Print

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

[popsofctown]

Cheatos are in both Banjo games but off the top of my head I think that's the Tooie sprite.

[grrgrrgrr]

Retracted my Cheat nom. Replaced it with:

Cheatos are in both Banjo games but off the top of my head I think that's the Tooie sprite.

Cheato was in both games, but the pages were a Tooie thing. The image is taken on Mayahem Temple if I recall correctly.

[segura]

Retracted my Cheat nom. Replaced it with:

Cheatos are in both Banjo games but off the top of my head I think that's the Tooie sprite.

Cheato was in both games, but the pages were a Tooie thing. The image is taken on Mayahem Temple if I recall correctly.

I think that this implies no choice at all: without trashing you obviously avoid the quadratic thing (even 5-5 split in a 2P game would make this a -5VP curse) and with trashing you take the Working Villages.

[grrgrrgrr]

Retracted my Cheat nom. Replaced it with:

Cheatos are in both Banjo games but off the top of my head I think that's the Tooie sprite.

Cheato was in both games, but the pages were a Tooie thing. The image is taken on Mayahem Temple if I recall correctly.

I think that this implies no choice at all: without trashing you obviously avoid the quadratic thing (even 5-5 split in a 2P game would make this a -5VP curse) and with trashing you take the Working Villages.

I think it is more nuanced. When there is no trashing, you can still pick up a Slave, as they provide a +Buy and the +Actions can still be useful. You just don't pick 5 of them; only one or two, maybe 3. When there is trashing, getting rid of the slaves can be somewhat of a pain. In order to trash a Slave, you must forego playing it, and your deck gets worse afterwards. And trashers like Apprentice don't like trashing slaves as they cost $0. On the flipside, trashers like Bonfire, Advance or Sacrifice are excellent for the job.

In the end of the day, it is a Village that punishes having too many of them. It may be on the lower end, but it being free means that there is no opportunity cost in picking them up when you have spare +Buys (which they provide themselves).

[segura]

Retracted my Cheat nom. Replaced it with:

Cheatos are in both Banjo games but off the top of my head I think that's the Tooie sprite.

Cheato was in both games, but the pages were a Tooie thing. The image is taken on Mayahem Temple if I recall correctly.

I think that this implies no choice at all: without trashing you obviously avoid the quadratic thing (even 5-5 split in a 2P game would make this a -5VP curse) and with trashing you take the Working Villages.

I think it is more nuanced. When there is no trashing, you can still pick up a Slave, as they provide a +Buy and the +Actions can still be useful.

You refer to the case of no Cursing and no trashing. This is also trivial, you will pick up one or two Slaves. Three is highly unlikely.

[grrgrrgrr]

Rotten Egg Basket
$3 Curse-Reaction
---
-4 VP
-
When you would gain a Curse, you may gain this instead. If you do, reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 2 cards named Curse. Return the revealed Curses to the Supply and discard the rest.

Just like putting all your eggs in one basket- you can bundle your Curses up into one slightly more Curse-y card and (hopefully) trash it later!

Errata: I was considering adding a Setup rule to add an extra Curse-giving Attack to the kingdom to make up for the potentially wasted space, but decided that was way too wordy.

Avoiding letting it return itself to the Supply was a problem and has made the wording a little weird too, I'd appreciate feedback on how to make it a bit simpler!

EDIT: fixed the text to match the card image (it said -3VP)

I think it is simpler to just make it a buyable card that moves curses back when purchased. I would do something like this.

-4%
-
When you buy this, +1 Buy. Look through your discard pile. Move up to 3 Curses from your hand or discard pile to the supply.

[Kudasai]

CHALLENGE #51: THERE'S A CURSE ON YOU --- SUBMISSION:



12-Pile

I guess the idea is two-fold:
-As a card you'd want to buy, it's a decently powerful card for cheap, but at the cost of -2VP. Can't be trashed later unless Bonfire is in the Kingdom.
-As a card you'd give out when Cursing someone, it gives -2VP versus -1VP, but players will need to understand when that actually will hurt an opponent and not help them.

FANATIC - $3 Action - Duration - Curse
At the start of each of your turns for the rest of the game: +$1.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-2VP
(This stays in play.)

[popsofctown]

That's right, you meet Cheato directly in the first one, don't you.
But he is multiple places at once.
Very omnipotent.

[Something_Smart]

Haunted Shop
$0
Action - Duration - Curse
+1 Action. Now and at the start of your next turn, +1 Buy and +$1.
--
While this is in play, you must use all of your Buys during your Buy phase. -1 VP.

(When playing with this, replace the Supply Curses with an equal number of Haunted Shops.)

[FlyerBeast]

Rotten Egg Basket
$3 Curse-Reaction
---
-4 VP
-
When you would gain a Curse, you may gain this instead. If you do, reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 2 cards named Curse. Return the revealed Curses to the Supply and discard the rest.

Just like putting all your eggs in one basket- you can bundle your Curses up into one slightly more Curse-y card and (hopefully) trash it later!

Errata: I was considering adding a Setup rule to add an extra Curse-giving Attack to the kingdom to make up for the potentially wasted space, but decided that was way too wordy.

Avoiding letting it return itself to the Supply was a problem and has made the wording a little weird too, I'd appreciate feedback on how to make it a bit simpler!

EDIT: fixed the text to match the card image (it said -3VP)

I think it is simpler to just make it a buyable card that moves curses back when purchased. I would do something like this.

-4%
-
When you buy this, +1 Buy. Look through your discard pile. Move up to 3 Curses from your hand or discard pile to the supply.

Yeah, simplifying it that way would help. My thinking was to stay true to the "gain a Curse" wording on Attacks (in my mind, "gain a Curse" means to gain a card with the Curse type like Hero's "gain a Treasure", rather than the specific card named Curse) but I was probably overthinking it so I might try reenterring a version closer to your idea.

I think it would need to be guaranteed to return the same amount of Curses every time you gain one though, otherwise it'd be too much of a gamble to buy one? If you only find one Curse in your discard, it'd be a pretty unsatisfying purchase. If you can get one when you're attacked, you're gonna be getting -1 VP  anyway, so I think it'd make for some interesting tactical decisions (but only if you mostly know what you're in for?)

[Something_Smart]

I don't think Rotten Egg Basket should be a reaction. Duchess isn't a reaction.

[NoMoreFun]

24 hours to go

[FlyerBeast]

I don't think Rotten Egg Basket should be a reaction. Duchess isn't a reaction.

Agreed. I was basing it on Trader being a Reaction but I see the difference there now.

I'm replacing my earlier entry with this fixed and far less wordy version. Here we go:

Rotten Egg Basket
$3 Curse
---
-4 VP
-
When you gain this, look through your discard pile for up to 2 cards named Curse, then trash them.

The rulebook that would come with this would say 'when someone gains a Curse, they can choose any card with the Curse type that's in the Kingdom'. I've made it trash the Curses instead of returning them to the Supply, so when the vanilla Curses run out people have to gain Rotten Egg Baskets instead until those have run out too. Might be unfair but hey, I tend to avoid playing games with Attacks anyway

EDIT: spelling and the rule

[[TP] Inferno]

Charlatan
$5
Action-Curse
You may set this aside. If you do, gain 2 cards each costing up to $4.
-------
-2VP

My card's FAQ would say that Witch calls for the card NAMED Curse, instead of the type, just so you guys know.

[Freddy10]

Here is my little experiment 



In games using this, replace the curse pile with a pile of nightmares of the same size

[forkofnature]

My entry is a 5/5 split pile:

Note: My entry has been updated. See post #4072.



This is supposed to work such that you can't gain Demons until all the Dark Rituals are gone. If this wording doesn't accomplish this, please let me know how to fix it 

P.S. The images from the shardofhonor tool are huge. Is there a way to make them show up smaller on the forum without manually resizing the files?

[Kudasai]

Charlatan
$5
Action-Curse
You may set this aside. If you do, gain 2 cards each costing up to $4.
-------
-2VP

My card's FAQ would say that Witch calls for the card NAMED Curse, instead of the type, just so you guys know.

I'd argue this is the case already as Witch gives out a Curse (name) and not a Curse card (type). It all comes down to what players understand though, so making the distinction helps.

Hopefully one day we'll get another official card with the Curse type.

[segura]

My entry is a 5/5 split pile:



This is supposed to work such that you can't gain Demons until all the Dark Rituals are gone. If this wording doesn't accomplish this, please let me know how to fix it 

P.S. The images from the shardofhonor tool are huge. Is there a way to make them show up smaller on the forum without manually resizing the files?

I like this but it has some obvious issues.

In the presence of other Cursers and with few players, it is unlikely that somebody will go for Dark Rituals (i.e. either buy them or take a Dark Ritual instead of a Curse). It is simply too slow.

Without other Cursers and in 3P games (2P game situation: if Alice goes for Dark Rituals, Bob can simply not go for them and Alice having 5 dead cards in her deck before she converts them into junkers is simply harmful for her and not for Bob) this is interesting.

One solution is to make this a parallel pile, i.e. both cards are always available.

[segura]

Haunted Shop
$0
Action - Duration - Curse
+1 Action. Now and at the start of your next turn, +1 Buy and +$1.
--
While this is in play, you must use all of your Buys during your Buy phase, if you can. -1 VP.

(When playing with this, replace the Supply Curses with an equal number of Haunted Shops.)

I like this, the Copper self-junking is neat.
But I'd definitely give this -2VPs, otherwise it is (barring edge cases of "forced players" like Herald, Golem and Ghost) strictly better than Curse (you can always choose to not play Haunted Shop). I'd also cut the if you can, it seems unlikely that the Copper pile empties (and even if it would, the general rule is always to do as much as possible).

[spineflu]

My entry is a 5/5 split pile:



This is supposed to work such that you can't gain Demons until all the Dark Rituals are gone. If this wording doesn't accomplish this, please let me know how to fix it 

P.S. The images from the shardofhonor tool are huge. Is there a way to make them show up smaller on the forum without manually resizing the files?

Include width=250 (or a number of your choice) in the [ img ] tag. 250 works good for vertical cards, 300 for horizontal.
This replaces the normal Curses?
The numbers on this being a 5/5 split might not be great - you might want to do something like 2 of each per player (4/4 for two player, scaling up to 12/12 for six)
Also welcome to the board!

[Something_Smart]

I like this, the Copper self-junking is neat.
But I'd definitely give this -2VPs, otherwise it is (barring edge cases of "forced players" like Herald, Golem and Ghost) strictly better than Curse (you can always choose to not play Haunted Shop). I'd also cut the if you can, it seems unlikely that the Copper pile empties (and even if it would, the general rule is always to do as much as possible).

I don't think there's anything wrong with it being strictly better than Curse, given that it replaces the regular Curses. I think if it were -2VP, then Cursers would be way stronger than they already are (and the action of Haunted Shop doesn't help in most cases), and if it were -2VP and placed alongside the Curses, people would never take these unless they had good trashing to get rid of them and if they do have good trashing then which Curse they take doesn't matter much. The way it is takes some of the edge off of Cursers, but playing these can come back to bite you even harder.

"If you can" covers other edge cases like Contraband and Mission but you're probably right that it's implied well enough.

[forkofnature]

My entry is a 5/5 split pile:



This is supposed to work such that you can't gain Demons until all the Dark Rituals are gone. If this wording doesn't accomplish this, please let me know how to fix it 

P.S. The images from the shardofhonor tool are huge. Is there a way to make them show up smaller on the forum without manually resizing the files?

I like this but it has some obvious issues.

In the presence of other Cursers and with few players, it is unlikely that somebody will go for Dark Rituals (i.e. either buy them or take a Dark Ritual instead of a Curse). It is simply too slow.

Without other Cursers and in 3P games (2P game situation: if Alice goes for Dark Rituals, Bob can simply not go for them and Alice having 5 dead cards in her deck before she converts them into junkers is simply harmful for her and not for Bob) this is interesting.

One solution is to make this a parallel pile, i.e. both cards are always available.

You're probably right that if your goal is to junk your opponent's deck, Demon absolutely works better in larger games, and Mountebank probably works better in general. However, I was thinking of this with a greater focus on the alt-VP. The junking was supposed to be more of a bonus to go along with buying out the Curses, which are free VP with two or more Demons.

That said, you may still be right that this strategy is on the slow side. I'll drop Dark Ritual to -1VP so Demons are more valuable and whiffing is less painful.

This replaces the normal Curses?
The numbers on this being a 5/5 split might not be great - you might want to do something like 2 of each per player (4/4 for two player, scaling up to 12/12 for six)

This is a kingdom pile. Witch etc. still give out regular Curses, never Dark Rituals. However, Demon counts both. I'm wary of scaling up to 12/12, or even 8/8, since such large quantities require many players to attempt the strategy (or a good source of +Buy) if the Demons are ever going to show up. However, I think you're right to question the flat 5/5. Maybe a more standard alt-VP count makes sense: 4/4 for two-player and 6/6 for multiplayer.


To summarize then, my entry is now as follows:



This is a kingdom pile that does not replace the regular Curses. Cursers such as Witch hand out Curses, not Dark Rituals; however, Demon counts both Curses and Dark Rituals. With two players, this is a 4/4 split; with three or more players, it's a 6/6 split.

Thanks for the feedback!

Edit: Demon now gives 2VP per Curse.

[segura]

I like this, the Copper self-junking is neat.
But I'd definitely give this -2VPs, otherwise it is (barring edge cases of "forced players" like Herald, Golem and Ghost) strictly better than Curse (you can always choose to not play Haunted Shop). I'd also cut the if you can, it seems unlikely that the Copper pile empties (and even if it would, the general rule is always to do as much as possible).

I don't think there's anything wrong with it being strictly better than Curse, given that it replaces the regular Curses.

I totally disagree. If you take a quick look at the other cards in this very contest, you realize that none of them are strictly better than Curses in order to make the decision non-trivial.
Also, your card in and of itself, i.e. without he negative VPs, is pretty decent. It is probably a $3 and in many engines likely preferrable to Woodcutter. So we don't talk about some moderate form of improved Curses like Ruins (in which case your notion of a straightforward Curse substitute would have more merit) but a decent Action card.

[segura]

However, I was thinking of this with a greater focus on the alt-VP.

There is no viable alt-VP strategy:

- An even split, i.e. 5 Curses and 4 Demons, would be 15VPs spread over 9 cards. Less than 2VP per (semi-)dead card in your deck is not feasible (compare this with Shepherd-Pasture, you gotta make these 2VP cards quasi-cantrip-Lab-hybrids to make it viable)
- Let's make this more extreme, 7 Curses and 7 Demons. Extremely unrealistic as a smart opponent would buy more Curses once he realizes that you go for Demons. That's 42 VPs spread over 14 cards, i.e. they are all Duchies. Even if half of them come for free, not all that impressive (and, as already mentioned, not realistic).

Perhaps there is something there with 2VPs/Curse. No idea. But the current alt-VP idea is simply too weak.

[forkofnature]

However, I was thinking of this with a greater focus on the alt-VP.

There is no viable alt-VP strategy:

- An even split, i.e. 5 Curses and 4 Demons, would be 15VPs spread over 9 cards. Less than 2VP per (semi-)dead card in your deck is not feasible (compare this with Shepherd-Pasture, you gotta make these 2VP cards quasi-cantrip-Lab-hybrids to make it viable)
- Let's make this more extreme, 7 Curses and 7 Demons. Extremely unrealistic as a smart opponent would buy more Curses once he realizes that you go for Demons. That's 42 VPs spread over 14 cards, i.e. they are all Duchies. Even if half of them come for free, not all that impressive (and, as already mentioned, not realistic).

Perhaps there is something there with 2VPs/Curse. No idea. But the current alt-VP idea is simply too weak.

Hm, fair. I think 2VP/Curse should help.

In that case, your example of 5 Curses and 4 Demons gives 35 points over 9 cards: that's a much better rate than Duchies, Demons aren't dead in hand, and you've probably handed out a few Curses to your opponent in the meantime.

However, your opponent will probably take a Demon out from under you if they can. 3 Demons and 5 Curses gives 25 points over 8 cards, which isn't as good, but still better than Duchies. If your opponent wants to steal your Curses, that's their own deck they're junking while speeding up your three-pile.

No matter what, I think the speed of the rush shouldn't be underestimated. All of the above seems feasible by turn 10 or so, and should be very resistant to attacks. However, it should be made fair by the fact that draining a third pile will be much more difficult than the first two.

2VP/Curse it is. I've updated my entry above.