Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2] 3  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent  (Read 3792 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5319
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3224
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #25 on: May 17, 2023, 06:48:24 am »
0

Yeah, the problem is that attacks in dominion are often engine pieces with an attack tagged on, like Rabble

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1551
  • Respect: +1435
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #26 on: May 17, 2023, 12:25:21 pm »
0

While this is similar to Exiling Attacks, it is different enough to be novel and interesting. But it is also pretty centralizing (if you don’t contest the pile and the opponent play it consistently, 10 cards stay in nirvana) and as the vanilla net effects are those of Caravan, just more delayed, this has to be nerfed somehow.
I would make I terminal. As non-terminal, easy-gainable $3, you want the entire pile even if the attack did not exist.
I feel like it's not quite so strong. In the early game, the attack is actually a benefit more often than not (or doesn't do anything, if you aren't shuffling). If an opponent goes hard for these, that can be counteracted quite easily by getting more Coppers as fodder to remain in play. It forces you to adapt how you build your deck, but I don't think it's too centralizing.

If it were terminal, the vanilla effect would be weaker than Sleigh, and that's a $2 that has other stuff going on as well. The comparison to Caravan is interesting, and maybe I'll up the price to $4, though I think the Horse gaining is significantly weaker than start-of-turn draw.
Normally you buy an Attack card for the effect. Torturer is an exception, you want it for imps, and so are Smithy variants. But you don't want Mountebank due to it being a terminal Silver.

Your card on the other hand provides non-terminal draw. It is definitely the weakest unconditional Lab variant but for $3 that is a bargain and you might want the entire pile no matter what. Add an attack on that and it becomes highly dubious.

I also don't think that the attack is weak. Sure, if somebody piles it early, trashing becomes less relevant. But what if you already added a trasher and then somebody goes for your card? If the mere presence of a $3 makes everybody not trash, then there is something odd going on.
Logged

RovingBear

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 41
  • Respect: +64
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #27 on: May 17, 2023, 12:56:42 pm »
0

Logged

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1551
  • Respect: +1435
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #28 on: May 17, 2023, 01:48:40 pm »
+4

This is far too harsh and monolithic. Harsh as you force the opponents to play their terminal and thus shut down any engine play. Monolithic ss Marionette is a good defense against itself (if somebody fears the Attack and plays BM, it is after all a Lab).
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5319
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3224
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #29 on: May 17, 2023, 02:14:38 pm »
+2



I also had this idea, but unfortunately, this will lock out people on many boards. You just select a terminal, and their turn is dead.

PPE'd!

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1551
  • Respect: +1435
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #30 on: May 17, 2023, 02:20:40 pm »
+6



I first tried a terminal Action that gave you tokens for stuff you gained in both turns but that felt too good. Then I had an Iron version (Coffers for Treasure, Villager for Action, Horse for Victory) but that was too wordy for my taste. So here is the simpler version. It might be too boring with the vanilla compensating for the Attack (in 2P games).
Logged

RovingBear

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 41
  • Respect: +64
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #31 on: May 17, 2023, 02:24:12 pm »
0

This is far too harsh and monolithic. Harsh as you force the opponents to play their terminal and thus shut down any engine play. Monolithic ss Marionette is a good defense against itself (if somebody fears the Attack and plays BM, it is after all a Lab).
it can be harsh but also can be dud- youll have many time where you have 1 action in hand, or a few actions that arent terminal. And just to correct- not a lab but a village.
Logged

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1551
  • Respect: +1435
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #32 on: May 17, 2023, 02:29:22 pm »
+1

This is far too harsh and monolithic. Harsh as you force the opponents to play their terminal and thus shut down any engine play. Monolithic ss Marionette is a good defense against itself (if somebody fears the Attack and plays BM, it is after all a Lab).
it can be harsh but also can be dud- youll have many time where you have 1 action in hand, or a few actions that arent terminal. And just to correct- not a lab but a village.
You can have 4 non-terminals in hand, if you are forced to play that 1 Smithy they all become dead. That's not a dud turn but total engine shutdown.

Marionette never duds, at worst you get draw or you make a decision for them that does not hurt them.

I make a simple prediction: the dominant strategy in all Marionette Kingdoms will be money.
Logged

4est

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 374
  • Shuffle iT Username: 4est
  • Respect: +1455
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #33 on: May 17, 2023, 02:39:00 pm »
+2



Here's my updated submission (also updated in the OP). Same name and idea, but should be a bit more painful as an Attack since it targets Action cards and holds them hostage until the player gains a VP card. I have it gain Golds so players likely don't want a bunch of them, and it's not a Duration anymore since the set aside cards should provide enough tracking.
Logged

LTaco

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
  • Shuffle iT Username: LTaco
  • Respect: +127
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #34 on: May 17, 2023, 07:43:18 pm »
+9

Logged

BryGuy

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 307
  • Respect: +175
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #35 on: May 17, 2023, 08:57:19 pm »
0

Quote
Lieutenant • $4 • Action - Command - Attack
Each other player takes their deck's top card and sets it aside face-up. You may play one face-up set aside card, if it is an...: Action, once; or Treasure, twice. Each player discards one card set aside.
:) You can use a player's cards to take advantage of their improved deck and remove it from their use for one turn. 
« Last Edit: May 17, 2023, 08:58:21 pm by BryGuy »
Logged

majiponi

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 823
  • Respect: +734
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #36 on: May 18, 2023, 01:27:58 pm »
0



I also had this idea, but unfortunately, this will lock out people on many boards. You just select a terminal, and their turn is dead.

PPE'd!

How about making it a Duration like Green Village?  It protects you from locking out.
Logged

AJL828

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 143
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJL828
  • Respect: +395
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #37 on: May 18, 2023, 01:49:01 pm »
+1



I also had this idea, but unfortunately, this will lock out people on many boards. You just select a terminal, and their turn is dead.

PPE'd!

How about making it a Duration like Green Village?  It protects you from locking out.
The problem with that fix is that you’re pretty much required to buy your own Marionette to counter an opponent’s Marionette. Attacks shouldn’t be designed as their own counters.
Additionally this attack has problems in more than 2 player games. If player A designates a card for player C to play first, then what happens player B plays a Marionette? You can’t play multiple cards as the first card, and if the most recent Marionette played is the one that takes priority, you start to move into targeted attack territory.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2023, 01:52:48 pm by AJL828 »
Logged
Did you hear about the skyscraper with one really tall floor? I could tell you but it’s a long story…

AJL828

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 143
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJL828
  • Respect: +395
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #38 on: May 18, 2023, 03:02:07 pm »
+3



Ravager
Action - Attack - Duration ($5)

At the start of your next turn, + 3 Cards.
Until then, whenever any other player gains an Action or Treasure card, they set it aside and put it into their discard pile at the end of their next Cleanup.

This is a really hard prompt!
Ravager slows down opponents by setting aside their gained cards, causing them to miss shuffles. It can also be used to prevent gain-and-plays. Like Haunted Woods, the attack doesn’t stack, but can be pretty annoying to work around, which is why I feel the start of turn draw is an appropriate secondary effect.
It can be countered by a few things, anything that can move cards from their expected location (like Watchtower, Tiara, or Tracker) or cards that can access your discard pile (like Harbinger, Mountain Village, or Messenger). It also anti-synergizes a bit with Treasure junking attacks like Charlatan.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2023, 11:10:48 pm by AJL828 »
Logged
Did you hear about the skyscraper with one really tall floor? I could tell you but it’s a long story…

Holger

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 741
  • Respect: +466
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #39 on: May 19, 2023, 05:29:30 am »
0

While this is similar to Exiling Attacks, it is different enough to be novel and interesting. But it is also pretty centralizing (if you don’t contest the pile and the opponent play it consistently, 10 cards stay in nirvana) and as the vanilla net effects are those of Caravan, just more delayed, this has to be nerfed somehow.
I would make I terminal. As non-terminal, easy-gainable $3, you want the entire pile even if the attack did not exist.
I feel like it's not quite so strong. In the early game, the attack is actually a benefit more often than not (or doesn't do anything, if you aren't shuffling). If an opponent goes hard for these, that can be counteracted quite easily by getting more Coppers as fodder to remain in play. It forces you to adapt how you build your deck, but I don't think it's too centralizing.

If it were terminal, the vanilla effect would be weaker than Sleigh, and that's a $2 that has other stuff going on as well. The comparison to Caravan is interesting, and maybe I'll up the price to $4, though I think the Horse gaining is significantly weaker than start-of-turn draw.

I also think so. Additionally, the draw is delayed by a full shuffle compared to Caravan, which is a significant disadvantage. E.g. Bandit Camp is a Village that effectively comes with a Gold delayed by one shuffle, for only $5 instead of $3+$6. (Gaining a Spoils each play is actually slightly better than gaining a Gold once, since you can keep the Spoils for the next shuffle if you dont need the $.)
Logged

Holger

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 741
  • Respect: +466
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #40 on: May 19, 2023, 08:31:08 am »
+1

Quote
Lieutenant • $4 • Action - Command - Attack
Each other player takes their deck's top card and sets it aside face-up. You may play one face-up set aside card, if it is an...: Action, once; or Treasure, twice. Each player discards one card set aside.
:) You can use a player's cards to take advantage of their improved deck and remove it from their use for one turn. 

Discarding the top card doesn't hurt at all on average, so I wouldn't call this an Attack. (Tribute isn't an Attack either.)

Besides, I think it's very swingy, especially in 2 player games: You don't know if it’s terminal or not when playing it (same as Tribute, again), and it does nothing when only green cards are revealed. I think I'd give it at least +1 Action.
 
Logged

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3384
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +5160
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #41 on: May 19, 2023, 09:48:09 am »
0

Quote
Lieutenant • $4 • Action - Command - Attack
Each other player takes their deck's top card and sets it aside face-up. You may play one face-up set aside card, if it is an...: Action, once; or Treasure, twice. Each player discards one card set aside.
:) You can use a player's cards to take advantage of their improved deck and remove it from their use for one turn. 

Discarding the top card doesn't hurt at all on average, so I wouldn't call this an Attack. (Tribute isn't an Attack either.)

Besides, I think it's very swingy, especially in 2 player games: You don't know if it’s terminal or not when playing it (same as Tribute, again), and it does nothing when only green cards are revealed. I think I'd give it at least +1 Action.
Actually, as it is worded, the attacking player puts the opponents' cards into their own play area (as there is no "leaving it there"), so that would be a pretty nasty Attack. Though it is likely not intended that way.
Logged
You say the ocean's rising, like I give a shit
You say the whole world's ending, honey it already did

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1551
  • Respect: +1435
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #42 on: May 19, 2023, 11:51:47 am »
0

While this is similar to Exiling Attacks, it is different enough to be novel and interesting. But it is also pretty centralizing (if you don’t contest the pile and the opponent play it consistently, 10 cards stay in nirvana) and as the vanilla net effects are those of Caravan, just more delayed, this has to be nerfed somehow.
I would make I terminal. As non-terminal, easy-gainable $3, you want the entire pile even if the attack did not exist.
I feel like it's not quite so strong. In the early game, the attack is actually a benefit more often than not (or doesn't do anything, if you aren't shuffling). If an opponent goes hard for these, that can be counteracted quite easily by getting more Coppers as fodder to remain in play. It forces you to adapt how you build your deck, but I don't think it's too centralizing.

If it were terminal, the vanilla effect would be weaker than Sleigh, and that's a $2 that has other stuff going on as well. The comparison to Caravan is interesting, and maybe I'll up the price to $4, though I think the Horse gaining is significantly weaker than start-of-turn draw.

I also think so. Additionally, the draw is delayed by a full shuffle compared to Caravan, which is a significant disadvantage. E.g. Bandit Camp is a Village that effectively comes with a Gold delayed by one shuffle, for only $5 instead of $3+$6. (Gaining a Spoils each play is actually slightly better than gaining a Gold once, since you can keep the Spoils for the next shuffle if you dont need the $.)
Horses are more or less similar in strength to immediate draw. The delay is compensated for by the increase of consistency as well as ability to Throne and Remodel Horses.
Logged

Ethan

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 112
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: May 21, 2023, 08:17:08 am by Ethan »
Logged

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1551
  • Respect: +1435
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #44 on: May 21, 2023, 07:44:03 am »
0

You seem to have missed my card.
Logged

Ethan

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 112
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #45 on: May 21, 2023, 08:17:28 am »
0

You seem to have missed my card.
sorry, I have corrected it.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5319
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3224
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #46 on: May 22, 2023, 06:39:16 am »
+3

Last!



FAQ: if blocked by Moat, you don't get to move/place the token.

Edit: This version is outdated; new one here:

« Last Edit: May 23, 2023, 03:30:03 am by silverspawn »
Logged

Ethan

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 112
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #47 on: May 22, 2023, 08:30:10 am »
+1

We got a new submission, so-
CONTESET CLOSED
Hope I can do the judgement tomorrow.
Logged

Holger

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 741
  • Respect: +466
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #48 on: May 22, 2023, 11:36:51 am »
+2

Last!



FAQ: if blocked by Moat, you don't get to move/place the token.

So one player's Moat protects all other players in multiplayer games? That's very unusual, no other Attack works like that AFAIK. Shouldn't Moat just protect the player revealing it from taking debt?
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5319
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3224
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #187: The Law Falls Silent
« Reply #49 on: May 22, 2023, 12:20:39 pm »
0

agreed; I realized that but it was too late to think of a fix. (It would ordinarily be not an attack but then it skirts the boundaries of the contest.)
Pages: 1 [2] 3  All
 

Page created in 0.129 seconds with 21 queries.