Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[dondon151]

I mean, like Transmute is like just a few places shy of absolute last, but the cards that I would consider worse than it (Scout, Adventurer, Harvest, Pirate Ship) really help you out even less often than Transmute, I think. (They virtually never help you.)

Dude, I know you hate Pirate Ship, but it's not this bad.

[Robz888]

I mean, like Transmute is like just a few places shy of absolute last, but the cards that I would consider worse than it (Scout, Adventurer, Harvest, Pirate Ship) really help you out even less often than Transmute, I think. (They virtually never help you.)

Dude, I know you hate Pirate Ship, but it's not this bad.

I don't hate it in the sense that I dislike the card, but I do think it's a terribly weak card, and can basically always be gotten around. And all my experience seems to confirm this.

But... I could be wrong. I've changed my mind about lots of cards.

[KingZog3]

I mean, like Transmute is like just a few places shy of absolute last, but the cards that I would consider worse than it (Scout, Adventurer, Harvest, Pirate Ship) really help you out even less often than Transmute, I think. (They virtually never help you.)

Dude, I know you hate Pirate Ship, but it's not this bad.

I don't hate it in the sense that I dislike the card, but I do think it's a terribly weak card, and can basically always be gotten around. And all my experience seems to confirm this.

But... I could be wrong. I've changed my mind about lots of cards.

Like Saboteur, you need to be playing at least 2 times a turn for it to be worth it. More is better because it can miss. If there's an engine and your opponent went BM, it's sometimes a decent option, especially if it's the only attack on the board.

[Robz888]

Like Saboteur, you need to be playing at least 2 times a turn for it to be worth it. More is better because it can miss. If there's an engine and your opponent went BM, it's sometimes a decent option, especially if it's the only attack on the board.

But I don't think that counts. Sure, if your opponent goes with a really stupid plan, you could beat him by buying Pirate Ship. Probably the person going BM should just go engine.

[KingZog3]

Like Saboteur, you need to be playing at least 2 times a turn for it to be worth it. More is better because it can miss. If there's an engine and your opponent went BM, it's sometimes a decent option, especially if it's the only attack on the board.

But I don't think that counts. Sure, if your opponent goes with a really stupid plan, you could beat him by buying Pirate Ship. Probably the person going BM should just go engine.

Maybe, but sometimes it's unclear which is better. Maybe the engine isn't the strongest and there are good BM cards. It happens.

[Asper]

Like Saboteur, you need to be playing at least 2 times a turn for it to be worth it. More is better because it can miss. If there's an engine and your opponent went BM, it's sometimes a decent option, especially if it's the only attack on the board.

But I don't think that counts. Sure, if your opponent goes with a really stupid plan, you could beat him by buying Pirate Ship. Probably the person going BM should just go engine.

Maybe, but sometimes it's unclear which is better. Maybe the engine isn't the strongest and there are good BM cards. It happens.

Or let's just play a slog with 3 or more players. Also sifters, Scheme and anything that makes you play the card more often helps (even if not during the same turn, as PS - unlike some others - does not care much about that).

[AJD]

3. Perhaps the biggest reason, but also the most subtle: When pulled off, you don't have to spend any buys on Gold, or any Treasures for that matter. Alchemy makes you want a deck full of Actions, but sometimes you need a bit of Gold to make such a deck work. Converting your 3 starting Estates into Gold is usually plenty of Treasure. You never have to wrestle with whether to buy Golem or Gold with your $6P hand. Buy the Golem.

I don't know if I want to have Transmutes and Golems in the same deck, though…. It seems likely to lead to problems.

[KingZog3]

3. Perhaps the biggest reason, but also the most subtle: When pulled off, you don't have to spend any buys on Gold, or any Treasures for that matter. Alchemy makes you want a deck full of Actions, but sometimes you need a bit of Gold to make such a deck work. Converting your 3 starting Estates into Gold is usually plenty of Treasure. You never have to wrestle with whether to buy Golem or Gold with your $6P hand. Buy the Golem.

I don't know if I want to have Transmutes and Golems in the same deck, though…. It seems likely to lead to problems.

I've never really seen the Potion cards to mix well. I mean, Scrying Pool works well on it's own, Apothecary wants copper which the other alchemy cards don't (aside from PStone), Alchemist can use help, but doesn't require the other cards, Familiar is a good attack that works alone, Possession is viable with a strong engine, and Vineyards is already insane that it doesn't need other cards. Golem too, although it is expensive it's worth it often in Colony games. It's only really Transmute and PStone that are duds, and putting in more potion cost cards doesn't make them worth it, it just makes them acceptable alternatives.

[LastFootnote]

3. Perhaps the biggest reason, but also the most subtle: When pulled off, you don't have to spend any buys on Gold, or any Treasures for that matter. Alchemy makes you want a deck full of Actions, but sometimes you need a bit of Gold to make such a deck work. Converting your 3 starting Estates into Gold is usually plenty of Treasure. You never have to wrestle with whether to buy Golem or Gold with your $6P hand. Buy the Golem.

I don't know if I want to have Transmutes and Golems in the same deck, though…. It seems likely to lead to problems.

Coward! Afraid of a little forced trashing? 

[KingZog3]

3. Perhaps the biggest reason, but also the most subtle: When pulled off, you don't have to spend any buys on Gold, or any Treasures for that matter. Alchemy makes you want a deck full of Actions, but sometimes you need a bit of Gold to make such a deck work. Converting your 3 starting Estates into Gold is usually plenty of Treasure. You never have to wrestle with whether to buy Golem or Gold with your $6P hand. Buy the Golem.

I don't know if I want to have Transmutes and Golems in the same deck, though…. It seems likely to lead to problems.

Coward! Afraid of a little forced trashing? 

It's more the unwanted effects than the force trashing. Like getting more Transmutes, or adding VP cards you don't need yet.

[tuned2g]

Scout: cost 4
+1 Action
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand. If there are no revealed Victory cards, the player to your left chooses one of the revealed cards. Put that card in your hand. Either way, put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

What I like about this is the new dynamic of player interaction and always getting at least one card from Scout. Often this card will simply be a Copper or a Curse, but that is still a useless card that won't be in your hand next turn. I can see how this can suddenly become a powerful card in a streamlined Chapel deck, but I like how as soon as it hits green it returns to its original function and does nothing further for you. It's a little swingy, but I do not think it is unbalanced. Its appeal is certainly broadened past simply its interactions with Harem, Nobles, and Great Hall. This is my favorite modification so far, so I am very curious to hear what you all think.

So I hate to be that attention-hungry OP, but I don't think anyone has commented on what my Scout buff actually does. We have discussed +1 card at the beginning of the play, +1 card at the end after putting cards back on top of your deck, and come to a consensus that both of these are too powerful. Setting aside the +$1 option (sorry, but I think this is pretty boring), what if Scout is still always drawing at least one card, but a card from among the 4 revealed that is chosen by your opponent? And this only if it has not already drawn cards?

Sure, this doesn't improve it significantly, but I'm looking to just make it a little more appealing and a little less of a waste. Not as good as the more expensive Cartographer, obviously, but that's a $5 anyway. Bonus: more player interaction.

I'm wondering too if it would begin to acquire an Advisor-like effect when stacked. But no playtesting yet. My wife isn't too keen on "house rules."

[tuned2g]

Additionally, I literally just bought Alchemy this week, and since I don't have it on Goko either, I am so looking forward to seeing just how awesome Transmute is.

[brokoli]

Harvest is such an unloved card ! Terminal money is just not that bad ! If you want to change Harvest, you have to change merchant ship too. They are very close in power level… and I'm still convinced that Harvest is overall better (and won't discuss that again because it becomes repetitive).

And I think it's almost impossible to modify a card keeping its basic function. Even adding a +buy is sometimes too much.
Adventurer and lookout definitely doesn't need change. The only cards I may want to change are transmute and scout, and I'm even not sure for that last one because it's fun to have a scapegoat in Dominion.

[LastFootnote]

Scout: cost 4
+1 Action
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand. If there are no revealed Victory cards, the player to your left chooses one of the revealed cards. Put that card in your hand. Either way, put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

What I like about this is the new dynamic of player interaction and always getting at least one card from Scout. Often this card will simply be a Copper or a Curse, but that is still a useless card that won't be in your hand next turn. I can see how this can suddenly become a powerful card in a streamlined Chapel deck, but I like how as soon as it hits green it returns to its original function and does nothing further for you. It's a little swingy, but I do not think it is unbalanced. Its appeal is certainly broadened past simply its interactions with Harem, Nobles, and Great Hall. This is my favorite modification so far, so I am very curious to hear what you all think.

So I hate to be that attention-hungry OP, but I don't think anyone has commented on what my Scout buff actually does. We have discussed +1 card at the beginning of the play, +1 card at the end after putting cards back on top of your deck, and come to a consensus that both of these are too powerful. Setting aside the +$1 option (sorry, but I think this is pretty boring), what if Scout is still always drawing at least one card, but a card from among the 4 revealed that is chosen by your opponent? And this only if it has not already drawn cards?

Sure, this doesn't improve it significantly, but I'm looking to just make it a little more appealing and a little less of a waste. Not as good as the more expensive Cartographer, obviously, but that's a $5 anyway. Bonus: more player interaction.

I'm wondering too if it would begin to acquire an Advisor-like effect when stacked. But no playtesting yet. My wife isn't too keen on "house rules."

Scout doesn't need an "interesting" fix because already does something interesting. It's just too weak. Your fix is overly-complex while also being unexciting and too weak to really make a difference. Oh, I always get to draw the worst card out of four. Joy. I don't think that tiny tweak to its power is worth the delay that the player interaction causes.

[Asper]

3. Perhaps the biggest reason, but also the most subtle: When pulled off, you don't have to spend any buys on Gold, or any Treasures for that matter. Alchemy makes you want a deck full of Actions, but sometimes you need a bit of Gold to make such a deck work. Converting your 3 starting Estates into Gold is usually plenty of Treasure. You never have to wrestle with whether to buy Golem or Gold with your $6P hand. Buy the Golem.

I don't know if I want to have Transmutes and Golems in the same deck, though…. It seems likely to lead to problems.

I've never really seen the Potion cards to mix well. I mean, Scrying Pool works well on it's own, Apothecary wants copper which the other alchemy cards don't (aside from PStone), Alchemist can use help, but doesn't require the other cards, Familiar is a good attack that works alone, Possession is viable with a strong engine, and Vineyards is already insane that it doesn't need other cards. Golem too, although it is expensive it's worth it often in Colony games. It's only really Transmute and PStone that are duds, and putting in more potion cost cards doesn't make them worth it, it just makes them acceptable alternatives.

I don't think PS is a dud. It certainly mixes horrible with Alchemist or Scrying Pool and is (unlike much of Alchemy) anything but an engine-friendly card in general. SP needs support to work out, but i think the most interesting cards are those where you actually have to look at the board to see whether they are worthwile, not just buy them outright. Provided you have a way of gaining many cheap cards (willing or due to junkers) or will usually discard cards from your hand a lot (discard for benefit or opponents discard attacks) it is fine. Doesn't always happen, but it happens often enough (especially in 3/4 player games, where being hit by attacks is almost unavoidable anyhow, which also stretches the game and buys you time).

[silverspawn]

We have discussed +1 card at the beginning of the play, +1 card at the end after putting cards back on top of your deck, and come to a consensus that both of these are too powerful

i really don't think +1 card at the beginning is too powerful. i can see this

Part of Scout's power is the ability to pull grab Victory cards that your opponent's Attacks have left on your deck. While a Scout with +1 Card technically also pulls such a card off your deck, it is no more a counter for such Attacks than any other cantrip. This is one of many reasons that I think Scout should have +$1 rather than +1 Card.

as a reason why it shouldn't have it though. but i'd be fine with +1$. if anything, i think scout would still be rather weak, but definitely viable on some boards.

[sudgy]

The only, absolutely only Dominion card I would change is Adventurer, which should simply cost $5 instead of $6.

I think Scout could easily cost $2 instead of $4 too.

[popsofctown]

Yeah, Lookout does not need a buff at all.  Trashless strategies don't need another hit.

[Julle]

Would a duration Scout be balanced?
Either:

Scout
Action - $4
+1 Action.
Now and at the start of your next turn:
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand. Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

or:

Scout
Action - $4
Now and at the start of your next turn:
+1 Action.
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand. Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

[LibraryAdventurer]

Scout
Action - $4
+1 Action.
Now and at the start of your next turn:
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand. Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

I like this version.

[markusin]

Scout
Action - $4
+1 Action.
Now and at the start of your next turn:
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand. Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

I like this version.

Oh hey, I remember suggesting just that way beck in another thread.

While we're on the subject, here's a radical modification to Scout: make it a duration! Scoutpost:

Scout
--------
Action - Duration - $4

+1 action

Now and at the start of your turn: Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand. Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

Ooh, I do it at the start of the turn I play it?  Excuse me while I go in my time machine...

Yeah, that should read "your next turn". I honestly think that would make Scout a bit more of a player.

It's that cantrip Scout we always wanted, but only on the duration turn, and it has the duration drawback of missing the reshuffle more often.

For the idea to have been thought up of again independently suggests it might be an interesting thing to try.

Of course, You'd want to rename it to have "ship" in the name. Scouting Ship? Did those ever exist?