Print

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

[emtzalex]

For Week 15, I wanted to adapt Violet CLM's Project cards.

Project cards are works in progress. The archetypal Project card starts out weak but can be made strong by repeatedly investing in it. When you buy a Project card, you have a choice: either you gain the card as usual, or you add one of your Project tokens to that card's supply pile. (This still counts as buying a card for the purposes of e.g. Merchant Guild or Contraband.) The number of Project tokens each player has on a given supply pile is referred to as that player's level of that pile; each supply pile therefore starts out at level 0. There is no hard limit on how many Project tokens a player can have, in total or on any given supply pile, though specific cards may stop accruing benefits after specific levels.

As you can see, this was posted in 2016, before Renaissance was released (in 2018) and Project landscapes were introduced. To avoid confusion, I am going to suggest these be renamed as Level cards, and the tokens be called Level tokens. Other than the name change, I don't want to change any of the rules. I would restate those rules and add the following clarifications:

• Some cards have the Level type.
• Cards with the Level type can have any other type or combination of types.
• When you buy a Level card, you have a choice: either you gain the card as usual, or you add one of your Level tokens to that card's supply pile.
• If you choose to add the token, this still counts as buying a card (e.g. for the purposes of  Merchant Guild or Contraband); it does not count as gaining the card (like gaining a card and exchanging it would).
• The number of Level tokens each player has on a given supply pile is referred to as that player's level of that pile (and the cards in that pile).
• Therefore, each supply pile starts out at level 0.
• There is no hard limit on how many Level tokens a player can have, in total or on any given supply pile, though specific cards may stop accruing benefits after specific levels.
• Moreover, Level tokens are not component-limited; players may use a substitute if they run out.
• The archetypal Level card starts out weak but can be made strong by repeatedly investing in it by adding Level tokens.
• But, in theory, Level tokens could have a mixed effect (both strengthening some aspects of the cards and weakening others) or even just weakening it.
• While all Level cards can have Level tokens added to it using the buying mechanic, other Level cards might add (or even subtract) Level tokens through other means.

Violet CLM designed a number of Project card as samples:

Redecorate is a Remodel that starts out almost useless (although the "you may" wording means it can at least kill coppers) but can be built up to an Expand or beyond.
Entourage spends a while burdening you with junk (its on-buy effect is triggered when you put a Project token on it) before letting you gain it two at a time, or better.
Boom Town gradually becomes a village or better, but also helps you with anything you may be specializing in.
Initiate is cheap but mostly useless until level 4, when it becomes a bargain Market with potential to grow even further. May be worth gaining before leveling.
Arsonist allows you to mess with whatever cards your opponents have been leveling.
Sellsword is less effective than Militia but gains drawing abilities if other players compete with you for it.
College is a drawer that wants you to buy expensive cards before you start playing it.
Caravansary needs at least one token on it before you start, but then carries money indefinitely into the future until you finally want it.
Sunken City, like Encampment, disappears after you use it, but the moment you place a token somewhere you've got any number of sunken cities back in your deck again.
Ore is as straightforward a project card as it gets, a criminally overexpensive Copper that can be made better than Gold.
Smeltery turns coins into coin tokens, but only if you invest in it first.
Tithe gives you a lot of money in short order, but slows down the moment you get too greedy with it.
Memorial is a pricier Gold that turns into a cheaper Province.
Ramparts is a self-contained bidding war.

edit: fixed Ramparts link

Here are three of those cards, edited to use the updated language.

      


For the contest, design a Kingdom card pile that uses the Level mechanic. Please let me know if you have any questions or suggestions.

EDIT: Whoops, forgot to give details about the actual contest. Once again, my main judging criteria is whether I would be excited to see in a Kingdom? Important factors for me are:

balance -- is the card useful, but not overpowering (both in general and in a variety of Kingdoms)
playability -- the card is fun to play and works in more than one type of deck
simplicity -- this doesn't always mean fewer words; a card with lots of text that, once you understand it, can be easily and intuitively be played is better than one with four lines of text that is hard to understand
topicality -- the card (or cards) uses the mechanic in an interesting way

The deadline for submissions will be 23:59 UTC / 7:59 p.m. Eastern/Forum time on Sunday, July 18, 2021.

[The Alchemist]

This sounds just like Unjer's "Progress" cards. We've been playtesting a bunch of them in the Discord.

[fika monster]

This sounds just like Unjer's "Progress" cards. We've been playtesting a bunch of them in the Discord.

Ive also been playtesting them. I dont mind that they are similar: Its super hard to come up with something completely new

[emtzalex]

This sounds just like Unjer's "Progress" cards. We've been playtesting a bunch of them in the Discord.

Ive also been playtesting them. I dont mind that they are similar: Its super hard to come up with something completely new

I'm not on Discord that much, and I haven't seen them.

[fika monster]

This sounds just like Unjer's "Progress" cards. We've been playtesting a bunch of them in the Discord.

Ive also been playtesting them. I dont mind that they are similar: Its super hard to come up with something completely new

I'm not on Discord that much, and I haven't seen them.

Both me and Annie/the alchemist told Umcher, the author of Progress cards: They dont seem to mind. Even if they had minded, i wouldnt have blamed you or anything.

[The Alchemist]

Unjer's Progress is a landscape card you can buy. It's buy neutral and costs $1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4 for a total of 10 levels of Progress. Here are a few of their cards:



These aren't the final versions I don't think, just what I had on hand. Hopefully they can post their set.

[emtzalex]

Obviously this is a very similar design space. As I said, these cards were initially created by Violet CLM back in 2018, and I used it as I found it interesting.

[spineflu]

Mechanic question: absent of cards that change levels on their own, can you only level up while there are cards remaining in the pile (ie, can you still buy a level when that pile is empty)?

[emtzalex]

Mechanic question: absent of cards that change levels on their own, can you only level up while there are cards remaining in the pile (ie, can you still buy a level when that pile is empty)?

That's an interesting question. Nothing in the original posts on Violet CLM's progress cards discussed this, but my inclination is to say no.

As the rules currently exist, you cannot buy a card from an empty supply pile then just fail to gain it because there are not cards there (which you might actually want to do in the context of, say, Goons) the way you could buy an Event (like Wedding) and fail to gain the card if the pile is empty. Also, some piles have cards of differing costs, making it hard to know what the price should be (of course, you could make it a rule that Level cards can't be in those kinds of piles).

That being said, if you want to make a card where you can buy and level up from an empty pile, that is fine, just mention it in the comments.

[spineflu]

Carnavale • $3* • Action - Level
Cards cost $1 less this turn, per level.

Gain a card costing up to $2 (after the price change).
-
On your turns, this costs $1 more per level.

potential super-inventor that can't gain itself (without some other source of price reduction.)
An assumption I made here is the "level" talked about is always the player in question's level with that specific card, rather than anyone's/any card's level - I think this is a mechanic-wide assumption, and should probably be revised with a different keyword that better denotes ownership, but for playtesting + the sake of the contest, i'm just using "level".

[emtzalex]

We're a couple hours past the halfway point. Just a quick reminder (since I initial forgot to include it in the OP), the deadline for submissions is 23:59 UTC / 7:59 p.m. Eastern (Forum) time on Sunday, July 18, 2021.

[Aquila]

One of the main advantages I see to this mechanic is it can create an ongoing interesting decision throughout the game between gaining a copy and powering up the copies you have. Having the level up price be the same as the card's cost is elegant and it would be great if it can work.
Another thing I noted is how the Adventures tokens (or really Pathfinding, Lost Arts, Training and Seaway) are similar to levelling up. They're a good power gauge, and maybe the more interesting level-up effects will not simply be extra vanilla because they exist.

This entry might need to cost a bit more, looking through extra cards to find a target is rather potent. Also, some kind of level cap could be defined...

[emtzalex]

Another thing I noted is how the Adventures tokens (or really Pathfinding, Lost Arts, Training and Seaway) are similar to levelling up. They're a good power gauge, and maybe the more interesting level-up effects will not simply be extra vanilla because they exist.

This is actually the origin of the idea. I did not want to quote Violet CLM's entire OP announcing these, but:

In any case, I was thinking about Adventures earlier and its use of +1 Card, +1 Action, etc. tokens to make supply piles better, but only for individual players. Those tokens are all pretty generic because they have to be, but what if you could tailor the tokens to specific supply piles? So I whipped up a few quick illustrations of that idea.

[mxdata]

Carnavale • $3* • Action - Level
Cards cost $1 less this turn, per level.

Gain a card costing up to $2 (after the price change).
-
On your turns, this costs $1 more per level.

potential super-inventor that can't gain itself (without some other source of price reduction.)
An assumption I made here is the "level" talked about is always the player in question's level with that specific card, rather than anyone's/any card's level - I think this is a mechanic-wide assumption, and should probably be revised with a different keyword that better denotes ownership, but for playtesting + the sake of the contest, i'm just using "level".

How would that cost-increasing work with cost-reducers?  E.g., suppose you have 4 Highways in play and one level token - how much does Carnavale now cost?  I can see two interpretations:

• It costs $1 - the base price is $3, that's reduced by $4, but it can't go below $0, so it's reduced to $0, then the level increases it to $1
• It costs $0 - the base price is $3, the level increases it to $4, then the Highways reduce it by $4, to $0

Which would be the correct interpretation? I'm thinking the first, based on the wording of Fisherman's reduction clause, i.e., "this costs $3 less" rather than "this costs $2". I'm assuming that the reason it's worded that way is that "this costs $2" would override other cost-reducers, implying that cost-changing on a card comes after other cost-reducers

[spineflu]

Carnavale • $3* • Action - Level
Cards cost $1 less this turn, per level.

Gain a card costing up to $2 (after the price change).
-
On your turns, this costs $1 more per level.

potential super-inventor that can't gain itself (without some other source of price reduction.)
An assumption I made here is the "level" talked about is always the player in question's level with that specific card, rather than anyone's/any card's level - I think this is a mechanic-wide assumption, and should probably be revised with a different keyword that better denotes ownership, but for playtesting + the sake of the contest, i'm just using "level".

How would that cost-increasing work with cost-reducers?  E.g., suppose you have 4 Highways in play and one level token - how much does Carnavale now cost?  I can see two interpretations:

• It costs $1 - the base price is $3, that's reduced by $4, but it can't go below $0, so it's reduced to $0, then the level increases it to $1
• It costs $0 - the base price is $3, the level increases it to $4, then the Highways reduce it by $4, to $0

Which would be the correct interpretation? I'm thinking the first, based on the wording of Fisherman's reduction clause, i.e., "this costs $3 less" rather than "this costs $2". I'm assuming that the reason it's worded that way is that "this costs $2" would override other cost-reducers, implying that cost-changing on a card comes after other cost-reducers

oh no are we having this thread again? I'd say it costs $0 - you calculate Carnivale's cost first, with levels, then apply any effects (highways, etc). same deal as fisherman.

[grrgrrgrr]

Carnavale • $3* • Action - Level
Cards cost $1 less this turn, per level.

Gain a card costing up to $2 (after the price change).
-
On your turns, this costs $1 more per level.

potential super-inventor that can't gain itself (without some other source of price reduction.)
An assumption I made here is the "level" talked about is always the player in question's level with that specific card, rather than anyone's/any card's level - I think this is a mechanic-wide assumption, and should probably be revised with a different keyword that better denotes ownership, but for playtesting + the sake of the contest, i'm just using "level".

You know that "Carnivalle" itself can be an other source of cost reduction, right? Or if you throne Carnivalle, the second one can gain itself. Personally, I'd say "All cards other than Carnivalle cost $1 less this turn". Unless you actively want to make Carnivalle more expansive if you fail to play any Carnivalles.

[spineflu]

Carnavale • $3* • Action - Level
Cards cost $1 less this turn, per level.

Gain a card costing up to $2 (after the price change).
-
On your turns, this costs $1 more per level.

potential super-inventor that can't gain itself (without some other source of price reduction.)
An assumption I made here is the "level" talked about is always the player in question's level with that specific card, rather than anyone's/any card's level - I think this is a mechanic-wide assumption, and should probably be revised with a different keyword that better denotes ownership, but for playtesting + the sake of the contest, i'm just using "level".

You know that "Carnivalle" itself can be an other source of cost reduction, right? Or if you throne Carnivalle, the second one can gain itself. Personally, I'd say "All cards other than Carnivalle cost $1 less this turn". Unless you actively want to make Carnivalle more expansive if you fail to play any Carnivalles.

yeah i know. thats fine. inventors can just gain eachother like they're going to an inventor's conference. this, less so.

[mxdata]

Warlord
Action - Level - Attack
$2
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each other player discards cards until the number of cards in their hand is one per token less than five, then draws to three cards.
-
When you gain this during your buy phase, +1D per level.

A cantrip attack whose severity depends on the number of level tokens you have. With no levels, it's nothing more than a simple cantrip most of the time. With one level, it's like Urchin, without the possibility of gaining a Mercenary. With two levels, it's a Militia attack. At three levels, it becomes like Legionary when you reveal a gold - discard to 2 then draw to three. At four levels, it's incredibly harsh - discard down to one card then draw to three. And at five or more levels (I can't think of any reason you'd put more than five), you're forced to discard your entire hand then draw three, like an even meaner Minion

Note that the "draw to three" is separate from the discarding, so that if another player already had fewer than three cards, such as from repeated Torturer attacks, then they'd get to draw to three

Level cards are really difficult to establish a cost for, because once you've invested in leveling it up, the cost to gain another copy is the same, no matter how many levels there are, and I'm really not sure if this cost is fair. As it is, you have to spend a total of $6 and 3 buys to gain your first Militia-strength version, for example, and a total of $12 and 6 buys to gain a copy at maximum strength, so that's a pretty significant investment. However, once you do, each additional card only costs $2. However, if I bumped it up to $3, then the first Militia-strength card would cost effectively $9 and 3 buys and the first maximum strength would amount to $18 and 6 buys. This also means that the value is dependent on how much +buy is available. If there's no +buy, then you have to sacrifice actually gaining a card to level it up, but if there's lots of +buy, then it becomes really easy to use an extra buy to level the card up. It might make sense in some cases to have a below-the-line clause such as "when you add a level, +1 Buy", but I think on an attack like this, it's better not to have such a clause

EDIT: Added a debt clause to make higher-level copies more expensive. It still costs $2 to level it up, no matter how many levels, but at maximum strength, an additional copy costs $2+5D. "During your buy phase" added to avoid shenanigans with Swindler and the like. I had to phrase it as "when you gain this" instead of "buy" because "buy" would make it apply to adding a level token as well. This clause wouldn't work too well with Possession - since the person gaining the card is not the person whose buy phase it is, no one gains any debt, but that's the only card I can think of where that would be a problem

[emtzalex]

48 Hour Warning!!!

There are about 48 hours left (as of a few minutes ago).

[fika monster]

A lab variant. Powers up the more you buy it, but you have to keep fueling it.
 added the +1 Buy treatment to it. Now either you could pile this on a turn, but have a load of junk in your deck, or you could spent a lot of excess money on powering it up.



Edited it per peoples suggestions.
For some reason Card image generator isnt working for me right now, so just imagine this

VOLATILE LABORATORY
2 Debt Action - Level
+1 Action
++1 Card per level you have. Reduce your level by one.
-
When you buy this, +1 Buy

[grrgrrgrr]

A lab variant. Powers up the more you buy it, but you have to keep fueling it.
 added the +1 Buy treatment to it. Now either you could pile this on a turn, but have a load of junk in your deck, or you could spent a lot of excess money on powering it up.

Adding this +1 buy-on-purchase effect to a card that only costs $2 is always sketchy, as a Ferry or singular Quarry can reduce this card's cost to $0. This interaction is downright broken in this case, because it enables to power up Volatile Laboratory infinitely and then snatch all VLs away entirely for free.

It's otherwise a cool idea, but you gotta do something about that (just removing and making the card your typical it-needs-+Buy-to-be-truely-amazing card is probably just fine. Alternatively, you could add an overpay effect).

[spineflu]

A lab variant. Powers up the more you buy it, but you have to keep fueling it.
 added the +1 Buy treatment to it. Now either you could pile this on a turn, but have a load of junk in your deck, or you could spent a lot of excess money on powering it up.

Adding this +1 buy-on-purchase effect to a card that only costs $2 is always sketchy, as a Ferry or singular Quarry can reduce this card's cost to $0. This interaction is downright broken in this case, because it enables to power up Volatile Laboratory infinitely and then snatch all VLs away entirely for free.

It's otherwise a cool idea, but you gotta do something about that (just removing and making the card your typical it-needs-+Buy-to-be-truely-amazing card is probably just fine. Alternatively, you could add an overpay effect).

could also just make it cost 2 debt so it dodges cost reduction but in practise (ignoring gainers) still costs $2.

[naitchman]

Here's my submission (there are 20 cards in this pile):

Kind of like an experiment but it can get better (costs more though). I think this is a good use of levels bc it's not overpowered if you level up too much (drawing your deck isn't really that crazy).

[emtzalex]

20 Hour Warning!!!
(I'm a few minutes late again. The deadline for submissions is still 23:59 UTC / 7:59 p.m. Eastern (Forum) time on Sunday, July 18, 2021.)


Here are the submissions so far:

spineflu's Carnavale
Aquila's Aristocrat
mxdata's Warlord
fika monster's Volatile Laboratory
naitchman's Breeder

[Gubump]

20 Hour Warning!!!
(I'm a few minutes late again. The deadline for submissions is still 23:59 UTC / 7:59 p.m. Eastern (Forum) time on Sunday, July 18, 2021.)


Here are the submissions so far:

spineflu's Carnavale
mxdata's Warlord
fika monster's Volatile Laboratory
naitchman's Breeder

You're missing Aquila's Aristocrat.