Print

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

[Holunder9]

I love this, except for being perhaps too automatic which is, given that you can construct your deck such that you have a discard more often, arguable. Do you think that it would be too expensive if it costed $1?

It doesn't give +1 Action like Villa, so that makes is less automatic imo. (Also, you can put the +1 Buy after the "once per turn" for bigger text, like Save.)

It is an Event "cantrip", there is no cost of playing it beyond the gift to the opponents. When you return to your Action phase the number of Actions you have remains constant. Also, what I just noted is that like Villa this is bonkers with draw-to-X (but unlike Village it doesn't flood your deck with degenerate villages).
If one wanted to avoid this one could do it as Edict: In games using this, once per turn during your Action phase, you may look through your discard pile to put a card from it into your hand. If you do, all other players may do the same.

[Commodore Chuckles]

I love this, except for being perhaps too automatic which is, given that you can construct your deck such that you have a discard more often, arguable. Do you think that it would be too expensive if it costed $1?

It doesn't give +1 Action like Villa, so that makes is less automatic imo. (Also, you can put the +1 Buy after the "once per turn" for bigger text, like Save.)

It is an Event "cantrip", there is no cost of playing it beyond the gift to the opponents. When you return to your Action phase the number of Actions you have remains constant. Also, what I just noted is that like Villa this is bonkers with draw-to-X (but unlike Village it doesn't flood your deck with degenerate villages).
If one wanted to avoid this one could do it as Edict: In games using this, once per turn during your Action phase, you may look through your discard pile to put a card from it into your hand. If you do, all other players may do the same.

One thing, though: If you want to put something in your hand that you just bought, it will cost an additional Buy, because you have to buy it after you bought the other thing. The text is triggered immediately after you buy it, right?

[Chappy7]

Check it out.  Artificer and Workshop had a baby.  I thought the semi-attack was kinda fun. 
You can usually gain an action to your hand to discard for Coffers if you want to.  That way it turns into a normal workshop +2 Coffers (and some player interaction.)  Or you can keep the card you gain and it's more like a Sculptor/Cobbler! If you have the actions for it that is.

[Aquila]

Edit to my entry, format change to match 2E Events (thanks crlundy), and made your returning to Action phase conditional to getting a card from discard (thanks holunder for identifying that this can just empty your Treasures out of hand, one can't do this by itself now).

[NoMoreFun]

Judging will take place in 24 hours

[Violet CLM]

A bit of Nocturne-style unpredictability. I wanted to do something with debt and "if you have any debt," but Capital kept getting in the way, so here's some different less-explored territory instead. Maybe getting all these treasures for free is too powerful, I dunno, I didn't have any better ideas.

[MrHiTech]

Real Estate (Action-Attack, cost: $2)
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each player (including you) gains an Estate. Then, you may trash any number of Estates from your hand.

[NoMoreFun]

Thank you to everyone who sent in a card. This wouldn't have been the easiest round to design cards for, so it was very nice to see so many interesting cards that use the concept in different ways.

Ancient City: A bit too powerful.; very easy to play a lot of these and get all the actions you could ever want,  and only the first one helps your opponents.

Cabin: A good card that really understands the idea behind the contest. However while I didn't rule out creating new tokens, but I didn't like "+1 Marketeer" - I felt like it added very little value to the card for a new mechanic. I suggest replacing it with "+1 Card" for discarding a Victory card.

Sorceress: I don't generally like $4 cursers, but this one seems more fun. It has the same problem as other cursers where you essentially have to buy it, even though you do end up benefiting from being the player with more curses occasionally.

Refresh: Looks interesting, fun and fast... maybe too fast? Its strength mostly seems to come from the other cards you use with it (like Chapel and Donate)

Forbidden city: I really like it. While your opponents could benefit a lot, maybe a bit too much, the card gets its strength from differences in intent between decks.

Prisoners Dilemma: Very clever, but doesn't seem like it makes for a fun Dominion card.

Mountaineering: Very unique, using the concept of non attack interaction as a "cost" for something that's otherwise free. Discard pile based mechanics often seem too much like luck for me to really get behind this card, but it works very nicely with other +buy in the kingdom to play the card you just gained.

Artificer's shop: I don't understand why it's not "up to $4". An interesting discard for benefit.

Real Estate: Too cheap for a cantrip junker and I don't like how it varies between plays

Bedtime story: Not sure why it's a night card. I would prefer different effects to treasure gaining to try out the very interesting Journey token mechanic.

Runner up 1: Potlatch by hypercube
A very interesting and amazingly simple card. I think it will mostly be used to bridge the $5/$4 gap. It does seem like it would run into a lot of analysis paralysis, and I'm not sure why the 2nd gain is compulsory. The slowness of the card itself is made up for by how quick games using it will get.

Runner up 2: Philosopher by scott_pilgrim
Although it didn't win, this is the card I'd like to playtest most. I like the uneasy pacts it would create between players to keep cards the way they are, but it does risk getting political in 3 player games - buying a Philosopher to sabotage one other player's deck in particular. I can see players getting irritated with each other, but I'm not sure how endearing it will be. Still, a $4 cantrip gives players plenty of chances to run out the pile.

Winner: Mason's Guild by faust
I'd like to playtest it to see how strong it is and when it's worth buying, but I really like the concept behind combining cards and the -1 card token. It isn't necessarily an easy decision but other players only need to make it once. Meanwhile you have a card that has very interesting interactions with itself.

[Aquila]

What about Commodore's Ancient City?

[NoMoreFun]

I wasn't planning on writing up every card but I got most of them in the end.  I've updated the post with the 2 I missed - I think that's all of them.

[faust]

Thansk!

Should we make a 2-week deadline for the next competition?

[faust]

Anyway, here comes the new challenge:

Create a card that utilizes an existing State or Artifact

Possibilities are: Lost in the Woods, Deluded, Envious, Miserable, Twice Miserable, Flag, Key, Treasure Chest (less likely: Horn/Lantern).

Your cards should reference the State/Artifact explicitly; it is not enough to simply make a Hexer.

[Asper]

Jolly seasons greatings, I guess.

[hypercube]

[Holunder9]

With 6 cards in hand this will be more of a gift than an Attack until fairly late in the game. Of course it becomes much stronger with handsize attacks.

[faust]

With 6 cards in hand this will be more of a gift than an Attack until fairly late in the game. Of course it becomes much stronger with handsize attacks.

It isn't really an attack anyway because it is trivial to defend against it. Still good that it has Attack type I think.

[Freddy10]

With 6 cards in hand this will be more of a gift than an Attack until fairly late in the game. Of course it becomes much stronger with handsize attacks.

It isn't really an attack anyway because it is trivial to defend against it. Still good that it has Attack type I think.

You can also trash your own cards if you have the flag. The Attack type is strange, a player can react to it, even if is not affected (like multiple militias, but at least, in that case, is affected once)

[Commodore Chuckles]

[Holunder9]

With 6 cards in hand this will be more of a gift than an Attack until fairly late in the game. Of course it becomes much stronger with handsize attacks.

It isn't really an attack anyway because it is trivial to defend against it. Still good that it has Attack type I think.

There is one official card that is remotely similar to this in terms of being potentially hurtful late in the game, Masquerade. It doesn't have the Attack type.

With 6 cards in hand this will be more of a gift than an Attack until fairly late in the game. Of course it becomes much stronger with handsize attacks.

It isn't really an attack anyway because it is trivial to defend against it. Still good that it has Attack type I think.

You can also trash your own cards if you have the flag. The Attack type is strange, a player can react to it, even if is not affected (like multiple militias, but at least, in that case, is affected once)

Yeah, it is totally weird to give something which is more often beneficial than harmful and, as you pointed out, often not affecting the supposedly attacked player, the Attack type.

[Asper]

Masquerade isn't an Attack cardf because it would be unclear how it should be resolved if one player blocks the attack. I do agree that Spendthrift should not be an Attack because it is very often useful, but I also think that mandatory trashing on a non-attack is poor design. My suggestion would be to just make the trashing optional.

[Holunder9]

Masquerade isn't an Attack cardf because it would be unclear how it should be resolved if one player blocks the attack.

Pretty simple, that dude doesn't pass a card or gets passed a card to, i.e. in a 3P game you simply resolve Masquerade as if it were a 2P game. And if both players Moat you pass a card to yourself.

Also, while you can get a better card via Masquerade while you are on the passive side of it most of the times it is neutral or bad whereas Vanguard seems to be mostly good for the Attacked player.

[Asper]

Masquerade isn't an Attack cardf because it would be unclear how it should be resolved if one player blocks the attack.

Pretty simple, that dude doesn't pass a card or gets passed a card to, i.e. in a 3P game you simply resolve Masquerade as if it were a 2P game. And if both players Moat you pass a card to yourself.

That does not align with how the card is worded. If I block the attack, my right neighbor is still told to pass me a card. He's not told to pass my left neighbor a card. To make it work the way you describe it, the card would have to use a much more complicated wording. Those additional words would only ever matter if a straight attack-blocker was in the kingdom, and Intrigue never had such a card (and started as a standalone edition, mind you). It's so, so much simpler to just not have it be an attack.

[Holunder9]

Masquerade isn't an Attack cardf because it would be unclear how it should be resolved if one player blocks the attack.

Pretty simple, that dude doesn't pass a card or gets passed a card to, i.e. in a 3P game you simply resolve Masquerade as if it were a 2P game. And if both players Moat you pass a card to yourself.

That does not align with how the card is worded. If I block the attack, my right neighbor is still told to pass me a card. He's not told to pass my left neighbor a card. To make it work the way you describe it, the card would have to use a much more complicated wording. Those additional words would only ever matter if a straight attack-blocker was in the kingdom, and Intrigue never had such a card (and started as a standalone edition, mind you). It's so, so much simpler to just not have it be an attack.

Sure, the wording would be a mess. I am just saying that you could commonsensically play Masquerade as an Attack card and that if Masquerade, which is often harsher than Vanguard (and led to the broken KC-Goons-Masquerade combo), isn't an Attack Vanguard, which is often a gift, shouldn't be one either.
I read the card as a partly-delayed Smithy: it always net draws 3 cards with the last card only arriving in your hand at the end of your turn. It has the upside of potentially drawing you more cards if the Flag is uncontested and the downside of gifting whomever you steal the Flag from something (the stealing itself obviously cannot be considered as Attack, otherwise Fool, Borderguard, Treasurer and Swashbuckler could be Attacks as well). This is why I don't think that it should be an Attack. Sure, it is more complex as in the later part of the game there is a little mini-game arising about whether you really want to play Vanguard anymore as you might be superthin and direly want to hang on to whatever you have. But that seems to be more like a downside attached to Flag late in the game, akin to Cathedral potentially trashing good cards late in the game, than a genuine Attack.

[hypercube]

The idea behind the trashing on Vanguard being mandatory is to create an additional set of decisions regarding whether you want the Flag late in the game. If the trashing is optional both players will just pass the Flag back and forth every turn, which isn't too interesting.

I don't really see what the advantage of leaving the Attack type off is other than some additional similarity to Masq. Certainly there will be lots of times where one has a thin deck and the trashing will act as an attack, so I think it's better to let that get blocked by Moat etc.. Playing Pirate Ship is usually helpful to your opponent as well; that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be an Attack.

[Holunder9]

It just seems weird that Alice plays Vanguard, Bob trashes a card from his hand, Charles sets aside a Horse Trader and Alice takes the Flag from Bob. Bob got compensated for having lost the Flag and Charles got a gift as well although the Attack did not involve him at all. Existing Attacks are always symmetric, they affect all other players.