Print

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

[werothegreat]

So I've been playing a fair amount of Hearthstone lately, and there's a new minion that draws 3 cards when played, putting any minions drawn directly into play.  That got me thinking.

Commander
- Action

Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.  Set aside any Actions revealed and put the rest into your hand.  Play the set aside Actions in any order.

How exactly, if at all, could this be balanced?  It needs to compare favorably to both Herald and Golem, but not be strictly better than any pure terminal draw card, and at the same time not be so hampered in cost that it's unplayable.

[Haddock]

So I've been playing a fair amount of Hearthstone lately, and there's a new minion that draws 3 cards when played, putting any minions drawn directly into play.  That got me thinking.

Commander Wrynn
- Action

Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.  Set aside any Actions revealed and put the rest into your hand.  Play the set aside Actions in any order.

How exactly, if at all, could this be balanced?  It needs to compare favorably to both Herald and Golem, but not be strictly better than any pure terminal draw card, and at the same time not be so hampered in cost that it's unplayable.

FTFY.

Seriously, though, I like the idea, it carries over quite nicely.  No idea about balancing it, though my first gut feeling is that costing it at 7 would not make it unreasonably expensive.  It's probably almost as powerful as King's Court in any engine.

[GendoIkari]

The thing is, it will be very rare that this card isn't at least as good as "+3 cards, +1 action". The only time it's not really is if it finds no actions at all. And +3 cards, +1 action is a very strong card that I've seen talked about here, and some people have said that it's too strong at any cost.

Now perhaps that's wrong because being forced to play an action from one of the revealed cards is going to be a little worse than playing any action in your hand. But I'm not sure how much worse.

Also, you might want to exclude playing other Commanders here, like Golem does. It's not an issue for Herald because Herald only plays one card. But what happens if you reveal a Commander and a Village with your Commander play? You play your revealed commander, thus revealing 3 more cards. 2 of them are actions, so you set those aside along with your Village. You now have 3 set-aside cards, but set aside by 2 different effects. But Commander just says "the set aside actions", so this would technically include that Village. Or if you don't want it to, you have to have 2 separate "set-aside" zones. Currently nothing in Dominion can create 2 separate set-aside zones where you need to keep the 2 sets of cards separate.

[Awaclus]

I'm pretty sure it has to cost at least $7, but probably more (with a buying restriction or Potion cost). It's a double lab if it hits one Action, Lab + Lost City if it hits two, and double Lost City if it hits three. It's not all that uncommon to have three Actions on the top of your deck.

[GendoIkari]

I'm pretty sure it has to cost at least $7, but probably more (with a buying restriction or Potion cost). It's a double lab if it hits one Action, Lab + Lost City if it hits two, and double Lost City if it hits three. It's not all that uncommon to have three Actions on the top of your deck.

And it's a Smithy if it hits no actions... but that should be a very rare situation. You won't be playing Commander Big Money.

[Awaclus]

Currently nothing in Dominion can create 2 separate set-aside zones where you need to keep the 2 sets of cards separate.

Haven + Horse Traders can.

[popsofctown]

Add "then end your action phase" to the end.

It would still cascade into itself for craziness and be pretty strong.

[Accatitippi]

Have it gain you a Scout.

[LastFootnote]

I'd be interested in reducing it to 2 cards and costing it at $3. And making it so that it can't hit itself as Gendo suggests.

[popsofctown]

And making it so that it can't hit itself

why do you hate fun

[Awaclus]

And making it so that it can't hit itself

why do you hate fun

I've hated fun ever since Making Fun started making it.

[Asper]

And making it so that it can't hit itself

why do you hate fun

Tried it once. It was awful.

[Witherweaver]

The thing is, it will be very rare that this card isn't at least as good as "+3 cards, +1 action". The only time it's not really is if it finds no actions at all. And +3 cards, +1 action is a very strong card that I've seen talked about here, and some people have said that it's too strong at any cost.

Now perhaps that's wrong because being forced to play an action from one of the revealed cards is going to be a little worse than playing any action in your hand. But I'm not sure how much worse.

Also, you might want to exclude playing other Commanders here, like Golem does. It's not an issue for Herald because Herald only plays one card. But what happens if you reveal a Commander and a Village with your Commander play? You play your revealed commander, thus revealing 3 more cards. 2 of them are actions, so you set those aside along with your Village. You now have 3 set-aside cards, but set aside by 2 different effects. But Commander just says "the set aside actions", so this would technically include that Village. Or if you don't want it to, you have to have 2 separate "set-aside" zones. Currently nothing in Dominion can create 2 separate set-aside zones where you need to keep the 2 sets of cards separate.

Even if Commander cannot play Commanders, wouldn't you run across the same issue with a Commander playing a Golem or Herald, (or Throne Room), which could in turn play other Commanders?

[GendoIkari]

The thing is, it will be very rare that this card isn't at least as good as "+3 cards, +1 action". The only time it's not really is if it finds no actions at all. And +3 cards, +1 action is a very strong card that I've seen talked about here, and some people have said that it's too strong at any cost.

Now perhaps that's wrong because being forced to play an action from one of the revealed cards is going to be a little worse than playing any action in your hand. But I'm not sure how much worse.

Also, you might want to exclude playing other Commanders here, like Golem does. It's not an issue for Herald because Herald only plays one card. But what happens if you reveal a Commander and a Village with your Commander play? You play your revealed commander, thus revealing 3 more cards. 2 of them are actions, so you set those aside along with your Village. You now have 3 set-aside cards, but set aside by 2 different effects. But Commander just says "the set aside actions", so this would technically include that Village. Or if you don't want it to, you have to have 2 separate "set-aside" zones. Currently nothing in Dominion can create 2 separate set-aside zones where you need to keep the 2 sets of cards separate.

Even if Commander cannot play Commanders, wouldn't you run across the same issue with a Commander playing a Golem or Herald, (or Throne Room), which could in turn play other Commanders?

Interesting... so I guess this situation could exist currently:

Play Golem: Find 2 Heralds.
Play Herald #1: Find a Golem.
Play Golem #2, Find 2 other actions, while Herald #2 is still set aside from Golem #1.

[Haddock]

You can avoid those problems by making it say +1 action per action card drawn.  Then there's no setting aside.  But obviously this makes it still more powerful as you then have no forced play and you can chain Commanders more easily.

[ConMan]

Play Golem: Find 2 Heralds.
Play Herald #1: Find a Golem.
Play Golem #2, Find 2 other actions, while Herald #2 is still set aside from Golem #1.

Or Play Golem: Find two Throne Rooms when the only action cards in your hand are more Golems.

[liopoil]

If you want to avoid problems with too much draw, just make it discard the non-actions.

[eHalcyon]

How about:

Commander
$7 - Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.  Choose a revealed Action card and put the other cards into your hand.  Play the chosen card.

It only plays one card so the nesting is only ever as bad as Herald's.

[GendoIkari]

How about:

Commander
$7 - Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.  Choose a revealed Action card and put the other cards into your hand.  Play the chosen card.

It only plays one card so the nesting is only ever as bad as Herald's.

This could actually work. It's a slightly weaker version of +3 cards +1 action, which might just be balanced at . Possibly .

[werothegreat]

How about:

Commander
$7 - Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.  Choose a revealed Action card and put the other cards into your hand.  Play the chosen card.

It only plays one card so the nesting is only ever as bad as Herald's.

This could actually work. It's a slightly weaker version of +3 cards +1 action, which might just be balanced at . Possibly .

I would word it:

Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.  If you revealed any Actions, set one aside, and put the other revealed cards into your hand.  If you set aside an Action this way, play it.