Print

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

[Wrclass]

I know this card is complicated, but I'd like some feedback on it:

Roadblock $4 Action - Duration
+$2
While this is in play, if a player has not already bought a card this turn, cards cost $1 more

The idea is to have a card the directly prevents your opponents from gaining coins. It only makes the first card a player buys each turn cost $1 more.

[silverspawn]

well, the problem is cutpurse. it's almost identical, just a little bit weaker because it can miss an early reshuffle due to its durationessness

[Aidan Millow]

First and foremost a duration needs to say what it does at the start of your next turn if you want it to stay in play after the turn you play it; at the moment this card is worse than a terminal copper.
Secondly: This affects you, twice if you make it work as a duration. It needs to have something to counteract this or it'll be bloody weak.
Thirdly: Cost increasers are a bit awkward due to the "not less than zero" clause on cost reducers: if you play four actions then this and want to buy a Peddler it's very unclear as to whether it costs 1 or 0.
Fourthly: Do you want this to increase costs pre buy phase? At the moment its main function is not counteracting coin tokens (I assume that's what you meant buy coins) but shutting down cards like workshop and Altar.

Here's a semi-fixed version:
Roadblock $4 Action-Duration
Now and at the start of your next turn +$2
During a buy phase while this is in play, if a player has not already bought a card this turn, cards cost $1 more.

[Awaclus]

Now and at the start of your next turn +$2

This isn't the out of context thread. Note that the card is in play during your own turns as well.

[Aidan Millow]

Now and at the start of your next turn +$2

This isn't the out of context thread. Note that the card is in play during your own turns as well.

i noticed; so it hurts all players equally. that's still a merchant ship for 4$. a 5$ card for 4$ usually isn't a good idea. and i'm pretty sure giving +2$ twice wasn't the intention.

This effectively gives you $1 twice and attacks your opponents with something akin to a cutpurse. That looks far more like a $4 card that a $5 one.

[Aidan Millow]

I'm starting to wonder if you and I are reading the same card.
Here's what happens when you play (my version of) this card:
You get +$2, in your buy phase your first buy costs $1 extra (net effect, terminal copper)
On your opponents turn the first card they buy costs $1 extra (cutpurse-esque attack) (the stacking is a problem which I didn't think of which needs to be fixed)
At the start of your next turn you get +$2, in your buy phase your first buy costs $1 extra (net effect, peddler).
The card goes away.

The only person the card "attacks" twice is you. The economy is also not a problem; it's worse (though not by much) than that of fishing village and lighthouse.

[silverspawn]

I'm starting to wonder if you and I are reading the same card.
Here's what happens when you play (my version of) this card:
You get +$2, in your buy phase your first buy costs $1 extra (net effect, terminal copper)
On your opponents turn the first card they buy costs $1 extra (cutpurse-esque attack) (the stacking is a problem which I didn't think of which needs to be fixed)
At the start of your next turn you get +$2, in your buy phase your first buy costs $1 extra (net effect, peddler).
The card goes away.

The only person the card "attacks" twice is you. The economy is also not a problem; it's worse (though not by much) than that of fishing village and lighthouse.

oups. you're right, it attacks just once. sorry. yea, than it's not broken for 5$. I somehow got in my mind that it will hit twice.

[eHalcyon]

Please don't delete your posts.  Makes conversation much harder to follow.  You can always edit them with a note of whatever mistake or misunderstanding obsoletes the contents of the post.  Or just leave it as is and anyone following along will see the correction come up in the conversation anyway.

[Awaclus]

Please don't delete your posts.  Makes conversation much harder to follow.  You can always edit them with a note of whatever mistake or misunderstanding obsoletes the contents of the post.  Or just leave it as is and anyone following along will see the correction come up in the conversation anyway.

Plus you will reach cooler titles faster if you don't decrease your post count by removing your posts!

[silverspawn]

Please don't delete your posts.  Makes conversation much harder to follow.  You can always edit them with a note of whatever mistake or misunderstanding obsoletes the contents of the post.  Or just leave it as is and anyone following along will see the correction come up in the conversation anyway.

Plus you will reach cooler titles faster if you don't decrease your post count by removing your posts!

okay 

[SirPeebles]

Aidan Millow raised some important concerns.  Another is that this card stacks with itself, which could lead to terrible slowing of the game.  This is especially bad in a multiplayer game, where there could easily be four of these cards in play consistently.  Not every kingdom is capable of overcoming such steep cost increases in a timely (and enjoyable!) manner.

I've spent a lot of time trying to come up with an idea to make a cost increaser work, but it is tricky.

edit:  I just had an idea that may address these concerns, although it inverts the card a bit.

Roadblock
$4 Action-Duration

Now and at the start of your next turn: +$2
While this card is in play, -$1 when you buy a card, to a minimum of $0.

Rather than ramping up the cost of the first card, this effectively ramps up the cost of any subsequent cards.  The effect is cleaner with the wording borrowed from Poor House, and it does not excessively stall the game since you can still buy one reasonably priced card even when lots of these are consistently in play.  Now, I'm not saying that the card as written is good, but I think this mechanism is at least a starting point.