Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?  (Read 5459 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

nyxfulloftricks

  • Alchemist
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 35
  • Respect: +43
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #25 on: February 18, 2022, 01:13:31 pm »
0


Quote

Apprenticeship
Treasure
@4
When you play this, gain a Spoils and cards cost $1 less.
Quote
Master Tradesman
+1 Buy
This turn, whenever you play a treasure from your hand, if no other treasure cards in play share a name with it, play it again afterwards.
-
You can't buy this unless you have an apprentice in play.
Quote

Night School
@2
For each card you've gained this turn, take @1. For each @ you have, gain a Spoils setting it aside (under this). While any remain, at the start of each of your turns, put one of them into your hand.
-
This is gained to your hand (instead of your discard pile).

My entry this week is an even 5/5 split pile of Apprenticeship on top and Master Tradesman on bottom. I thought flavorfully going into debt for school and then making bank once you have a job (which you cannot acquire without doing the work from school) was great for this contest. I have also posted my other iteration of Apprenticeship (Night School) as an interesting way for gaining spoils to get some feedback on as well. The reasoning for both of my top card options dealing with spoils is that school sets you up for the future and can minorly help (bridge effect on Apprenticeship) or hurt (gaining debt on Night School).
Logged

UltimateGeek

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 30
  • Respect: +44
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #26 on: February 19, 2022, 07:22:53 pm »
+1

Project: Magna Carta
Cost: $7
Text:
When another player plays an attack card, it does not affect you.
-
You must have at least 5 differently named cards in play to buy this.



(Revised - new v1.4)
« Last Edit: February 21, 2022, 10:17:34 am by UltimateGeek »
Logged

pubby

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 548
  • Respect: +1046
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #27 on: February 20, 2022, 02:22:03 am »
+13

Logged

Xen3k

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 413
  • Respect: +580
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #28 on: February 20, 2022, 05:15:13 pm »
+2



Quote
Late Witch - $4
Action - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action
Exile an Estate from the Supply.
Each other player gains a Curse.
----
When you would play, gain, trash, or Exile this from the Supply, if there is no empty Supply pile, gain a Silver instead.

A late game attack card that will accelerate a 3 pile ending. I know the replacement wording of "would/instead" was changed on at least one card that used to use it, but for the card to function as desired it was needed. Not sure how centralizing and game warping this being in the Kingdom will be, but I wanted to try and make something functional that could not be obtained until a Supply pile was empty. Feedback is appreciated.
Logged

Holger

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 724
  • Respect: +431
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #29 on: February 20, 2022, 06:31:40 pm »
+1



Quote
Late Witch - $4
Action - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action
Exile an Estate from the Supply.
Each other player gains a Curse.
----
When you would play, gain, trash, or Exile this from the Supply, if there is no empty Supply pile, gain a Silver instead.

A late game attack card that will accelerate a 3 pile ending. I know the replacement wording of "would/instead" was changed on at least one card that used to use it, but for the card to function as desired it was needed. Not sure how centralizing and game warping this being in the Kingdom will be, but I wanted to try and make something functional that could not be obtained until a Supply pile was empty. Feedback is appreciated.

That's an interesting concept. But I'd suggest to remove "trash, or Exile" from the below-the-line wording - it's enough to disallow gaining and playing Late Witch:
Most kingdoms wouldn't allow you to exile or trash it from the supply anyway, and those that do still can't get it into your deck afterwards as long as no pile is empty, let alone play it.

Maybe you could even get away with not disallowing playing it either, though it would make an occasional combo like Band of Misfits +Late Witch very strong...
Logged

Xen3k

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 413
  • Respect: +580
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #30 on: February 20, 2022, 09:53:33 pm »
+1



Quote
Late Witch - $4
Action - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action
Exile an Estate from the Supply.
Each other player gains a Curse.
----
When you would play, gain, trash, or Exile this from the Supply, if there is no empty Supply pile, gain a Silver instead.

A late game attack card that will accelerate a 3 pile ending. I know the replacement wording of "would/instead" was changed on at least one card that used to use it, but for the card to function as desired it was needed. Not sure how centralizing and game warping this being in the Kingdom will be, but I wanted to try and make something functional that could not be obtained until a Supply pile was empty. Feedback is appreciated.

That's an interesting concept. But I'd suggest to remove "trash, or Exile" from the below-the-line wording - it's enough to disallow gaining and playing Late Witch:
Most kingdoms wouldn't allow you to exile or trash it from the supply anyway, and those that do still can't get it into your deck afterwards as long as no pile is empty, let alone play it.

Maybe you could even get away with not disallowing playing it either, though it would make an occasional combo like Band of Misfits +Late Witch very strong...

Thanks for the feedback! I agree including "trash" and "Exile" may be excessive, but I wanted to ensure the core concept of a card not being part of the Kingdom until late game came through. There are very few cards that can exploit the card through trashing or Exiling, and those that could can also exploit an arguably more powerful Action card like Goons. Still, I will take the suggestion into account and will update my entry after thinking about it. Thanks!
Logged

mathdude

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 216
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #31 on: February 20, 2022, 10:33:19 pm »
+1

Project: Magna Carta
Cost: $8
Text:
When another player plays an attack card, it does not affect you.
-
You must have at least 5 differently named Action cards in play to buy this.



I know some people (especially those I play with!) often want more ways to "defend" against attacks.  Moat, Champion, Lighthouse... are there other "full" protections?  A project may be a good place for such a design.  But it's not an easy thing to design.

As it currently stands, there are *so* many barriers here.  Some kingdoms don't have any villages, and then you'd need at least 4 different cantrips, which is rare too.  On top of that, you have to land such a hand with 5+ unique action cards played with at least $8 coins, likely before greening starts for it to be worthwhile (though not necessarily before).  And, even if you land all that, this project can end up in kingdoms with no attacks!

Does it need something else added instead of just moat-effect?  Does it need a lower barrier (not 5+ unique actions in play)?  Does it need a lower cost?  I don't know.  But it feels to unreachable for this first version.
Logged
he/him

arowdok

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 87
  • Respect: +129
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #32 on: February 21, 2022, 12:10:40 am »
+3

Project: Magna Carta
Cost: $8
Text:
When another player plays an attack card, it does not affect you.
-
You must have at least 5 differently named Action cards in play to buy this.



I know some people (especially those I play with!) often want more ways to "defend" against attacks.  Moat, Champion, Lighthouse... are there other "full" protections?  A project may be a good place for such a design.  But it's not an easy thing to design.

As it currently stands, there are *so* many barriers here.  Some kingdoms don't have any villages, and then you'd need at least 4 different cantrips, which is rare too.  On top of that, you have to land such a hand with 5+ unique action cards played with at least $8 coins, likely before greening starts for it to be worthwhile (though not necessarily before).  And, even if you land all that, this project can end up in kingdoms with no attacks!

Does it need something else added instead of just moat-effect?  Does it need a lower barrier (not 5+ unique actions in play)?  Does it need a lower cost?  I don't know.  But it feels to unreachable for this first version.
I agree this project feels way off as it is hard to hit $8 if a strong attack card are on board which completely defeats the purpose of such a project, notice most moats cost $2 or $3, that is to help players gain them even through heavy attacks. Also the odds you get a mega action hand of 5 card is doubly hard when you are forced to discard down to 3 cards or have a lot of junk cards in your deck.
Logged

UltimateGeek

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 30
  • Respect: +44
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #33 on: February 21, 2022, 10:23:09 am »
0

Project: Magna Carta
Cost: $8
Text:
When another player plays an attack card, it does not affect you.
-
You must have at least 5 differently named Action cards in play to buy this.



I know some people (especially those I play with!) often want more ways to "defend" against attacks.  Moat, Champion, Lighthouse... are there other "full" protections?  A project may be a good place for such a design.  But it's not an easy thing to design.

As it currently stands, there are *so* many barriers here.  Some kingdoms don't have any villages, and then you'd need at least 4 different cantrips, which is rare too.  On top of that, you have to land such a hand with 5+ unique action cards played with at least $8 coins, likely before greening starts for it to be worthwhile (though not necessarily before).  And, even if you land all that, this project can end up in kingdoms with no attacks!

Does it need something else added instead of just moat-effect?  Does it need a lower barrier (not 5+ unique actions in play)?  Does it need a lower cost?  I don't know.  But it feels to unreachable for this first version.
I agree this project feels way off as it is hard to hit $8 if a strong attack card are on board which completely defeats the purpose of such a project, notice most moats cost $2 or $3, that is to help players gain them even through heavy attacks. Also the odds you get a mega action hand of 5 card is doubly hard when you are forced to discard down to 3 cards or have a lot of junk cards in your deck.

Thank you for the feedback mathdude & arowdok. I wanted the cost to be similar to Moat or Lighthouse @ $2 x 4 to reflect that it lasts throughout the rest of the game, and for it to be similar to a cost of a Province: when making it to $8 for the first time, would you decide to buy this vs by a Province? But I get the point about the barrier when there is attacks going on, so I've reduced it to $7 and changed the on-buy restriction to be just 5 differently named cards which seems much more plausible: 2 actions + 3 treasures.
Logged

spineflu

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1365
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • Head Empty, Heart Worms, Can't Lose
  • Respect: +1342
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #34 on: February 22, 2022, 02:23:22 am »
0

Project: Magna Carta
Cost: $8
Text:
When another player plays an attack card, it does not affect you.
-
You must have at least 5 differently named Action cards in play to buy this.



I know some people (especially those I play with!) often want more ways to "defend" against attacks.  Moat, Champion, Lighthouse... are there other "full" protections?  A project may be a good place for such a design.  But it's not an easy thing to design.

As it currently stands, there are *so* many barriers here.  Some kingdoms don't have any villages, and then you'd need at least 4 different cantrips, which is rare too.  On top of that, you have to land such a hand with 5+ unique action cards played with at least $8 coins, likely before greening starts for it to be worthwhile (though not necessarily before).  And, even if you land all that, this project can end up in kingdoms with no attacks!

Does it need something else added instead of just moat-effect?  Does it need a lower barrier (not 5+ unique actions in play)?  Does it need a lower cost?  I don't know.  But it feels to unreachable for this first version.
I agree this project feels way off as it is hard to hit $8 if a strong attack card are on board which completely defeats the purpose of such a project, notice most moats cost $2 or $3, that is to help players gain them even through heavy attacks. Also the odds you get a mega action hand of 5 card is doubly hard when you are forced to discard down to 3 cards or have a lot of junk cards in your deck.

Thank you for the feedback mathdude & arowdok. I wanted the cost to be similar to Moat or Lighthouse @ $2 x 4 to reflect that it lasts throughout the rest of the game, and for it to be similar to a cost of a Province: when making it to $8 for the first time, would you decide to buy this vs by a Province? But I get the point about the barrier when there is attacks going on, so I've reduced it to $7 and changed the on-buy restriction to be just 5 differently named cards which seems much more plausible: 2 actions + 3 treasures.
$7 isn't much cheaper than $8; add on the in-play restriction and i think the only time i'd ever buy this is if i was able to get there first in a mountebank game.

$4 with the restriction is the upper limit of what i'd ever pay - no attack hurts enough that it's worth doing this, not instead of a province
« Last Edit: February 22, 2022, 09:32:22 am by spineflu »
Logged

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3351
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +5065
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #35 on: February 22, 2022, 04:11:32 am »
+1

This is your

24 hour warning!
Logged
You say the ocean's rising, like I give a shit
You say the whole world's ending, honey it already did

Holger

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 724
  • Respect: +431
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #37 on: February 22, 2022, 04:56:11 am »
0

Project: Magna Carta
Cost: $8
Text:
When another player plays an attack card, it does not affect you.
-
You must have at least 5 differently named Action cards in play to buy this.



I know some people (especially those I play with!) often want more ways to "defend" against attacks.  Moat, Champion, Lighthouse... are there other "full" protections?  A project may be a good place for such a design.  But it's not an easy thing to design.

As it currently stands, there are *so* many barriers here.  Some kingdoms don't have any villages, and then you'd need at least 4 different cantrips, which is rare too.  On top of that, you have to land such a hand with 5+ unique action cards played with at least $8 coins, likely before greening starts for it to be worthwhile (though not necessarily before).  And, even if you land all that, this project can end up in kingdoms with no attacks!

Does it need something else added instead of just moat-effect?  Does it need a lower barrier (not 5+ unique actions in play)?  Does it need a lower cost?  I don't know.  But it feels to unreachable for this first version.
I agree this project feels way off as it is hard to hit $8 if a strong attack card are on board which completely defeats the purpose of such a project, notice most moats cost $2 or $3, that is to help players gain them even through heavy attacks. Also the odds you get a mega action hand of 5 card is doubly hard when you are forced to discard down to 3 cards or have a lot of junk cards in your deck.

Thank you for the feedback mathdude & arowdok. I wanted the cost to be similar to Moat or Lighthouse @ $2 x 4 to reflect that it lasts throughout the rest of the game, and for it to be similar to a cost of a Province: when making it to $8 for the first time, would you decide to buy this vs by a Province? But I get the point about the barrier when there is attacks going on, so I've reduced it to $7 and changed the on-buy restriction to be just 5 differently named cards which seems much more plausible: 2 actions + 3 treasures.
$7 isn't much cheaper than $8; add on the in-play restriction and i think the only time i'd ever buy this is if i was able to get there first in a mountebank game.

$4 with the restriction is the upper limit of what i'd ever pay - no attack hurts enough that it's worth doing this, not a province

Many attacks are weak enough to not warrant  a $7 cost, but I would gladly pay $7 e.g. to prevent 5-10 curses/ruins entering my deck in a curser/looter game without good trashing. The problem is getting to fulfill the condition and reaching the price tag before being flooded by curses/ruins. Heirlooms and Shelters would help...
Maybe changing the cost to debt or reducing it to $5 would help to make this more accessible without killing all Attack cards in the kingdom from the start.
Logged

arowdok

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 87
  • Respect: +129
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #38 on: February 22, 2022, 05:06:45 pm »
0

My Current entry
A hard to get gainer that seems fun to try out. It puts cool treasures into play during the action phase so that should be cool for player to mess around with. The card has a lot of costs, basically $5 money($4+Treasure), you need to keep a Green in your deck, and still save an action like The heirloom ghost requires. Hopefully this mega gainer is a quest worth it, player messing around with.

Quote
Beckoner
$5
Night - Duration
Gain an Action or Treasure card costing up to $5. Set it aside. If you did, then at the start of your next turn, play it.
-
When you gain this, return it to the supply unless you discard an Action, a Treasure, and a Victory card, revealed.

Quote
This is no longer my entry as emtzalex pointed out a huge flaw with the combo it creates.
I wanted a nice strong Project that feels worth going for. The limit of not using Copper adds a nice angle as players need to find way to fund this Project without removing all the Coppers, or at least find a way to get them back via +Buys or Return from Exile as treasures that produce $3 are as good as Gold, at least that what I have been told. Is is a bit funny as the OP's original refenced card, Grand Market, used the exact same limit, but this card leads players down a odd path of wanting to keep Coppers for later use vs most decks (especially Grand Market decks) just want all of the Copper trashed.


Quote
Bronze
$4
Project
Copper produces an extra $2 on your turns.
-
You canít buy this if you have any Coppers in play.

Quote
After making quite a few of cards for the contest this week and reading through other entries I am just going to muse on the design space for a minute.
These "cannot be bought unless X." cards and really any synergy focused card seem to fall into 2 Camps.
Either the card can be bought by doing something that can happen every game even if it is not often to happen alot/easily. This includes having something or having the lack of something. Examples: Grand Market, Fisherman, , have no discard pile, discard a card from your hand when purchasing.
The other major division is the cards with limits that are board dependent, even if the missing thing is a common effect, the Landmark Tomb with no Trash effects or the Landmark Labyrinth with no gainers or +buys and Tomb with no Trash effects. Also to a lesser extent bonus effects from card like Leprechaun's extra trigger for wishes needs some number of +Action cards to gain the Wish or Priest's bonus $2 for extra trashed card later in the turn can only happen with +Actions or trash effect that trigger via treasures and Night cards. (Not that having money in the Night phase does much)
This can be circumvented by the Split piles, Travelers or most commonly Heirloom mechanic. Each granting additional effects beyond the default supply piles grant (the Copper, Estate, Curse and such) to assist players in doing the objective the pile sets up. Example Magic Lamp needing some number a common effects like +Cards, a Duration, or something else to allow for having enough cards in play to meet the have 6 or the Necromancer has its default Zombies to help set up a useful trash pile.

Now this all pretty surface level stuff to see and talk about, what get interesting is how each individual card gets implement such as the Event Quest. Technically this Event is NOT board dependent since a player can spend multiple buys on Curse cards (blehhh), also if the board has a common terminal +2 cards effect it can turn a heavy green hand into a Gold. Though the Event's main focus to counter Attack strategies which give you Curses, or turn your own attack effects into personal value, or after getting a junked up hand of 6 cards into an okay turn. But that does demonstrate that even if the effect is technically NOT board dependent it really is, just more subtly requires either +cards to get to 6 or attack effects to be on board. This also can translate to the Split piles. The Parasitic design behind them is a delicate balance for a linked supply piles (Split piles, Travelers or Heirloom) one side is if they have nothing to do with each other like Fool/Lucky Coin there is almost no reason these effect are attached. Or a more odd case of Catapult/Rocks, as the self synergy is clear fling some Rocks for value but who ever buy more then 1(maybe 2) Catapults. So in a 2 player experience good luck getting to Rocks and unlocking that value. The other side of this Balance is maybe a greater danger too much self synergy. Examples are Encampment/Plunder and Sauna/Avanto. Both use mostly themselves to make a strong decks with a splash of the default supply of Gold/Silver to accomplish what there game plan is. These are not the strongest Dominion deck but they have issue similar to the all Minion decks which just want more Minions, (maybe backed up by some Peddlers). Or an early Rebuild which just avoids Dominion's main systems of gained VP all together and has few interesting way for other supply pile to spice up its play.
Now for a new player, these are not the greatest issues as the repeated play patterns from some Singular supply piles will not be a huge turn off for the 1st few times, unless they have limited access to the expansion content. I might suppose, they might more easily see the repeated play patterns appear and be turned off by them, though the common complaints of this comes from a lose synergy from 2 cards (Witch+Village) more so then coming from 1 pile. But for the enfranchised player these patterns of a two card combo less of a problem given with access to more card official expansions or fan made cards spices up repetition. Like which Witch they are being Cursed by or what flavor of village is supporting it. But with Singular linked piles this will not be the case, so a great danger comes from a strong monolithic Pile. Example if a Supply requires a card being trashed during the same turn as this card can be purchased and the card comes with an Heirloom to unlock that trash trigger, if that Heirloom was as strong as Goat or greater you might see this Linked pile almost never caring what else is in the kingdom and only focusing on it own self synergy. Now if the  same supposed Pile required trashing and the Heirloom was a much weaker at Trashing then players might used another kingdom card over the heirloom to unlock this Supply pile. Lastly if the card Supply is not worth the effort it is unlikely to completely ruin a game, since if players ignore 1 or 2 kingdom piles they can still find interesting game player in the other 8 card interacting with each other.
I do get quite annoyed though when comment mention that a card is unplayable on some boards due to "needing" a +1 buy or something else.

Now it is nice when Designers can seamlessly create interesting self synergies but maybe it is better to have cards that can only work when the board has the explicate requisite effect and be dead otherwise instead of the guarantee the card will always be able to function at full strength no matter the surrounding board which lends itself to mandatory to purchase for all players.

Quote
These are not my entries. I thought others might enjoy tinkering with these ideas down the line and since it is late in the contest I am hopefully not limiting other entries by making this extended post. Feedback and discussion is still welcome for those who have the time and motivation.


This one is my take on limited by lots of card in play and end up as a strange Alt strategy to reward a mega turn guided by the dark flavor of 3 different Sixes to make a 666 refence and 13 for an overall Evil theme.
Quote
Dark Pact
@5
Event
+6%
Gain a card onto your deck costing up to $6.
-
You can only buy this if you have exactly 13 cards in play.


This one is my take on limited be requiring a Gold to buy this, I went with Treasure to limit its brokenness with Workshops and I got cute with it being a "National Treasure" flavor of a mega bridge. A few design notes: the Debt cost was added to make it feel different from Gold and limit it from assisting in gain future copies, also it is a nice limiting factor how future plays of Golden Gate Bridge does not help pay off the Debt taken to acquire them.
Quote
Golden Gate Bridge
@7
Treasure
This turn, cards (everywhere) cost $3 less.
-
You canít buy this if you have no Gold in play.


This one is my take on requiring a Horse being used that turn. Which in my opinion is not to hard to track. Got to say I am not super happy with this design overall, the Heirloom seems fun, the event just is too close to Experiment and I tried to add a diversity quest to guide players but feels kind of flat. Would love to see somebody else take this design up a notch.
Quote
Pony Up
$3
Event
+2 Buys
Once per turn: Gain a Horse per differently named card you have in play.
-
You canít buy this unless you played a Horse this turn.
Heirloom: Saddlebags
Quote
Saddlebags
$0
Treasure - Heirloom
$1
When you play this, gain a Horse.


This one is my take on requiring another to be gained in the same turn. I felt it needed to give the Heirloom so all boards can use it. Started by making a few cute Heirlooms to try out then just figured the Official Heirloom Lucky Coin might just be a good fit. So then I went down a few Strange gainer rabbit holes and thought a Junker would be cool since this trigger doesn't care who gained a card this turn, which opened up more way for this to be unlocked and easier to gain the 1st copy on more boards. As for the Action itself I copied Familiar (which gets under played due to Potions) but it needed to be different enough so I went with delayed action(Villager) and delayed +1 Card (Horse) and it still gives out Curses like normal. This odd take on (+1Card&+1Action) feels worth exploring later and I might try this out elsewhere but on this card feels just bad fit for the contest.
Quote
Palmist
$5
Action
+1 Villager
Gain a Horse. Each other player gains a Curse.
-
You can only buy this if any player (including you) has gained another card this turn.
Heirloom: Lucky Coin


This one is my take on requiring a gained province. The main focus was what would get player to want to spike to a province and still be useful late game but not be direct VP, Megabridge seemed like an okay fit but would encourage other to find a better one. I also felt it needed to give the heirloom so all boards can use that to get the Province then this card, I could shift it to a $10@2 cost and add "When you buy this, gain a Province." but then would not have worked for the this contest. To help differentiate this from that other design I went with a megabridge so that both the province and this card will be cost reduced for even bigger future turns. I felt $2($10=$8+$2) was too cheap but $3($11=$8+$3) was too difficult an ask so I added the Debt. As a side bonus the Debt cost helps to prevent free piling this, also prevents the using remodel to cheese this early, lastly add more layers of complexity to the situation for when a player has $10 not the full $12, is it worth the debt hurting next turn?
Quote
Thoroughfare
$2@2
Action
+2 Buys
This turn, cards (everywhere) cost $2 less.
-
You canít buy this if you haven't gained a Province this turn.
Heirloom: Pouch


This one is my take on needing to keep Estates in your deck and super rewarding player for it. Mega Baron, not exactly a can't buy this effect but pretty close and probably should qualify for this contest. The flavor could use a tune up, also at $7 might be to close too Inheritance in same vein caring about Estates but also I am scared of most strong +VP token cards so probably best to test this on the weaker side vs letting it dominate a game.
Quote
Matchmaker
$7
Action
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
You may discard an Estate for +2%. If you don't, gain an Estate.
--
When you gain this, discard an Estate from your hand. If you don't trash this.



This one is very different but has the spirit of this contest so here. The idea of personal kingdom piles feels like cool place for custom card to play in, I have seen a few other deckbuilder try this idea out to some success. This idea is a Tug-of-War for the exclusive right use of the set aside pile. At least though if you can pay the price the +2 buys get you in and grab few card before anyone else can take this from you. I went with just random piles of normal cards similar to black market, and players can decide if they want to spent time on acquiring them. I started with only 1 pile set aside but went to 3 just to up the odds one of the pile is worth getting. Also the Potion cost is to limit players access tell after the 1st shuffle and prevent a with tons of money just jumping in and buy this late with little effort. But some people hate Potion so I added the $3 option too. Also with potion it limit how often this trades hands so even if you cant buy things right away then at least you opened the door for next turn and if other haven't purchased Potion they cant shut that door from you. Lastly Potion cost make this feel a bit more different from Travelling Fair. A path some future designer might explore is making a full set of custom Forbidden piles, like Necromance/Zombies or a Knight like pile. Also one might just add the 3 normal piles like I did but buff them with cost reduction or other token like effects.
Quote
Plaudits
$^ or $3
Event
Once per turn: +2 Buys. Take the Approval.
-
Setup: Add three extra Kingdom card piles. Cards from those piles are Forbidden cards and are not part of the supply.
Quote
Approval
Artifact
During your turns, Forbidden cards are in the supply.


This card was me trying to reward gathering a Copper, a Silver, and a Gold on one turn. I have go back a forth on the cost with being $0 or ($1+$2+$3=$6). Given without a +Buy it makes not Difference (I guess Debt too) win not test the overpowered and $0 and scale back after seeing it do some stuff as skip out on a $6 right away feels like a hard sell on top of the mini quest. The project's top half is patterned after Mint, you can gain a big treasure with no downside or choose to have a Action card not get played that turn in exchange for another copy, similar to a better Way of the Rat. Overall, I love the gain limit but just not happy with the Top part matching together.
Quote
Plaudits
$0
Project
At the start of your Buy phase, you may reveal a non-Victory card from your hand. Gain a copy of it.
-
You can only buy this if you have a Copper, a Silver, and a Gold in play.


This card was me trying to find a reward for a player who grab a Duchy early. And again not happy with the top half maybe somebody else can figure this out. Tried a few supply piles the needed the Duchy to discarded to bought but still no Homeruns.
Quote
Horticulture
$4
Project
During your turns, Victory cards are also Actions with "+1 Coffers and +1%".
-
You can only buy this if you discard a Duchy from your hand.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2022, 01:33:09 am by arowdok »
Logged

D782802859

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 285
  • Respect: +368
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #39 on: February 22, 2022, 06:01:54 pm »
+1


Quote
Weaver
$4
Action
+2 Cards
Gain a card costing up to $4.
-
You can only buy this card if you have at least three differently named cards in play.
Logged

emtzalex

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 796
  • Respect: +1397
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #40 on: February 22, 2022, 06:43:06 pm »
+1

I wanted a nice strong Project that feels worth going for. The limit of not using Copper adds a nice angle as players need to find way to fund this Project without removing all the Coppers, or at least find a way to get them back via +Buys or Return from Exile as treasures that produce $3 are as good as Gold, at least that what I have been told. Is is a bit funny as the OP's original refenced card, Grand Market, used the exact same limit, but this card leads players down a odd path of wanting to keep Coppers for later use vs most decks (especially Grand Market decks) just want all of the Copper trashed.


Quote
Bronze
$4
Project
Copper produces an extra $2 on your turns.
-
You canít buy this if you have any Coppers in play.

This would be very easy to buy with Storeroom / Vault (turning Coppers in your hand into $ without the need to put them into play), and there would be no need to trash Coppers to make either work.

Storeroom in particular is strong. If a player opens Storeroom/Silver, when the Storeroom comes up after the shuffle, they need just one of the eight cards they can look through to be the Silver. There's about a 60% chance of that happening on Turn 3 or 4 (I believe). Once it does, they can use the spare Buy to gain another Copper, and now have 8 Golds* and 1-2 Silvers on turn 3 or 4. This could end the game extremely quickly and make opening $2/$5 catastrophically bad. Alternatively, in a game with Vault opening $2/$5 becomes extremely beneficial.
Logged
he/him/his

Thanks to Shard of Honor for his Extended Version of the Dominion Card Image Generator, which I use to mock up my fan cards, and to Violet CLM, who made the original.

Commodore Chuckles

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1284
  • Shuffle iT Username: Commodore Chuckles
  • Respect: +1962
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #41 on: February 22, 2022, 07:43:16 pm »
+3

Capital City
Action - $7
You may play two Action cards from your hand twice.
-
You can't buy this if you have more than one card in play costing $5 or more.

A super Throne Room - Village, but you can only use it on cheap cards if you want to buy more.
Logged

jakav

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 50
  • Respect: +47
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #42 on: February 22, 2022, 10:11:10 pm »
0

Quote from: Field
Field
Type: Victory
Cost: 6
Worth 5VP
                 
You can't buy this if you have any coppers or silvers in play.

A simple victory card that has a buying restriction, it should have many uses in games.

Feedback is appreciated.
Logged
--Jakav--

(Why shouldn't signatures be like the above?)

arowdok

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 87
  • Respect: +129
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #43 on: February 23, 2022, 01:20:43 am »
0

I wanted a nice strong Project that feels worth going for. The limit of not using Copper adds a nice angle as players need to find way to fund this Project without removing all the Coppers, or at least find a way to get them back via +Buys or Return from Exile as treasures that produce $3 are as good as Gold, at least that what I have been told. Is is a bit funny as the OP's original refenced card, Grand Market, used the exact same limit, but this card leads players down a odd path of wanting to keep Coppers for later use vs most decks (especially Grand Market decks) just want all of the Copper trashed.


Quote
Bronze
$4
Project
Copper produces an extra $2 on your turns.
-
You canít buy this if you have any Coppers in play.

This would be very easy to buy with Storeroom / Vault (turning Coppers in your hand into $ without the need to put them into play), and there would be no need to trash Coppers to make either work.

Storeroom in particular is strong. If a player opens Storeroom/Silver, when the Storeroom comes up after the shuffle, they need just one of the eight cards they can look through to be the Silver. There's about a 60% chance of that happening on Turn 3 or 4 (I believe). Once it does, they can use the spare Buy to gain another Copper, and now have 8 Golds* and 1-2 Silvers on turn 3 or 4. This could end the game extremely quickly and make opening $2/$5 catastrophically bad. Alternatively, in a game with Vault opening $2/$5 becomes extremely beneficial.

Thank you for pointing that out to me. I did not see that interaction. So I am going submit something else as I can't see a clean way to fix this card given that combo.
Logged

Holger

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 724
  • Respect: +431
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #44 on: February 23, 2022, 04:09:52 am »
+1

I wanted a nice strong Project that feels worth going for. The limit of not using Copper adds a nice angle as players need to find way to fund this Project without removing all the Coppers, or at least find a way to get them back via +Buys or Return from Exile as treasures that produce $3 are as good as Gold, at least that what I have been told. Is is a bit funny as the OP's original refenced card, Grand Market, used the exact same limit, but this card leads players down a odd path of wanting to keep Coppers for later use vs most decks (especially Grand Market decks) just want all of the Copper trashed.


Quote
Bronze
$4
Project
Copper produces an extra $2 on your turns.
-
You canít buy this if you have any Coppers in play.

This would be very easy to buy with Storeroom / Vault (turning Coppers in your hand into $ without the need to put them into play), and there would be no need to trash Coppers to make either work.

Storeroom in particular is strong. If a player opens Storeroom/Silver, when the Storeroom comes up after the shuffle, they need just one of the eight cards they can look through to be the Silver. There's about a 60% chance of that happening on Turn 3 or 4 (I believe). Once it does, they can use the spare Buy to gain another Copper, and now have 8 Golds* and 1-2 Silvers on turn 3 or 4. This could end the game extremely quickly and make opening $2/$5 catastrophically bad. Alternatively, in a game with Vault opening $2/$5 becomes extremely beneficial.

Thank you for pointing that out to me. I did not see that interaction. So I am going submit something else as I can't see a clean way to fix this card given that combo.

What about turning coppers into silvers instead of golds? A princed Coppersmith still seems like a good investment at $5. This way, Storeroom, Vault and other cards that give you $5 without Coppers early (e.g. Death Cart, Capital, Cursed Gold) would make for a strong but not game-breaking combo. And in games without those, it will still often be worth it to go for the Project, especially when there's no good way to trash coppers.
Logged

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3351
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +5065
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #45 on: February 23, 2022, 06:25:26 am »
+5

Submissions closed!

I expect to be able to finish the judging some time tomorrow.
Logged
You say the ocean's rising, like I give a shit
You say the whole world's ending, honey it already did

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3351
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +5065
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #46 on: February 24, 2022, 06:27:36 am »
+9

Here come the results! Entries are sorted by creator name.

Realm by 4est
The closest existing analogue to "Province for $6" is Fairgrounds, I think. Realm is similar in that it rewards variety. Fairgrounds is fun! And this enables a few different techniques. I worry that the gaining restriction might make it a bit too niche for engines - it's not often that you can have an engine turn without having duplicates in play. And it's not really worth the effort since for an extra $2 you can just buy a Province. I think you should tinker with that to increase the viability, though I am unsure what the best way to go is - maybe more uniques than duplicates in play?
Also, since this has a gaining restriction, we need to address rules issues, and that doesn't really happen here. This particular design makes it so that oftentimes, you will be able to gain this on an opponent's turn, which prevents some issues; however you could still have Durations in play. I think a "soft" gaining restriction is a better way to go, like "when you gain this, unless X, return this to the supply", or "if you have any duplicates in play on your turn, this is not in the supply".

Consultant by AJL828
The concept here is quite simple, and that's not bad. I think that it can be quite luck-based whether you'll be able to buy this early on; just an Estate in your starting hand may block you. But that's all probably fine; it's not like Consultant is a super high-priority purchase, so you won't be too sad when you don't manage to buy this. It's a solid design.

Beckoner by arowdok
This is a super-Cobbler that requires a lot of setup. It seems quite cool, but it's hard to judge the power level. Since you need to put in some work to make this happen, you won't get it super early, but gainers are at their best early on. On the other hand, the effect might just be strong enough to still make this worthwhile. Probably requires some testing. There are some neat mindgames to be explored here when playing this + Swindler.
The text is a bit too long for my taste, I would cut the Treasure gaining option to get down to 7 lines of text, but that's not a major issue.

Machine/Broken Gear by Augie279
I like this design overall, and I like the idea of doing a bad Artifact. It does "you can't gain this" and thus provides some rules problems, and also it feels like you are double-punishing having a lot of Machines in play via the gaining restriction and the Artifact. And it's a bit too much text. I guess what I'm saying is that this design would be better without the gaining restriction, which is of course a bit of a problem for this contest.
Also here's a random rules question: When you play Machine with Broken Gear as Way of the Chameleon, do you draw a card or get a coin?

Capital City by Commodore Chuckles
From the text, it's unclear to me whether you need to have the two Actions you want to play in hand at the time you play Capital City or you can play one and then draw another and play that. Though since there is no accountability built in, I assume it's the latter. If so, I recommend: "Do this twice: You may play an Action card from you hand twice".
This likes cost reduction, is my immediate thought. I wonder whether this strictly needs to be more difficult to get than King's Court, but then King's Court is pretty good. I still think this could stand having its cost reduced to $6. Overall I like it, Throne Room variants are always good fun.

Weaver by D782802859
So here, once you buy the first one, you can circumvent the buying restriction and just get as many as you like. I feel like this could be a bit swingy if you start with Heirlooms/Shelters and one of you can get Weaver on T1/T2. On the other hand, this is a solid card, but it's not going to give a game-deciding advantage. So yeah, this feels quite decent.

Elitist Village by emtzalex
This feels quite restrictive. It has been pointed out that this is about the power level of Port, and I don't think it needs to be so expensive. Could easily cost $3 to make it just a bit more viable. Other than that, I have no complaints.

Financier by Firestix
This is just too weak. Hireling is already a kind of bad $6, and a card at the start of your turn is much better then a choice of $1 or +Buy. It would be a bit better if you were able to delay your decision until the start of your Buy phase, but not much. You might get one of these if you really need the extra Buy, but it feels quite expensive compared to Fair. And since you raraly want more than 1, the buying restriction doesn't do a whole lot.

Agent by infangthief
In a way, this is like the opposite Grand Market. With GM, once you have the first one it becomes easier to get the next ones, and here it's the other way around. Unfortunately I don't think there is much depth to this card; you just get it when you can. It's not really worth it to miss out on playing a Agent to get more Agents, but if you happen to not have any Agents in play, it's a great deal. So it ends up feeling kind of boring.

Field by jakav
Another Province alternative! I don't think this is strong enough to matter a lot, unfortunately. There are many engines where you don't want any Coppers or Silvers in your deck anyways, and there sure you'll get some Fields (though would you get 3 Fields instead of 2 Provinces? I am not convinced). But otherwise, this isn't good enough to justify sacrificing buying power: If you have a Silver in hand, then you could just play that and get a Province instead, which is also worth more.

Developing Village by JW
This is decent, if a bit vanilla. I'm not convinced that pileouts are as big a problem as you make them out to be; you don't want too many  of these. Of course it could be more of an issue for 3-piling, but I think that's also an interesting strategic option, so I would try to keep this. The main problem I see is stuff like Remake/Upgrade. These will definitely lead to pileouts and unlike with Poor House, most of the time you will be happy to trade a Copper for a Developing Village.

Deep Mines by mathdude
I kind of like this, but it falls into a similar trap as earlier entries: Is the buying restriction really necessary? Not being able to play Treasures is enough to discourage a Deep Mine opening, and sure, Deep Mines are awesome once you've trashed down but I think it's fine to let them be awesome... you want these in an engine and you still don't want too many of them because they are still stop cards.

Foundry by NoMoreFun
This is a new spin on "having one of these makes getting more hard". The effect is suitably good, it's simple and effective, the buying restriction is easy to follow. It's good. My only worry is that it might be a bit too overpowering if you have a way of gaining $5s.

Apprenticeship/Master Tradesman by nyxfulloftricks
So Apprenticeship feels kind of unfair from the get-go, since there are 5 and thus you won't split them evenly. When they're good, then then person winning the split probably has a very solid advantage, and that will happen early into the game. I like Master Tradesman, though I don't think it really needs to be packaged into a split pile and could just be a standalone card. And the buying restriction feels a bit redundant; if Master Tradesman is uncovered all the Apprenticeships are already out anyways, so likely you'll be able to get it without much of an issue.

Foreign Exchange by pubby
It has a simple appeal. Save $3 but you have to spend them before doing that again. I'm not surprised this got a bunch of upvotes. One critique that I have is the effect on openings. First of all, this makes is trivial to open with a $6 (unless you have a $5/$2), and $6s are often designed specifically so you cannot get them in the opening. Secondly, if there are any $7s, then you could open with them on a $3/$4 but not on a $4/$3, and that doesn't feel great for stuff like Inheritance or Forge.

Pyramid by silverspawn
It's not completely clear to me whether you could discard 8 Coppers multiple times at the start of a single Buy phase.
Other than that, there are some combos that make this very easy to get. Just think of Apothecary. Could could probably also make a Counting House thing work but that is fine by me, Counting House can use all the buffs it can get. My main problem however is that these running out does not end the game. So when this is viable, you'll go for Pyramids until the pile runs out and then you end up with a deck with 8 Coppers and 3-5 Pyramids and have to play on with all that junk until you somehow manage to end the game. That doesn't sound like a good time to me.

Abutment by spineflu
So this is like "extreme Bridge". You won't be able to open with it (and you probably don't want to either, considering that unlike Bridge, this doesn't act as a terminal Silver). However, once you get a good engine set up, these will provide excellent buying power. I'm not sure how much I like the ability to just trash the pile with 4 Abutments, that feels like a way to lock your opponents out of the game. I think I'd prefer a version where you need to return this to the supply.
It's also kind of mean with some interactions on another player's turn. Messenger + Abutment? Sure but not for you! Swindler hits Abutment? Sorry, I do not have a replacement for you today.

Huntsman by Timinou
Very straightforward. I think the restriction is not enough to make a $6 card for $5; with extra buys it's trivial to get around. And here we have another "you can't gain this" without rules clarification, which I explicitly stated you should consider.

Magna Carta by UltimateGeek
I agree with comments calling this too expansive; Attacks hit hardest in the early game and that's when you won't be able to get this. In order to satisfy the requirements you already need to be able to deal with any attacks, so at that point, what do you even need this for?
What's more I don't think straight up blocking attacks is a very interesting design space to begin with.

Late Witch by Xen3k
It's to have a Curser that only comes into play later on, though I feel like Coven already does a similar thing. I don't like the "when you would" wording, and especially not referring to niche cases like exiling/trashing from the supply, that just seems unnecessarily confusing. Another gripe I have is that this drives 2 Supply piles down, and can only be played if another one is already empty, so it will always lead to 3-pile endings. That doesn't seem particularly fun to me.

Charlatan/Bootleg by xyz123
I think a Silver+ is a bit much for an Heirloom. The Heirloom also tries to enable getting your first Charlatan, but I'm not sure it does so very successfully: early on Charlatan does not really provide much of a benefit, so at the time you trash Bootleg there is probably another card you'd rather gain, so you'll still end up with many games where this is just a dead pile.
I think this card is designed around the whole "you can't buy this" thing and tries hard to make that work -  I understand how that happens. But I'm not convinced that "you can't buy this" is actually interesting enough to justify all the effort.

Shortlist: Beckoner, Capital City, Weaver, Foundry, Foreign Exchange

Winner: Foundry by NoMoreFun
Logged
You say the ocean's rising, like I give a shit
You say the whole world's ending, honey it already did

NoMoreFun

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1983
  • Respect: +2065
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #143: Can I see your ID first?
« Reply #47 on: February 24, 2022, 07:23:41 pm »
+1

Thank you for judging. New contest will be up soon
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All
 

Page created in 0.075 seconds with 24 queries.