Print

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

[NoMoreFun]

For this contest, design a card with the Jewelry type (originally posted by Scolapasta in the Week 61 WDC)

My entry for this week is a new Treasure subtype: Jewelry:

Normally your buy phase consists of of two sub phases: First, play your treasure cards (spend coffer, pay off debt); second, buy card(s) (or event(s), or project(s))

Treasure-Jewelry cards are are cards you can play any time during your buy phase. Frequently, they will care about what or how many cards you have bought.

Examples:

In my view, "Jewelry" is the type that allows you to play things during your buy phase precisely after you've bought a card. So you could technically do a pure Jewelry (can't play until you've bought a card), or an Action-Jewelry. Of note is the phase is still called your Buy phase, even though there's two distinctive parts to it.

Scolapasta's examples were all Treasure-Jewelry and in my view those are the most interesting designs and are the least likely to avoid confusion. But I won't rule out other interesting designs. If the answer to "Could this have just been a Treasure" or "Could this have just been a night card" is yes, then it won't do too well in judging.

I have a template here

[LibraryAdventurer]

Charm Bracelet
$5 - Treasure - Jewelry
+1 Buy
Gain an Action or Treasure card costing less than the most expensive card you bought this turn and play it.

A Charm/Haggler variant.

[BryGuy]

Broach
$5 Treasure - Jewelry
$1
+1 Buy
Choose one: gain a card costing less than $4 and you may play it up to twice; or gain a Villager per Action card you have gained this turn.

[czzzz]

Not a Treasure. Makes off bought Silvers, or recoups from bought Golds. To ensure it can be useful in sets without +Buys, it has a discard-for-buy reaction.

Goes off the rails in sets with cost reduction...then again, so do many other cards. I would make it say "Worth half the cost of this card, rounded up, per Silver..." to adjust somewhat for cost reduction, but I'd hate for it to get wordier.
I'm open to feedback.

[emtzalex]

My Submission:

	Witchstone • Treasure - Jewelry - Attack • $5 $2 +1 Buy Discard a card. If you've gained a copy of it this turn, each other player gains a Curse.

My submission is Witchstone. It's an attacking Spices variant (which, as Jewelry, can be played late). The attack is fairly weak, as the player will have to forego playing a copy of the card they want to gain, or gain a dead card. While this is potentially stronger when you are greening, even if you want to discard a Province, you can't use the Witchstone's payload to buy the new copy of it. And, even if you don't want to use the Attack, the discard is still mandatory. While this will usually not be an issue, it can become one if you have more copies of Witchstone (beyond the first) than dead cards in your hand (or if you have Night cards or other Jewelry you want to play later).

[czzzz]

I guess Jewelry isn't getting a lot of love; not many submissions. I still think it's an interesting concept.  It really is sort of a different phase in between the Night phase and buying your first thing, since you can't play Treasures. I like that it uses that space.

[segura]

I guess Jewelry isn't getting a lot of love; not many submissions. I still think it's an interesting concept.  It really is sort of a different phase in between the Night phase and buying your first thing, since you can't play Treasures. I like that it uses that space.

I guess the problem is that it is pretty narrow design space. You need resources that you can still use in your Buy phase because otherwise you could implement it as Night, hence all Jewelry cards produce Coins and Buys. You also need to care about stuff that happened during the Buy phase, because otherwise you could implement it as normal Treasure.

[NoMoreFun]

I guess Jewelry isn't getting a lot of love; not many submissions. I still think it's an interesting concept.  It really is sort of a different phase in between the Night phase and buying your first thing, since you can't play Treasures. I like that it uses that space.

I guess the problem is that it is pretty narrow design space. You need resources that you can still use in your Buy phase because otherwise you could implement it as Night, hence all Jewelry cards produce Coins and Buys. You also need to care about stuff that happened during the Buy phase, because otherwise you could implement it as normal Treasure.

I chose this contest as I thought with all the card shaped things allowing you to play Actions in your "buy after treasures" phase that there'd be some design space for cards specifically designed to do that. Particularly frustrated by Sheepdog, Trail etc. worthlessly drawing cards in the buy phase. It's true that a lot of the designs that don't involve $ and buy would be fine as night cards, though I think anything involving playing a card after you buy it is better suited to Jewelry than Night Cards to make $ and buy worthwhile.

Anyway,

24 hour warning

[scolapasta]

First, let me say, thanks for picking a mechanic I designed for this contest.

I think there are some interesting designs in this thread, and also some good feedback on the overall concept.

In the original thread where I had posted this, I had added some of my own commentary at the time:

One challenge with the Jewelry mechanic (and any new mechanic, of course) is making sure that the same or similar effect can't be equally or more effectively achieved with existing mechanics.

A regular treasure with a "while this is in play, cards that share a type with cards you've bought this turn cost $1 less", while not the same, might be similar enough to what Bracelet is trying to do.
 
Hmm, now I'm wondering about the other cards:
Earrings compares to a regular treasure that said "When you play this, the next time you buy a card this turn, +$2 and gain a silver.", but that's different enough - you'd be able to spend the first $2 on the first buy and then get the $2 (and silver). Earrings on the other hand is one or the other - play it first for the $2 with no bonus, or buy something without it, then get all $4. So it feels like a good use of the mechanic, I think.

(though I might still remove the "then play any number of treasures" , just letting you play the silver. And have a new card with
+ Cards based on cards you've bought and then play any number of treasures...)

Ring (as a hybrid Treasure - Night type mechanic) and Necklace (limitation only if you play as a regular treasure) also show that there's some versatility for this mechanic.

So I agree that, one of the challenges of this mechanic is the design space - you need just the right mix for it to not just be a Treasure card or a Night card. Personally, I think Treasure-Jewelry makes the most sense, since part of what I think made these special is the tension between playing it at the start of your buy phase for the $ and having to wait until you've bought something first, reducing the amount you have for one big purchase.

The other thing I tried to do in order to make (some of) my designs be different from Night is to allow them to play Treasures that you gained (Earrings letting you play the Silver) or drew in your buy phase (Jewelry Box letting you play any Treasures from your hand).

One good thing that have changed since I originally posted these is that official Treasures no longer specify "when you play this" on Treasures, so that's a nice cleanup (as we can see with this week's entries).

[NoMoreFun]

Charm Bracelet: I like the premise and it's a good play on the mechanic - you're more likely to gain a stronger card after you buy, but it's less useful. Unfortunately with being able to play Treasures, this can pile itself out at any time. Would be better if it was just limited to Actions, or "gain a card costing less than the last card you gained".

Broach: I think it would be more interesting just with the villager effect. For the second choice something better would have been something relating to Villagers (e.g. you may pay Villagers for $1). As it stands, it can gain $5 cards (and a Silver), and possibly do more than that. Figurine is a $5 card just for +2 cards so even something like gaining a Moat (in your Buy phase) with this would be very powerful.

Circlet: With its reaction, it's not particularly hard to buy 2 silvers and then get a province. It is right to cost $7 but even then a bit too strong and not in an interesting way, I think there's the makings of an interesting concept here - +$X per Silver/Gold/Both you gained this turn is a good Jewelry mechanic. But not really suited to this power level.


Witchstone: This fits in very, very, nicely with all the midgame cursers that seem to be popping up in official sets a lot lately. The opportunity cost for cursing gets lower as the game goes on (buy your own junk -> forgo playing a decent card -> free cursing while you Green), just as the power of cursing goes down. Choosing this contest was worth it for this design. Gold star!


Winner: Witchstone
Runner Up: Circlet

[emtzalex]

Witchstone: This fits in very, very, nicely with all the midgame cursers that seem to be popping up in official sets a lot lately. The opportunity cost for cursing gets lower as the game goes on (buy your own junk -> forgo playing a decent card -> free cursing while you Green), just as the power of cursing goes down. Choosing this contest was worth it for this design. Gold star!


Winner: Witchstone

Thanks, NoMoreFun. I will post the next contest later today.

[czzzz]

Not arguing against the judging at all. I didn't feel totally satisfied with my submission. But I'll leave the thought process behind it here.

With its reaction, it's not particularly hard to buy 2 silvers and then get a province.

That is what Circlet wants you to do, true. But you have to already have and 2 Buys -- If you used the discard-for-buy reaction, that means your hand is at least 2 Golds or 3 Silvers in addition to the Circlet. For a net of only +.
And then you're adding 2 Silvers and a Province, so it gets harder to pull it off. Basically I think it's more narrow than it seems.

It is right to cost $7 but even then a bit too strong and not in an interesting way

In some sets, it could definitely be overpowered. I agree that it's not the most interesting/exciting card; that's what ultimately left me unhappy with it.

I think there's the makings of an interesting concept here - +$X per Silver/Gold/Both you gained this turn is a good Jewelry mechanic. But not really suited to this power level.

Yeah. The concept is best as Jewelry as opposed to plain Treasure or Night, which is a good thing... it's just not a great card.

My original Circlet concept was that it played a Treasure from your discard pile for every Silver you bought this turn. I probably should have just kept trying to balance that one, it would've been more fun