Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Reaction Attack  (Read 10484 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12849
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #25 on: May 01, 2016, 04:45:09 am »
0

It's great when he gives constructive criticism.  That's not what people are against.

What's happening is that other people are giving constructive criticism to clarify and follow Dominion rules, and then tristan drops in to say, "ignore the rules lawyers, rules are for suckers".  That's the opposite of constructive.

The other problem is that he's most likely horatio83.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +193
    • View Profile
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #26 on: May 01, 2016, 06:14:43 am »
0

This is a really good first card idea, Multitallented! I'm excited to see what else you can think of! Also, welcome to the Dominion forums!

Also, ignore tristan. He seems to think that caring about the rules is the same as nitpicking about them. (You don't have to remove the Attack type, though; it still works, it's just somewhat confusing.)
You obviously don't get that the ideal causality chain is from mechanics to rules, no the other way around as rule-lawyers like you wrongly assume. No game designer does it the other way around. You have an idea, you implement it mechanically and only then do you write a rule which formalizes this very mechanic.

If you want the other player to be able to play Reactions to this novel form of Attack, a Reaction-Attack (read the friggin' title of this thread, that's the key point of the card), it should be a Reaction-Attack. If you don't want them to be able to React you don't call it an Attack. In the former case, Reactions can obviously only be played if the Reaction Attack occurs, not if the card is applied "peacefully". That does not match the rules but it is common sensical and most likely how my gaming group would play intuitively with this card.
Rules do exist to clarify how a game is played, not to make it something superrigid which can never be modified.

You certainly do not limit your design ideas to what already exists and has been formalized via the rules. As I already said, nobody does this, especially not DXV. He changes or amends the rules when he implements something new. This is precisely what Multitalented should do, only that there is no need to write an actual rule amendment as he can explain this in 10sec to anybody he plays with.

You just don't get it.
I know very well that Reactions can only be revealed if somebody plays an Attack card. But you don't seem to get that mechanisms come first and rules later.

Externalize is something NEW, a Reaction Attack. The point of the card, as I read it, is that playing the card doesn't count as Attack whereas revealing it as a Reaction does and that in this case other players could reveal Reactions.
Now my reading could be wrong and this could very well not be what Multitalented is after. If he isn't he should indeed just remove Attack as the play effect of the card is not aggressive/interactive at all.
But if it is what he wants then you need a rule amendment that clarifies that Reactions cannot be revealed when somebody plays a Reaction Attack, only when he reveals a Reaction Attack. Of course it would also make sense to give it a new type, Aggressive Reaction or Attack/Reaction or whatever without the dash that seperates the Attack and Reaction type.

Furthermore you have to keep in mind that in principle (not in the case of this card though) this new type includes the potential for infinite loops so one has to be careful.

Again, all I am saying is that a fan card designer should first think about what he wants to achieve mechanically and only then formalize it which includes potential rule amendments. Nothing wrong with doing fan cards that operate within existing parameters but a lot wrong with telling folks who do fan cards that they should never ever come up with something that implies rule changes.

Addendum: Just read Plague Doctor and this is obviously a far cleaner way to implement the mechanism than what I thought up. Great work, Multitalented. And, on a totally egocentric note in this pointless debate with the rulelawyer fraction, kinda entertaining to see that I was initially right about you wanted the card to actually do.  ;D
« Last Edit: May 01, 2016, 06:24:59 am by tristan »
Logged

Multitallented

  • Swindler
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18
  • Respect: +21
    • View Profile
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #27 on: May 01, 2016, 12:41:14 pm »
+3

Glad to hear most of you like it!

For those of you who think the reaction is too strong, here is an alternative:



When you gain a card, you may discard this card from your hand. If you do, each other player gains a copy of the card you gained.

I use photoshop to make these cards. I'll try to come up with more and maybe make another thread about a kingdom or something.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #28 on: May 01, 2016, 04:33:57 pm »
+4

Again, all I am saying is that a fan card designer should first think about what he wants to achieve mechanically and only then formalize it which includes potential rule amendments. Nothing wrong with doing fan cards that operate within existing parameters but a lot wrong with telling folks who do fan cards that they should never ever come up with something that implies rule changes.

Addendum: Just read Plague Doctor and this is obviously a far cleaner way to implement the mechanism than what I thought up. Great work, Multitalented. And, on a totally egocentric note in this pointless debate with the rulelawyer fraction, kinda entertaining to see that I was initially right about you wanted the card to actually do.  ;D

Dude, nobody has said that fan cards shouldn't do new things.  You are setting up a strawman here.  But fan cards should be written to work with existing rules so that they can be understood and interactions are clear.  Plague Doctor is a cleaner version of the original concept, and it wouldn't have come up if LF hadn't first pointed out the misuse of the Attack type.  It's incredibly egocentric of you to claim credit for something you keep speaking out against.
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +193
    • View Profile
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #29 on: May 07, 2016, 07:01:06 am »
0

It's incredibly egocentric of you to claim credit for something you keep speaking out against.
Reading skills are essential. I did not claim credit for the text change of the card but for immediately understanding what Multitalented is MECHANICALLY after, something the rule-lawyer fraction did not.

It is hyperobvious that mechanics should come before the formalization of these very mechanics into rules. Sure, Dominion is an already existing game so there already exists a framework of rules. But unlike you and the other rulelawyers here I put more weight on mechanics than rules. If having different preferences and standing behind them pissed off a lot of people I cannot help them.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12849
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #30 on: May 07, 2016, 07:38:55 am »
+3

It is hyperobvious that mechanics should come before the formalization of these very mechanics into rules. Sure, Dominion is an already existing game so there already exists a framework of rules. But unlike you and the other rulelawyers here I put more weight on mechanics than rules. If having different preferences and standing behind them pissed off a lot of people I cannot help them.

Mechanics can't come before rules. You don't get to include the designer with the game to explain how the mechanics works, the rule book has to be sufficient.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #31 on: May 07, 2016, 12:24:31 pm »
0

It's incredibly egocentric of you to claim credit for something you keep speaking out against.
Reading skills are essential. I did not claim credit for the text change of the card but for immediately understanding what Multitalented is MECHANICALLY after, something the rule-lawyer fraction did not.

It is hyperobvious that mechanics should come before the formalization of these very mechanics into rules. Sure, Dominion is an already existing game so there already exists a framework of rules. But unlike you and the other rulelawyers here I put more weight on mechanics than rules. If having different preferences and standing behind them pissed off a lot of people I cannot help them.

I will rephrase then.  It is incredibly egocentric of you to congratulate yourself for guessing "correctly" the OP's intent when the effect may very well have evolved from the discussion.  It is incredibly egocentric of you to continue putting down "rules lawyers" who have provided helpful advice to get the card worded in a way that works within Dominion's existing rules.

The rules you complain about are how people express and understand the mechanisms.  You have to express a mechanism accurately before it can be meaningfully discussed, and figuring out the proper card wording is the easiest way to get there.  You seem to think that talking about the rules is useless or mean or something.  It's not.  It's helpful and constructive advice that a fan card designer can use to improve their work, if they aren't bristling against any and all criticism.


@OP: the new version of Plague Doctor, I think it's good.  Having you also gain the card is an interesting limiter instead of the self-trashing.  Have you tested both versions?  How do they compare in practice?
Logged

math

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 318
  • Shuffle iT Username: math
  • Respect: +191
    • View Profile
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #32 on: May 07, 2016, 04:41:58 pm »
0

I really like the new version of the card.  It could make for some interesting strategies where you buy a bunch of them and then buy Curses, discarding multiple Plague Doctors at once (and then use them later to trash the one Curse you gained).  Making it cost $3 means it's a bit harder to buy a bunch of them with extra buys.

The on-play effect seems similar to Masquerade, but weaker, which is fine since this has the reaction.
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +193
    • View Profile
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #33 on: May 09, 2016, 04:40:02 am »
0

It is incredibly egocentric of you to congratulate yourself for guessing "correctly" the OP's intent when the effect may very well have evolved from the discussion.
Aha, so you are saying that Multitalented had no idea about what he acutally wanted his card to do before the rulelawyers stepped in. Nice way to insult him and a worthwhile contribution to the topic of overblown egos.
Logged

ThetaSigma12

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1681
  • Shuffle iT Username: ThetaSigma12
  • Respect: +1809
    • View Profile
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #34 on: May 09, 2016, 07:24:51 am »
0

It is incredibly egocentric of you to congratulate yourself for guessing "correctly" the OP's intent when the effect may very well have evolved from the discussion.
Aha, so you are saying that Multitalented had no idea about what he acutally wanted his card to do before the rulelawyers stepped in. Nice way to insult him and a worthwhile contribution to the topic of overblown egos.
I think the word "evolved" implies that there was something to involve from. I wouldn't call either of you egocentric. Please just stop. I don't want this to turn into Market Squire's game ending traveller thread.
Logged
My magnum opus collection of dominion fan cards is available here!

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #35 on: May 09, 2016, 10:09:13 pm »
0

It is incredibly egocentric of you to congratulate yourself for guessing "correctly" the OP's intent when the effect may very well have evolved from the discussion.
Aha, so you are saying that Multitalented had no idea about what he acutally wanted his card to do before the rulelawyers stepped in. Nice way to insult him and a worthwhile contribution to the topic of overblown egos.

No, that's not what I'm saying.  I'm saying that we don't know his initial intention because it didn't follow Dominion wording.  It's through discussion that the idea was clarified and developed, which is exactly the reason your constant "rules lawyer" complaints are counterproductive.  I explained exactly that in the part of my post which you cut out.
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +193
    • View Profile
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #36 on: May 10, 2016, 03:07:43 am »
0

It is incredibly egocentric of you to congratulate yourself for guessing "correctly" the OP's intent when the effect may very well have evolved from the discussion.
Aha, so you are saying that Multitalented had no idea about what he acutally wanted his card to do before the rulelawyers stepped in. Nice way to insult him and a worthwhile contribution to the topic of overblown egos.

No, that's not what I'm saying.
Yes it is but whatever. Pointing out the obvious, that you first gotta consider how a mechanic should work before you think about how you should formalize it (on a fan card which is unlikely to be used by anybody but Multitalented ^^) is as pointless as talking with climate change deniers.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #37 on: May 10, 2016, 04:08:00 am »
0

It is incredibly egocentric of you to congratulate yourself for guessing "correctly" the OP's intent when the effect may very well have evolved from the discussion.
Aha, so you are saying that Multitalented had no idea about what he acutally wanted his card to do before the rulelawyers stepped in. Nice way to insult him and a worthwhile contribution to the topic of overblown egos.

No, that's not what I'm saying.
Yes it is but whatever. Pointing out the obvious, that you first gotta consider how a mechanic should work before you think about how you should formalize it (on a fan card which is unlikely to be used by anybody but Multitalented ^^) is as pointless as talking with climate change deniers.

It is incredibly egocentric of you to congratulate yourself for guessing "correctly" the OP's intent when the effect MAY very well have evolved from the discussion.

The rules you complain about are how people express and understand the mechanisms.  You have to express a mechanism accurately before it can be meaningfully discussed, and figuring out the proper card wording is the easiest way to get there.  You seem to think that talking about the rules is useless or mean or something.  It's not.  It's helpful and constructive advice that a fan card designer can use to improve their work, if they aren't bristling against any and all criticism.
Logged

FemurLemur

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 163
  • Shuffle iT Username: FemurLemur
  • Respect: +196
    • View Profile
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #38 on: May 13, 2016, 03:14:22 pm »
+2

It is incredibly egocentric of you to congratulate yourself for guessing "correctly" the OP's intent when the effect may very well have evolved from the discussion.
Aha, so you are saying that Multitalented had no idea about what he acutally wanted his card to do before the rulelawyers stepped in. Nice way to insult him and a worthwhile contribution to the topic of overblown egos.

No, that's not what I'm saying.
Yes it is but whatever. Pointing out the obvious, that you first gotta consider how a mechanic should work before you think about how you should formalize it (on a fan card which is unlikely to be used by anybody but Multitalented ^^) is as pointless as talking with climate change deniers.

Quote Mining (twice) is a jerk move. It's also rude to create an "us and them" mentality in these forums by name-calling people who are helping the OP in a way which you do not like. Worst of all, you then pat yourself on the back which comes across as unappealing given how confrontational you've been. If you don't see value in having well-defined, rigid rules, that's fine. But there's no need to attack people, especially not eHalcyon, who's been an active, helpful member of the forums for a long time.
Logged

FemurLemur

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 163
  • Shuffle iT Username: FemurLemur
  • Respect: +196
    • View Profile
Re: Reaction Attack
« Reply #39 on: May 13, 2016, 03:41:20 pm »
+1

Glad to hear most of you like it!

For those of you who think the reaction is too strong, here is an alternative:

(Image)

When you gain a card, you may discard this card from your hand. If you do, each other player gains a copy of the card you gained.

I use photoshop to make these cards. I'll try to come up with more and maybe make another thread about a kingdom or something.

I really like this card for multiple reasons. First of all, it's a Reaction, which is my favorite type of card. I'm also a sucker for cards in the 2-3 coin range, because they are far outnumbered by 4 and 5 coin cards, so it's nice (although not a necessity) when fan cards can avoid making that imbalance in the overall card pool even worse. I also like that you chose to not make it a pseudo-attack. I'm not the kind of player who feels there should always be Moat or Lighthouse in the supply (that's actually the worst part of playing with new players- they tend to refuse to deal with attacks any other way), but when a Moat or Lighthouse does appear in the Kingdom I expect it to actually block attacks. So having a lot of pseudo-attacks is not desirable to me.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All
 

Page created in 0.158 seconds with 21 queries.