Print

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

[Awaclus]

I mean, I also have to say that I'm not going to buy the set, but that's only because I know for sure that almost nobody wants to play Dominion against me IRL as it is, and the few people who still play Dominion with me sometimes certainly don't want any extra complexity or new cards to learn. The cards themselves are super exciting and I'm very looking forward to playing with them online.

[Davio]

The best part about the way Dominion works is that if you don't like a particular card, you can just choose not to play with it and still have many other cards leftover to enjoy.

Even if you do find yourself in a game with that card, it'll be over in half an hour anyway.

It's not like Magic where a certain overpowered card will be in every deck. Not every game has Goons and not every game has Scout.
Not every game will have Crown and not every game will have Villa.

Each expansion will have cards you love, cards you like, cards you don't mind, cards you dislike and cards you hate.
Just play in whichever way is most fun to you!

After all, it's still a game; a game with a giant pool of published cards to pick from and if you don't like it, just create a fan card or even a full set!

[tristan]

My then 11yo son and his three friends had super fun going full circle with KC-Possession, and still manage to keep track of the turn order.

This. As Dominion is a family level game, something that could have easily won "Spiel des Jahres", I fail to see why hardcore gamers have a problem with a tiny bit more complexity. It is still Dominion though and not Twilight Imperium, some 18xx or Caylus or whatever.

[Donald X.]

My then 11yo son and his three friends had super fun going full circle with KC-Possession, and still manage to keep track of the turn order.

This. As Dominion is a family level game, something that could have easily won "Spiel des Jahres", I fail to see why hardcore gamers have a problem with a tiny bit more complexity. It is still Dominion though and not Twilight Imperium, some 18xx or Caylus or whatever.

Dominion did in fact win Spiel des Jahres.

[RevanFan]

So does Crown work the same way as Throne Room in the sense that, if I Crown a Crown, I then get to Crown two cards instead of one? Like, I play Crown as an action, Crowning the second Crown, and then I get to Crown two more actions? Or if I play Crown as a treasure, Crowning the second Crown, I then get to Crown two treasures? I know thinking about this is pretty much useless, since just playing the two Crowns separately would do the same job, but it's nice to know.

[GendoIkari]

So does Crown work the same way as Throne Room in the sense that, if I Crown a Crown, I then get to Crown two cards instead of one? Like, I play Crown as an action, Crowning the second Crown, and then I get to Crown two more actions? Or if I play Crown as a treasure, Crowning the second Crown, I then get to Crown two treasures? I know thinking about this is pretty much useless, since just playing the two Crowns separately would do the same job, but it's nice to know.

Yes, it's identical to playing a throne room if it is your action phase. Except the "may" which allows you to play it without playing anything else.

[RevanFan]

So does Crown work the same way as Throne Room in the sense that, if I Crown a Crown, I then get to Crown two cards instead of one? Like, I play Crown as an action, Crowning the second Crown, and then I get to Crown two more actions? Or if I play Crown as a treasure, Crowning the second Crown, I then get to Crown two treasures? I know thinking about this is pretty much useless, since just playing the two Crowns separately would do the same job, but it's nice to know.

Yes, it's identical to playing a throne room if it is your action phase. Except the "may" which allows you to play it without playing anything else.

Cool. Thanks. That scenario I described is incredibly useless to think about, but it's not a new Dominion card if you're not thinking of completely abstract and obscure scenarios.

[GendoIkari]

So does Crown work the same way as Throne Room in the sense that, if I Crown a Crown, I then get to Crown two cards instead of one? Like, I play Crown as an action, Crowning the second Crown, and then I get to Crown two more actions? Or if I play Crown as a treasure, Crowning the second Crown, I then get to Crown two treasures? I know thinking about this is pretty much useless, since just playing the two Crowns separately would do the same job, but it's nice to know.

Yes, it's identical to playing a throne room if it is your action phase. Except the "may" which allows you to play it without playing anything else.

Cool. Thanks. That scenario I described is incredibly useless to think about, but it's not a new Dominion card if you're not thinking of completely abstract and obscure scenarios.

As was pointed out by someone, somewhere, if your hand is bank, bank, crown, crown, then you will get more money by crowning the crown instead of crowning each bank separately.

[RevanFan]

So does Crown work the same way as Throne Room in the sense that, if I Crown a Crown, I then get to Crown two cards instead of one? Like, I play Crown as an action, Crowning the second Crown, and then I get to Crown two more actions? Or if I play Crown as a treasure, Crowning the second Crown, I then get to Crown two treasures? I know thinking about this is pretty much useless, since just playing the two Crowns separately would do the same job, but it's nice to know.

Yes, it's identical to playing a throne room if it is your action phase. Except the "may" which allows you to play it without playing anything else.

Cool. Thanks. That scenario I described is incredibly useless to think about, but it's not a new Dominion card if you're not thinking of completely abstract and obscure scenarios.

As was pointed out by someone, somewhere, if your hand is bank, bank, crown, crown, then you will get more money by crowning the crown instead of crowning each bank separately.

How? Bank is worth one per treasure "in play." If you double Crown, it's still only one Crown "in play."

[Watno]

But if you play Crown->Crown->Bank->Bank, you have 1 more treasure in play for the first Bank.

[Accatitippi]

Here's the thing:  we all feel like Dominion belongs to us.  We evangelize it to others.  We defend it to others who tell us it is boring or claim one of the copiers "fixed" it.  We are the ones in each of our game groups who like Dominion the most, and want to be in the know.  A few years ago when Jay had Prosperity at a demo table at WBC a few weeks before release I pretty much played it non-stop.  It's our game.  Yes, we aren't the ones who invented it or put the thousands of hours into creating it.  But we also want it to be perfect, and we all have ideas.  The wording complaints and the "oh my God this combo is so broken/confusing/complicated" are just us whack jobs filling the void between now and May 25.  In a few days we will all be so busy playing that you won't hear too many more gripes, I hope.  If you are getting discouraged, just go read some of the fun threads like Great Dominion Moments.

Thanks for the previews and thanks for Dominion.

Amen.

[Beyond Awesome]

One thing I'm happy about is that we're getting another Throne variant. Honestly, we have not gotten many Throne variants. Prior to Adventures, we just had 3. This is one card type that we can afford to have a little more of.

[crj]

I don't follow the logic that it doesn't matter if there's a card in some expansion that you don't like.

I mean, sure, it's not a huge deal. One needs a sense of perspective. But if you took it to the logical extreme, it wouldn't matter if you liked none of the cards in an expansion: you could still buy it and just never play it.

Similarly, I don't follow the logic that it's not OK to judge a set by the previews. Isn't that like saying we can't decide whether or not to see a movie based on the trailer? Someone (Donald X., presumably) has chosen which cards to preview on the basis that they show Empires off to best effect.


Then again, even if I've managed to get a reputation as one of the malcontents, I do really like a lot of what I've seen, and there's stuff I really want to try out. I'm not saying the above applies to me, just that it feels bogus to claim it inherently couldn't.

[LibraryAdventurer]

One thing I'm happy about is that we're getting another Throne variant. Honestly, we have not gotten many Throne variants. Prior to Adventures, we just had 3.

4 if you count Scheme, but I agree TR and variants (almost) always make a kingdom more fun, and Crown more likely than others because it still works in money-based decks.


Everyone having access to the same cards is one of the big reasons why I love Dominion while I hate MTG.
(and yet I love Black Market too.)

[eHalcyon]

One thing I'm happy about is that we're getting another Throne variant. Honestly, we have not gotten many Throne variants. Prior to Adventures, we just had 3.

4 if you count Scheme, but I agree TR and variants (almost) always make a kingdom more fun, and Crown more likely than others because it still works in money-based decks.


Everyone having access to the same cards is one of the big reasons why I love Dominion while I hate MTG.
(and yet I love Black Market too.)

Wow, I've never thought of Scheme as a TR variant, but I guess it does kind of work.

[Accatitippi]

Penguins can't fly.

[junkers]

Penguins can't fly.

Buy more Catapults.

[Davio]

Magic from the outset focused on being a tournament/competition game with aantes and stuff. But you can play it casually as well. Dominion started out as a casual game that we took more and more seriously.

But in its core Dominion is still that casual game where you can exclude your 50 most hated cards and still have 200+ to choose from. I don't really associate Dominion with tournaments so the hated cards thing isn't really an issue.

I'm sad when I see Rebuild in a random game, but at least it's over soon and next game might have a very convoluted but fun engine.

[Asper]

One thing I'm happy about is that we're getting another Throne variant. Honestly, we have not gotten many Throne variants. Prior to Adventures, we just had 3.

4 if you count Scheme, but I agree TR and variants (almost) always make a kingdom more fun, and Crown more likely than others because it still works in money-based decks.


Everyone having access to the same cards is one of the big reasons why I love Dominion while I hate MTG.
(and yet I love Black Market too.)

You forgot to count Counterfeit, too. I also don't see why Adventures should be ignored, especially as it adds two TR-variants. And Scheme is probably the closest thing we have to a Duration-TR (to date...). So we get to 7, which is quite a bit more than 3.


By the way, in case anybody cares, i changed my opinion on Debt. Assuming you decide to implement debt at all, the current implementation seems like the best way to handle it. I originally thought you should have made it a cost in coins and then treat the debt part like a "+" or "*", where you simply take debt tokens on buy. Interestingly, this makes you run into exactly the same problems i ran into when trying to make a card you could pay less for. There it was, this costs $3+ and you gain a Copper per $ you overpay less than $3. The problem here was, Workshop could gain it without a penalty. This is the same problem you get when simply ignoring debt for cost comparisons, as a card costing 8 Debt (and 0 coins) would cost $0 for Workshop. So, no, not good.

The obvious other way to implement debt would have been, just add up the standard coin value and the debt coin value for comparisons. But then you could buy an 8 Debt card very cheap and Remodel it into whatever other card. This is another thing i ran into when trying my card as a $6 that allowed you to gain Coppers to buy it, although there the penalty affected your deck.

Of course both problems are worse the wider the gap between max and min price are. With my card, it was $3, which was already enough for me to abandon the concept in the end. With the official cards, it's much more. So, if you want to make Debt cards, i admit that having Debt as a third "currency" is the best way to do it, as it avoids both the Workshop and Remodel problems.

[crj]

The obvious other way to implement debt would have been, just add up the standard coin value and the debt coin value for comparisons. But then you could buy an 8 Debt card very cheap and Remodel it into whatever other card.

I assume something very like that will have got playtested, but I'm intrigued to know why it would be a problem. You can already get trash-for-benefit fodder really cheaply via Haggler, Border VIllage, Talisman, Peddler, ...

Being able to Expand a card that has a cost of "$8, but you can incur debt to help buy it" into a Colony doesn't feel broken or not-fun to me.

Maybe this will come out in the secret history.

[Davio]

I'm sad this back-and-forth is in the Crown-thread, because I think it's an awesome card; I love the boldness of finally making that coveted Action - Treasure. Hey you can even draw it with Adventurer and play it as an Action! Magpie can find it and you can use it on another Magpie! It's just great all around and most importantly... fun.

[Donald X.]

By the way, in case anybody cares, i changed my opinion on Debt.

For my part, I now think that the deal with my response to the thread is the way I was singled out.

There's a bit I repeat. People sometimes come up to me and want to tell me personally that they don't like Dominion. And I say that's cool. Hey it didn't win game of the year in Austria!

Sometimes people say, I hate this card. Well I can't make cards people love without making cards people hate. Or, this card sure looks weak/strong. It's nice to have the cards be hard to evaluate and I know they don't really have any data yet. It is so easy to not feel at all bad about any of this.

But when someone says "Donald X., that guy, personally let me down," well man. Maybe you let yourself down, did you think of that?

I don't think it was just you doing this but I'm not checking.

Now I will try to be friendly.

So Debt. A key thing is to have cost tell you something about power level. When Debt was "cost $0, when you gain this during your turn, take 8D," that $0 cost interacted with things in a very poor way (e.g. Swindler). It turns out this is a mistake I made on other cards back when, e.g. the Prizes (at the time thinking, let's make the cost make it clear that you can't buy this; man this couldn't cost $0, oh I see). It's cool for one card for combos (Peddler) but in general cost should mean something. Other cards expect it to. Also the interaction with Possession was not great for this version.

The first version was "Debt." The card costs e.g. $10, and under a dividing line it says "Debt (You may buy this for $0, but can't buy more cards until paying it off.)" I am trying to think of exactly what was going down when it changed; there's too much history to read through and the important thing was getting the work done, not leaving a clear record. The red coin gave the mechanic more flexibility that I immediately made use of (e.g. Fortune's cost, Capital's ability). There was Possession (at the time with no errata); switching to "cost $0, when gain this get D" made it not lock you out with debt, which was at least a step up. This is the big question really because going to the red coin/hexagon in the corner was an obvious step up from the cost $0 version. I don't remember specific issues with the giant cost being a big number although it's nice to have the fail-safe of killing those interactions. We enjoyed the interactions that weren't a problem, e.g. Chariot Race.

The final version is a red coin or as it turns out hexagon in the corner. This took text off of the cards that didn't tell you enough extra anyway, plus the dividing line. And it fixed issues with the $0 not being the real cost of the card (the "undefined" hexagon is way better). At the time it was just fantastic, solving all the issues I had except Possession, which in the end gets errata. It's useful that the cards can't be gained normally other ways, though e.g. Jester can get them. It's very clean. The rules for comparing costs are the same as for Potion, which is great because it means people who understand Potion costs don't have anything new to learn there.

[Donald X.]

I'm sad this back-and-forth is in the Crown-thread, because I think it's an awesome card; I love the boldness of finally making that coveted Action - Treasure. Hey you can even draw it with Adventurer and play it as an Action! Magpie can find it and you can use it on another Magpie! It's just great all around and most importantly... fun.

I don't want you to be sad, so I'll just split it off. And since we don't need it somewhere else either, I'll just delete it. Hope you had fun, Awaclus.

Edit: There was some collateral damage, sorry anyone who liked their post that's gone; but note that everyone got to keep their respect, hooray.

[Mavy2k]

What I really do not understand is the sublimal hostility towards Donald and the smirk posts without providing anything useful to the discussion, just for the sake of arguing. Why, just why?

[Donald X.]

What I really do not understand is the sublimal hostility towards Donald and the smirk posts without providing anything useful to the discussion, just for the sake of arguing. Why, just why?

If this had been a few minutes earlier I would have just deleted it with the rest, but instead I edited it so you didn't wonder, wtf where is my post. So this is the part that wasn't part of The Continuing Story of Awaclus. It's uh. It's not exactly good times but you get to say it anyway. Which I guess is part of the explanation you're looking for too.