $2. The $2 overpay is powerful, but at least sometimes there's a way for your opponent to steal it from you.

I think given the possibility to look at the Boons before receiving them, it isn't much worse than the variance the flame's gift already has.

81

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 07, 2020, 12:06:57 pm »

Not sure if this will be my final submission, but I'll put it down for now.

Gnome
Action/Fate - $2+
+1 Action. Look at the top Boon; you may receive it. If you don't, +1 Card.
--
When you buy this, you may overpay for it. If you do, receive the top Boon once per $1 you overpaid.

82

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 05, 2020, 08:06:31 pm »

I don't know about anyone else, but I think Forest Path being able to make Provinces cost $6 is pretty good and definitely worth $5...

Congrats NoMoreFun!

83

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 02, 2020, 02:45:33 pm »

Forest Path
$5 - Action
+1 Buy
Choose one: +$2, or put your -$2 cost token on a Supply pile. (Cards from that pile cost $2 less on your turns, but not less than $0.)

84

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 23, 2019, 04:01:20 pm »

edit: spineflu pointed out that  this comment was directed towards his suggestion towards a card, and not my contest submission. Probably using my name instead of his was a typo Something_Smart made?

Derp, yes, my bad. Topic summary confused me

85

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 23, 2019, 09:52:36 am »

I could change Magic Workshop to "choose an Action card costing at least $3." That would solve both the Silver and Potion problems, though it would remove the ability to distribute useless alt-VP like Duke and Feodum (which I thought was cool), but that's also probably for the better.

I think anordinaryman spineflu's suggestion is too political and also far too weak; I'd never take a $3 if it meant my opponent got a $5, and the Ruined Village aspect doesn't really help. (At least make it a cantrip, though it could be interesting to make it a Peddler or Lab or something your opponent might want to accept the gift to deny you, but that's still very political in multiplayer.)

86

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 22, 2019, 11:12:54 am »

Too lazy to make another image, sorry

Magic Workshop
Action - $4
Gain a card costing up to $5.

Name an Action card in the Supply costing at least $3; each other player may gain a copy of it.

87

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 12, 2019, 04:33:35 pm »

Bicycle
$5 Action
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Bicycle. Put 3 of the revealed non-Bicycle cards into your hand, and discard the rest.

I think it might be too strong without the "non-Bicycle" clause, although I would like to remove it if possible. Essentially, it is a smithy+ that gets worse the more you have.

Bicycle/Tunnel has got to be broken. Buy a few Bicycles (and add a few more later on), buy as many Tunnels as you can manage, pick up Provinces easily with all the gold.

Prince/Inheritance with cost reduction is also nuts, as is +1 Action token and Scheme.

88

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 12, 2019, 11:55:23 am »

Haha, no it's fine, I was just curious if we both came up with the same idea independently. Like I said although they use a similar mechanic they're still quite different.

89

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 12, 2019, 10:23:21 am »

Oh god my title is Scout now, what kind of cruel prank is this.

Gazbag I gotta ask, did you come up with Cats before or after reading my Millstone card? I'm sure it plays differently (Cats is to Lab as Millstone is to Gold), but the structural similarity is there

90

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 11, 2019, 03:21:53 pm »

Millstone
$4 - Treasure
$1
Choose one: return this to the Supply for +$2, or gain a Millstone.

91

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 09, 2019, 04:34:05 pm »

I would recommend you get rid of the "discard them all" clause (and just say "if you have no more than 2 Bivouacs in play, put them all onto your deck"); I don't think it affects functionality except that it creates weird edge cases like preventing you from topdecking it with Scheme and allowing Walled Village to be topdecked.

92

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 09, 2019, 01:40:24 pm »

I think Rats just does the sadistic part better. (Fwiw I hate Rats but my brother loves them. He's far more of an evil person than me so probably not a coincidence.)

I think you're right about draw 2, discard 2, draw 2, discard 2 being only negligibly different from draw 4, discard 4. That makes it a cheaper, better Warehouse that you can't get in moderation. I suspect it's very strong with nonterminal handsize-increasers such as Cursed Village, Diplomat, Lab, and Seer. Tunnel is bound to be nuts, Faithful Hound is also probably nuts. Pathfinding turns it into a jacked-up Forum.

In the absence of these cards, it's probably only useful in slog games where you have tons of junk (I would certainly pick one up in a Workshop/Gardens game for instance).

And I don't think it differentiates itself from the other sifters, especially Warehouse and Dungeon, because the self-gaining is a pain in the ass and only limits the situations where you want it (and the difference between $2 and $3 is so small it's not like the cheaper price really matters usually).

93

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 07, 2019, 09:53:41 am »

Storeroom
$2
Action
+1 Action
Gain a Storeroom. Do this twice: +2 Cards, then discard 2 cards.

Tried to make it simple. Basically, it offers some nice sifting search space, but do you really want more copies of it? Worse comes to worst though, it can sift through other copies of itself.

Storeroom is already an official card jsyk, and also this looks a lot like Dungeon (except for the self-gaining).

94

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 06, 2019, 12:26:36 pm »

Refugee Camp, Action, $2
+1 Card
+2 Actions
Discard a card.
-
In games using this, when you gain a more expensive card, you may gain a Refugee Camp.

Interesting concept, but as worded it might be broken with Trader?

Buy Silver, gain Refugee Camp, reveal Trader to gain Silver instead, gain Refugee Camp, reveal Trader to gain Silver instead, etc.

You might need to change "when you gain a more expensive card" to "when you buy a more expensive card." Or just rephrase the wording somehow to make this not allowed.

95

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 05, 2019, 10:37:46 am »

By the way, the reason I'm keeping it sequential, even though Masquerade does open up a precedent for doing it simultaneously, is that the right way to play Masquerade irl is obvious. You pass a card, then you pick up the card passed to you. You obviously can't pick up your card before you pass, but you don't have to wait for anyone else-- as soon as you've passed, if there's a card to pick up, you pick it up.

Tithe isn't like that though; everyone has to wait until everyone else is ready, or it doesn't work. So if I tell people to discard "at once" it may imply that they don't need to look at what everyone else is doing, which isn't accurate.

96

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 04, 2019, 02:11:56 pm »

Oh, I totally forgot about Masquerade, lol. Although I still think the situations aren't the same, because the Masquerade cards aren't publicly revealed.

97

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 04, 2019, 12:56:57 pm »

Simultaneously doesn't exist in Dominion. Things happen one at a time, always. Even attacks like Spy are technically supposed to go in turn order, usually irl it doesn't matter and so they do them all at the same time, but here it very much matters. So unfortunately, first setting the cards aside face-down is necessary.

Also, there isn't always a "least," because of Potion and Debt costs. Transmute doesn't cost more or less than Silver, for instance.

As for making ties lose, that's probably too brutal in a 3-player game, especially early on. There's still that element of fear in discarding a Copper because your opponents might be discarding Estates.

98

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 04, 2019, 11:50:45 am »

All as in each; they're only cursed if it costs less than each other card, considered individually.

The wording's already nasty, I'll see if I can clarify that without making it worse.

99

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 04, 2019, 09:47:25 am »

In that situation, nobody's card cost less than all the others, so nobody gets cursed.

100

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 04, 2019, 09:23:18 am »

Tithe
$4 - Action/Attack
+$2
Each other player draws until they have 4 or more cards in hand, then sets a card aside face-down. All players discard their set aside cards, and if any such card cost less than every other one, that player gains a Curse.