Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2  All

Author Topic: Additional Game Ending Conditions  (Read 11081 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Additional Game Ending Conditions
« on: December 09, 2015, 01:36:06 am »
+2

Can you think of any game ending conditions we could add to the rules which would open up new design space?

I've thought of one in particular: The game ends if, at the end of a turn, any player has 100+ VP tokens.

The number is arbitrary; the purpose is to open up design space around +VP cards.  With +VP cards, there is always a concern that it could cause a stagnant game that doesn't progress towards an end.  It's already a rare possibility with official cards, Bishop-Fortress being the standout combo for this.  But if this game end condition were added, even a cantrip +VP card could possibly work.

What do you think of this potential fix?
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +193
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2015, 03:41:22 am »
+1

In my experience Goons lead most often to a lot of VPs, after Fortress and Monument. Monument only leads to a lot if there is TR or KC on the board and as you already pointed out, Bishop is only abusive in combination with Fortress.
So we have two rare combos (which are IMO still interesting to play) plus the Goons thingy (which is IMO not but that is a problem of the card being overpowered). Hardly enough to warrant a VP token cap.

I think that you first question is interesting though. Set collection is an obvious (but probably boring) way to introduce an alternative way to win (not a game ending trigger though). Something like an expensive Kingdom card that says "if you have a copy of all cards in the supply in your deck you immediately win the game". Needs an extra clause that says that the player who thinks that he has won the game can check for it at the end of his turn via revealing all his cards and if he failed to meet the winning condition he is out of the game.
As I said, set collection is probably boring and it also changes the game (too) radically but I do not see a mere third game ending trigger.
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3413
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2015, 06:02:31 am »
+1

You could use tokens and place them on certain (kingdom, not basic) piles to use those piles for end game conditions, for instance:
- Piles with a token on them do not count toward the 3 empty piles end game condition
- Game also ends when all piles with tokens have been depleted (would be 1/2 instead of 3, for instance 2 tokens on Scout and Thief)

Extra setup rule: At the start of the game, the 2nd player places a token on a kingdom pile, then the 3rd/1st player, etc...
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

GeneralRamos

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 151
  • Respect: +104
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2015, 07:32:48 am »
+1

Bonus points for completing some set mission. Such at x points if you have no Golds at the end of the game.
Logged

faust

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3387
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +5174
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2015, 08:29:26 am »
+1

I'm not particularly excited about cantrip +VP. It's not a design space I want to explored so badly that I would introduce a new win condition. Also, keeping track of the VP tokens the whole time would be fiddly.

I like the general idea of playing with game ending conditions. I'm not sure if a general new condition should be introduced and always be applied, you can probably do most of them via events. The token idea Davio suggested would work nicely as a "move the token" Event.

I wonder if it's viable to have a condition that avoids pin games, as these are sometimes problematic. Like, "at the start of your turn, if you have no cards in hand, you may end the game". Also works as an event:

Pin Avoider
$0 Event
If you have no cards in hand and no cards in your play area, end the game.

Logged
You say the ocean's rising, like I give a shit
You say the whole world's ending, honey it already did

Haddock

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 725
  • Shuffle iT Username: Haddock
  • Doc Cod
  • Respect: +559
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #5 on: December 09, 2015, 08:55:47 am »
+2

That would have to be in every game to be worth anything. Fullblown pins are so rare, the chances of getting a board with pin possibilities and this would be negligibly small.
Logged
The best reason to lynch Haddock is the meltdown we get to witness on the wagon runup. I mean, we should totally wagon him every day just for the lulz.

M Town Wins-Losses (6-2, 75%): 71, 72, 76, 81, 83, 87 - 79, 82.  M Scum Wins-Losses (2-1, 67%): 80, 101 - 70.
RMM Town Wins-Losses (3-1, 75%): 42, 47, 49 - 31.  RMM Scum Wins-Losses (3-3, 50%): 33, 37, 43 - 29, 32, 35.
Modded: M75, M84, RMM38.     Mislynched (M-RMM): None - 42.     Correctly lynched (M-RMM): 101 - 33, 33, 35.       MVPs: RMM37, M87

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1798
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2015, 01:17:36 pm »
+2

I'm not particularly excited about cantrip +VP. It's not a design space I want to explored so badly that I would introduce a new win condition. Also, keeping track of the VP tokens the whole time would be fiddly.

I like the general idea of playing with game ending conditions. I'm not sure if a general new condition should be introduced and always be applied, you can probably do most of them via events. The token idea Davio suggested would work nicely as a "move the token" Event.

I wonder if it's viable to have a condition that avoids pin games, as these are sometimes problematic. Like, "at the start of your turn, if you have no cards in hand, you may end the game". Also works as an event:

Pin Avoider
$0 Event
If you have no cards in hand and no cards in your play area, end the game.

I like the idea of a game ending event checking for some unusual situation. This one is not realistically abusable (Distant lands/island/native village/+vp plus ratcatcher/Raze could possibly do the trick) but for something more viable:

Emigrate - Event 0$
Reveal a hand of 5 Victory cards (and nothing else) to end the game.

A problem might be kingmaking, but I believe that it's less than your average multiplayer PPR situation. Maybe swinginess too (not much more than getting a key 8 hand, I think).

Slightly more on topic:
I can't think of any general rule change, but I can come up with rules that could be applied single kingdom cards, like ending the game when a specific pile runs out, or there are X cards in the trash, or X differently named cards in the trash.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9712
  • Respect: +10777
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #7 on: December 09, 2015, 01:34:05 pm »
+4

I've had at least 1 great game with Goons where both scores were well over 100, and there were a lot of good tactics involved in making sure you were the one to be able to pile out with the lead. The 100 vp suggestion would have stopped that from being a great game.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
  • Respect: +2146
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #8 on: December 09, 2015, 02:42:00 pm »
+2

I've had at least 1 great game with Goons where both scores were well over 100, and there were a lot of good tactics involved in making sure you were the one to be able to pile out with the lead. The 100 vp suggestion would have stopped that from being a great game.

I thought what eHalcyon was suggesting (though maybe I'm wrong since no one else seems to have thought this) was to have a card that added a game-ending condition because it opens up some new possibilities for that card.  Like:

Quote
Some Card - Action $4
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1

In games using this, the game ends at the end of a turn when any player has 100 or more VP tokens.

I don't think the cantrip VP card is exciting enough to make it worth doing, but there are probably some other interesting ideas that would be a lot better with a rule like that.

Adding the rule in every game would be unnecessary because it won't even do anything in most games, and in the cases where it matters, as you said, it will fairly often just lead to a disappointing ending.  But attaching it to a new card opens up some new possibilities that we probably would have dismissed in the past because they lead to unending games.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9712
  • Respect: +10777
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #9 on: December 09, 2015, 03:02:59 pm »
+1

I've had at least 1 great game with Goons where both scores were well over 100, and there were a lot of good tactics involved in making sure you were the one to be able to pile out with the lead. The 100 vp suggestion would have stopped that from being a great game.

I thought what eHalcyon was suggesting (though maybe I'm wrong since no one else seems to have thought this) was to have a card that added a game-ending condition because it opens up some new possibilities for that card.  Like:

Quote
Some Card - Action $4
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1

In games using this, the game ends at the end of a turn when any player has 100 or more VP tokens.


Yeah, I just for some reason thought he was talking about a new rule in general; nevermind.

Assuming that your broken VP image is because of my Chrome extension; I've just fixed it in the last update.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9631
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #10 on: December 09, 2015, 03:11:42 pm »
+1

That would have to be in every game to be worth anything. Fullblown pins are so rare, the chances of getting a board with pin possibilities and this would be negligibly small.

You also always have the option to resign.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #11 on: December 09, 2015, 03:48:32 pm »
+1

I thought what eHalcyon was suggesting (though maybe I'm wrong since no one else seems to have thought this) was to have a card that added a game-ending condition because it opens up some new possibilities for that card.

I meant a general rule addition, not one attached to a specific card.  The intent is to open up design possibilities that are too problematic with the official rules.  My example is +VP, which inherently has the potential problem of stagnant unending games.  Having a game end condition tied to VP tokens would alleviate that.  Yes, this specific rule would do nothing in games without a VP token card, but I think it would be valuable both to avoid the extra text on multiple cards that would benefit from it as well as to retroactively fix those rare broken cases with Bishop/Fortress and Monument.

In my experience Goons lead most often to a lot of VPs, after Fortress and Monument. Monument only leads to a lot if there is TR or KC on the board and as you already pointed out, Bishop is only abusive in combination with Fortress.
So we have two rare combos (which are IMO still interesting to play) plus the Goons thingy (which is IMO not but that is a problem of the card being overpowered). Hardly enough to warrant a VP token cap.

So, the point is to open up new design space.  The existing +VP cards certainly don't warrant this rule addition, since they were designed to work without the rule.  Bishop needs to trash cards so it naturally leads to a game end anyway; the problem only really comes up with Fortress.  Monument is rarer because it only really comes up with KC-Monument AND strong trashing, already rare.  Even in that situation, Monument produces enough coin that you'll usually buy a Province or Colony anyway.  Goons is the least problematic of the bunch, because you only get +VP from it by pushing the game to an end.

But with a new game end condition tied to number of VP tokens, it would (hopefully) allow things that would be bad design with the official rules.

I'm not particularly excited about cantrip +VP. It's not a design space I want to explored so badly that I would introduce a new win condition. Also, keeping track of the VP tokens the whole time would be fiddly.

That was just an example.  What got me thinking about this was the lengthy discussion on Labyrinth in this thread.  It applies equally to pretty much any +VP fan card.

I've had at least 1 great game with Goons where both scores were well over 100, and there were a lot of good tactics involved in making sure you were the one to be able to pile out with the lead. The 100 vp suggestion would have stopped that from being a great game.

As I said, the 100 was just an arbitrary number.  It could as well be 500 or 1000.

Bonus points for completing some set mission. Such at x points if you have no Golds at the end of the game.

Fine, but not at all what I'm asking about. :P

Yeah, I just for some reason thought he was talking about a new rule in general; nevermind.

No, you were right the first time.  I'll try to clarify the general question:

There are some aspects of (fan) card design that most of us now take for granted.  For example, non-terminal +VP is usually a bad idea because it can lead to a stagnant game state.  My assertion is that this could be fixed by adding a new general rule, i.e. a game end condition tied to VP tokens.

Are there other problems with my idea that I haven't seen?

What other "closed" card design spaces could be opened up with a new general rule?

This latter question is difficult because it requires going back to look at old assumptions.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7868
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #12 on: December 09, 2015, 03:51:54 pm »
+4

A "Shoot the Moon" type of card, where you can win if you have all the Curses, and the Queen of Spades.
Logged

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1798
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #13 on: December 09, 2015, 04:01:45 pm »
+2

There are some aspects of (fan) card design that most of us now take for granted.  For example, non-terminal +VP is usually a bad idea because it can lead to a stagnant game state.  My assertion is that this could be fixed by adding a new general rule, i.e. a game end condition tied to VP tokens.

Are there other problems with my idea that I haven't seen?

What other "closed" card design spaces could be opened up with a new general rule?

This latter question is difficult because it requires going back to look at old assumptions.

I see what you mean, but rather than changing the ruleset, which gives problems to the game balance, why not just attach those rule changes to the specific cards, like it has been done until now?
« Last Edit: December 09, 2015, 04:10:13 pm by Accatitippi »
Logged

Limetime

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1237
  • Shuffle iT Username: limetime
  • Respect: +1179
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #14 on: December 09, 2015, 04:07:17 pm »
+2

That would have to be in every game to be worth anything. Fullblown pins are so rare, the chances of getting a board with pin possibilities and this would be negligibly small.

You also always have the option to resign.
The rules never say you can resign >:(
Logged

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1798
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #15 on: December 09, 2015, 04:09:32 pm »
0

That would have to be in every game to be worth anything. Fullblown pins are so rare, the chances of getting a board with pin possibilities and this would be negligibly small.

You also always have the option to resign.
The rules never say you can resign >:(

Oh noes, then I'm still stuck in that one game I started playing in 1969!
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9712
  • Respect: +10777
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #16 on: December 09, 2015, 04:17:02 pm »
0

That would have to be in every game to be worth anything. Fullblown pins are so rare, the chances of getting a board with pin possibilities and this would be negligibly small.

You also always have the option to resign.
The rules never say you can resign >:(

Oh noes, then I'm still stuck in that one game I started playing in 1969!

Always play in an all-night diner, that's my advice.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #17 on: December 09, 2015, 04:27:57 pm »
0

There are some aspects of (fan) card design that most of us now take for granted.  For example, non-terminal +VP is usually a bad idea because it can lead to a stagnant game state.  My assertion is that this could be fixed by adding a new general rule, i.e. a game end condition tied to VP tokens.

Are there other problems with my idea that I haven't seen?

What other "closed" card design spaces could be opened up with a new general rule?

This latter question is difficult because it requires going back to look at old assumptions.

I see what you mean, but rather than changing the ruleset, which gives problems to the game balance, why not just attach those rule changes to the specific cards, like it has been done until now?

Like it's been done in fan cards, you mean?  No official cards alter game-end conditions, unless I'm forgetting something.

The main reason is simplicity.  There are potentially lots of different +VP cards that would work and be interesting, and to put this rule on each of them would use up valuable space and also hinder other design possibilities if you want to follow the "only one dividing line per card" convention.

The second reason applies to this VP token rule, which is that it would retroactively apply to the existing +VP cards and improve game balance by mitigating those rare cases where they end up in an unending game.  As it is, either somebody resigns or (IRL) you just call it a draw.  That's fine, but a rule like this could be more satisfactory for those situations without hindering the game otherwise.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7868
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #18 on: December 09, 2015, 04:29:23 pm »
+1

That would have to be in every game to be worth anything. Fullblown pins are so rare, the chances of getting a board with pin possibilities and this would be negligibly small.

You also always have the option to resign.
The rules never say you can resign >:(

Oh noes, then I'm still stuck in that one game I started playing in 1969!

Always play in an all-night diner, that's my advice.

Game ending condition: Spilling ketchup on the cards is an automatic loss.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10723
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #19 on: December 09, 2015, 04:33:16 pm »
+1

Are there other problems with my idea that I haven't seen?

Well the obvious one is that different VP token cards can get tokens at a wildly different rate. A number that's a reasonable maximum for one such card might still lead to unreasonably long games with other such cards.

If the rule had been in place since the beginning (or since Prosperity), then cards could be designed with that maximum in mind.

What other "closed" card design spaces could be opened up with a new general rule?

This latter question is difficult because it requires going back to look at old assumptions.

Nothing jumps to mind.
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1808
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • I wish my username had the links like it once did.
  • Respect: +1701
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #20 on: December 10, 2015, 01:26:05 am »
+1

A "Shoot the Moon" type of card, where you can win if you have all the Curses, and the Queen of Spades.

Quote
Queen of Spades
Victory - Treasure
Cost $6?
Worth $2?, +1 Buy
-
At this end of the game, if you have all the curses, this is worth 50VP. Otherwise, this is worth -10 VP.

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +193
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #21 on: December 10, 2015, 04:07:19 am »
0

Goons is the least problematic of the bunch, because you only get +VP from it by pushing the game to an end.
Sure. But if you are concerned about players getting too many VPs from VP tokens and wanna cap it Goons is an obvious candidate which would warrant such a cap as among the three official card it is the one which on average leads to most VP tokens.
Does not mean that I think that the cap is necessary but if you introduced a cap you should be aware that among the three official VP token gaining cards it would weaken Goons on average the most (which IMO wouldn't be a big thing as Goons is overpowered).

Now if you wanna try out cantrip VP token gainers (personally I do not see much merit in that) you can do that (my uneducated guess is that a pure one would probably cost 5$) and you will soon see how much VP tokens such a card generated on average which would be the basis for a maximum value of VP tokens. Obviously in decks with non-terminal and terminal VP token gaining cards such a cap would make the latter weaker.
As others have said, I think it would make more sense to put the extra game ending trigger on the card. Only so much cantrip VP token gaining variants one can come up with.

Or if you wanna do non-terminal VP token gainers you simply nerf them directly instead of via a cap. Asper's Hospital comes to mind. After all the problem of a cap is that if a card is so strong that it will generate on average create such a huge load of VP tokens all players will go for it anyway and the only tricky decision is to balance how much of them you need in order to (nearly) reach the maximum of VP tokens.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2015, 04:16:13 am by tristan »
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4787
  • Respect: +3413
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #22 on: December 10, 2015, 04:33:58 am »
+1

A "Shoot the Moon" type of card, where you can win if you have all the Curses, and the Queen of Spades.
That would only work with the Ace of Spades, I've seen that card for sure on Goko, but never in my deck!
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2017
  • Respect: +2148
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #23 on: December 10, 2015, 09:13:50 am »
+3

Throwing a few ideas out there

Redeemer
Action - $5
+2 cards
Trash 2 cards from your hand. If both trashed cards were Curses, the game ends immediately.
---
When you gain this, gain 2 Curses.

Corruption
Event - $20
Gain the Curse pile and end the game

Collector
Action - $5
+6 Cards
Discard cards from your hand until you can reveal a hand with no more than 1 copy of any card
If you have 10 cards or 1 card remaining in your hand, end the game.

Boom Town
Action/Attack - $3
+2 Actions
+1 Card
Each player (including you) with 4 or more cards in his hand either discards a card, or draws a card (you choose)
If any player has more than 10 cards in his hand, the game ends immediately
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
  • Respect: +7868
    • View Profile
Re: Additional Game Ending Conditions
« Reply #24 on: December 10, 2015, 09:16:31 am »
0

A "Shoot the Moon" type of card, where you can win if you have all the Curses, and the Queen of Spades.

Quote
Queen of Spades
Victory - Treasure
Cost $6?
Worth $2?, +1 Buy
-
At this end of the game, if you have all the curses, this is worth 50VP. Otherwise, this is worth -10 VP.

Logged
Pages: [1] 2  All
 

Page created in 0.124 seconds with 21 queries.