Print

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

[GendoIkari]

So we have yet another runoff! Some people want to react to gaining. Others want to react to playing actions. Others want to react to emptying supplies. Other people wanted other stuff, but too bad for them; now they have a chance to choose something else.

To carry over a bit of conversation from the last thread... yes obviously supplies emptying will happen less times per game than any other event pretty much. So the reaction would probably have a mechanic that either puts a card back into the supply, or could even just have a rule-changing effect that stops the game from ending on the third pile. And it would have to be a somewhat powerful effect so that it's worth doing even if you can only do it a couple times. But it could work.

As before, remember that anything more specific will be decided later. "Someone gains" might be "you gain" or "an opponent gains". Buy would probably only be used if somehow on-gain were too powerful or breaks something.

[Roadrunner7671]

Vote for somebody gains/buys!

Supply piles don't empty so much, you'd only be able to effectively use the reaction portion three times!

And in an engine game, part of the reaction would have to be 'discard this' if we pick 'when someone plays an action.'

EDIT: First!

[eHalcyon]

To carry over a bit of conversation from the last thread... yes obviously supplies emptying will happen less times per game than any other event pretty much. So the reaction would probably have a mechanic that either puts a card back into the supply, or could even just have a rule-changing effect that stops the game from ending on the third pile. And it would have to be a somewhat powerful effect so that it's worth doing even if you can only do it a couple times. But it could work.

Still not a good idea, IMO.  If the reaction is powerful, then it becomes extremely swingly depending on whether you have it hand or not when a pile empties.

[GendoIkari]

If gains/buys wins; I'm hoping for "another player gains", because Watchtower is all that we need with the other. Here's a crazy idea that's probably unbalanced and unfun, but perhaps could be altered to be balanced and fun:

Pre-smugglers - Action-Reaction - Some cost
[Some top part]
----------------------
When another player would gain a card, you may reveal this. If you do, discard your hand and gain the card instead.


So you give up your entire next turn for the effect, unless you had durations or Prince out. It's like you replace your turn with the turn that your opponent just had, and your opponent loses that turn.

[ConMan]

If we'd originally voted for a Reserve, then having "When a supply pile is emptied, you may call this to ..." trigger could have been a pretty cool design space.

[Roadrunner7671]

If we'd originally voted for a Reserve, then having "When a supply pile is emptied, you may call this to ..." trigger could have been a pretty cool design space.

Are you one of the people who voted reserve? You sound a bit...bitter.

[eHalcyon]

If gains/buys wins; I'm hoping for "another player gains", because Watchtower is all that we need with the other.

Nah, there's plenty of other non-Watchtower things we could do.  And don't forget that this poll option also includes "would gain".  We could also do "when any player", of course.

If we'd originally voted for a Reserve, then having "When a supply pile is emptied, you may call this to ..." trigger could have been a pretty cool design space.

Are you one of the people who voted reserve? You sound a bit...bitter.

Doesn't sound bitter to me.  It's just a note that a Reserve is much more appropriate than a Reaction for such a rare trigger.

[A Ladder]

If gains/buys wins; I'm hoping for "another player gains",

Me too!

[Roadrunner7671]

If gains/buys wins; I'm hoping for "another player gains", because Watchtower is all that we need with the other.

Nah, there's plenty of other non-Watchtower things we could do.  And don't forget that this poll option also includes "would gain".  We could also do "when any player", of course.

If we'd originally voted for a Reserve, then having "When a supply pile is emptied, you may call this to ..." trigger could have been a pretty cool design space.

Are you one of the people who voted reserve? You sound a bit...bitter.

Doesn't sound bitter to me.  It's just a note that a Reserve is much more appropriate than a Reaction for such a rare trigger.

You're right, you can't really tell if someone is emotional or not purely by a short post on the Internet.

[Marcory]

If gains/buys wins; I'm hoping for "another player gains", because Watchtower is all that we need with the other.

Nah, there's plenty of other non-Watchtower things we could do.  And don't forget that this poll option also includes "would gain".  We could also do "when any player", of course.

If we'd originally voted for a Reserve, then having "When a supply pile is emptied, you may call this to ..." trigger could have been a pretty cool design space.

Are you one of the people who voted reserve? You sound a bit...bitter.

Doesn't sound bitter to me.  It's just a note that a Reserve is much more appropriate than a Reaction for such a rare trigger.

You're right, you can't really tell if someone is emotional or not purely by a short post on the Internet.

[ConMan]

If we'd originally voted for a Reserve, then having "When a supply pile is emptied, you may call this to ..." trigger could have been a pretty cool design space.

Are you one of the people who voted reserve? You sound a bit...bitter.

I did vote Reserve, but I'm not bitter. Just combining this discussion with the discussion elsewhere about "What else could trigger calling a card?".

[Davio]

If gains/buys wins; I'm hoping for "another player gains", because Watchtower is all that we need with the other.

Nah, there's plenty of other non-Watchtower things we could do.  And don't forget that this poll option also includes "would gain".  We could also do "when any player", of course.

If we'd originally voted for a Reserve, then having "When a supply pile is emptied, you may call this to ..." trigger could have been a pretty cool design space.

Are you one of the people who voted reserve? You sound a bit...bitter.

Doesn't sound bitter to me.  It's just a note that a Reserve is much more appropriate than a Reaction for such a rare trigger.

You're right, you can't really tell if someone is emotional or not purely by a short post on the Internet.

You can't tell, but you can assume and that never leads to any confusion.

I'd like to have an on-opponent-(would)-gain reaction, just have to be careful about the timing, you can get all sorts of conflicts with Trader.

The simplest and least conflicting would be an on-after-opponent-gains reaction.

[Asper]

If gains/buys wins; I'm hoping for "another player gains", because Watchtower is all that we need with the other. Here's a crazy idea that's probably unbalanced and unfun, but perhaps could be altered to be balanced and fun:

Pre-smugglers - Action-Reaction - Some cost
[Some top part]
----------------------
When another player would gain a card, you may reveal this. If you do, discard your hand and gain the card instead.


So you give up your entire next turn for the effect, unless you had durations or Prince out. It's like you replace your turn with the turn that your opponent just had, and your opponent loses that turn.

I don't think such a Reaction works. It's a prisoner's dilemma in multiplayer, and even with only two i can buy a Province, wait for you to discard your hand to steal it from me, and then discard my own, worthless hand to keep it.

It's a lot better if you only gain a copy of the card, but, well, i occasionally playtest with Co0kieL0rd, and he allready did that.

[eHalcyon]

Oh, I didn't notice Gendo's thing was a would gain effect.  Yeah, that would not work.

[GeneralRamos]

Not that I voted for buy/gain, but I don't think Watchtower exhausts the possibilities for "when you gain," even if it remains the most versatile version of it. Other effects:
When you gain... you may shuffle it into your deck
When you gain... you may trash it and gain two cards each costing less
When you gain... you may set it aside and put it in your hand at end of turn (after drawing)
When you gain a Victory card you may put it on top of your deck; if you do each other player gains a curse (to throw out my fraught Cursed Idol mechanic again)

[Asper]

Oh, I didn't notice Gendo's thing was a would gain effect.  Yeah, that would not work.

Depending on the trigger and what the card does, there's a lot of design space for pretty bad or unoriginal cards here:

• Keep yourself from gaining something when you would: We allready have this.
• Keep somebody else from gaining when he would: Political and many other issues.
• Do something with a card you gain yourself: We allready have this. Shuffling it in your deck is just weaker Watchtower, trashing it and gaining cheaper cards either behaves like Watchtower or Talisman most of the time, setting it aside for next turn is nice, but similar to Summon or, again, Watchtower.
• Make someone else gain something when he gains: Political. I like Bob less than Alice, so that's an additional Curse for him. Or an additional Silver for Alice, whatever.
• Gain copy when someone else gains: If i draw my deck, gain something, and you react to my gaining, i can react to yours with all reactions i drew. Player order comes in play, too. Do you have to scream first? Or can i wait until somebody after me in player order says something and then still claim i need to go first? What if there are not enough for each of us?
• Gain something else on somebody gaining: We allready have this.
• Gain copy when you buy: We allready have this. Not as a Reaction, but Treasures and Reserves are close enough for this one.
• Gain copy when somebody else buys: Sorry, i know you paid for that Duchy, but i'm afraid i just took the last two from the supply.

So, if the trigger should in fact become gain/buy, i want to express that i think the effect itself should rather not be related to gaining.

[eHalcyon]

Oh, I didn't notice Gendo's thing was a would gain effect.  Yeah, that would not work.

Depending on the trigger and what the card does, there's a lot of design space for pretty bad or unoriginal cards here:

• Keep yourself from gaining something when you would: We allready have this.
• Keep somebody else from gaining when he would: Political and many other issues.
• Do something with a card you gain yourself: We allready have this. Shuffling it in your deck is just weaker Watchtower, trashing it and gaining cheaper cards either behaves like Watchtower or Talisman most of the time, setting it aside for next turn is nice, but similar to Summon or, again, Watchtower.
• Make someone else gain something when he gains: Political. I like Bob less than Alice, so that's an additional Curse for him. Or an additional Silver for Alice, whatever.
• Gain copy when someone else gains: If i draw my deck, gain something, and you react to my gaining, i can react to yours with all reactions i drew. Player order comes in play, too. Do you have to scream first? Or can i wait until somebody after me in player order says something and then still claim i need to go first? What if there are not enough for each of us?
• Gain something else on somebody gaining: We allready have this.
• Gain copy when you buy: We allready have this. Not as a Reaction, but Treasures and Reserves are close enough for this one.
• Gain copy when somebody else buys: Sorry, i know you paid for that Duchy, but i'm afraid i just took the last two from the supply.

So, if the trigger should in fact become gain/buy, i want to express that i think the effect itself should rather not be related to gaining.

I agree that there's bad/unoriginal design space here, but that doesn't mean there isn't any good.  We can certainly come up with original takes on stuff that "we already have". 

[scott_pilgrim]

When you gain... you may trash it and gain two cards each costing less

This is a cool idea.  But depending on how it's done, it could lead to complete chaos.  I gain a Province, reveal this and get two King's Courts instead; then reveal for each of the King's Courts to get 4 Golds; then reveal for the Golds to get 8 Duchies; etc. down to 256 Coppers.  There aren't necessarily enough cards in the supply for that but you get the idea.  But if you're just suggesting "discard this/set this aside and gain two cards..." that could work, or "when you gain a card costing $x (or meeting some other condition)...".  Also, it could be would gain, instead of having you trash the card.

[GeneralRamos]

When you gain... you may shuffle it into your deck

Yeah, I know this (as written) is a weak watchtower. But depending on the things you add to it, it could be made unique. Like when you gain a victory card, discard this. Gain two silvers. Shuffle the victory and silvers into your deck. Or whatever, it's just to point out that there's design space here, not that it's a fully-fleshed out idea yet.

When you gain... you may trash it and gain two cards each costing less

Yeah, I'm imagining we are going to move to something other than "reveal this." Discard probably best here. Imagined as a sort of on-buy Stonemason effect.

When you gain... you may set it aside and put it in your hand at end of turn (after drawing)

Yeah, somewhat similar to Summon, but without the restriction to actions or the obligatory playing of it. But not really that much like watchtower. There is considerable difference between topdecking and setting aside to add to your hand after the draw. The former can set up a good hand for next turn, but still limits you to five; the latter gives you a better overall hand, though at the cost of vulnerability to handsize reduction attacks--but certainly putting you in no weaker position. It also has a different effect with gainers during your action phase, allowing you to set up a good hand for next turn if you don't need the very same cards this turn. Again, just saying there's possibly interesting space for developing it here.

And again, I voted for "when somebody resolves an action." So I'm more interested in the possibilities of that design space.

[enfynet]

When (you/player) gain, you may reveal this. If you do, return it to the supply and (gain copy, trash something, etc)

[AJD]

I'm still fond of "when you would gain a card, you may discard this; if you do, gain a card costing exactly $1 more instead."

[LastFootnote]

I'm still fond of "when you would gain a card, you may discard this; if you do, gain a card costing exactly $1 more instead."

We tried that as a Reserve. It was a dud.

[AJD]

I'm still fond of "when you would gain a card, you may discard this; if you do, gain a card costing exactly $1 more instead."

We tried that as a Reserve. It was a dud.

Aw, too bad. (But as a Reaction it'd play slightly differently, since you could give it a top half that does something rather than just "put this on the tavern mat".)

[LastFootnote]

I'm still fond of "when you would gain a card, you may discard this; if you do, gain a card costing exactly $1 more instead."

We tried that as a Reserve. It was a dud.

Aw, too bad. (But as a Reaction it'd play slightly differently, since you could give it a top half that does something rather than just "put this on the tavern mat".)

That's a good point.

[GendoIkari]

I'm still fond of "when you would gain a card, you may discard this; if you do, gain a card costing exactly $1 more instead."

We tried that as a Reserve. It was a dud.

Aw, too bad. (But as a Reaction it'd play slightly differently, since you could give it a top half that does something rather than just "put this on the tavern mat".)

As a reaction, it's more like a Copper.

[AJD]

I'm still fond of "when you would gain a card, you may discard this; if you do, gain a card costing exactly $1 more instead."

We tried that as a Reserve. It was a dud.

Aw, too bad. (But as a Reaction it'd play slightly differently, since you could give it a top half that does something rather than just "put this on the tavern mat".)

As a reaction, it's more like a Copper.

True! Herbalist and Candlestick Maker are also "like a Copper". We could run with that—for instance, the top half could be +1 Action, +$1, +1 Buy. Then you play it as an Action if you want the +Buy, and you use its Reaction ability if you're not buying anything, and you more or less get the same +$1 either way.

(Or it can have a completely unrelated top half, which might be more interesting, I don't know.)