Print

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

[Dr Who]

Hi everyone,
I only own the base set and Intrigue and I really don't want to buy more sets any time soon. However, there are some cards I would almost never buy at their current price (at least when other better cards of the same price are available), so to make them more useable I want to re-price them (e.g. I play with trading post and masquerade at $4 each). I know this is probably a very controversial area, but just assuming this was an OK thing to do I have this problem:

Witch and torturer are excellent cards and better than lab, library and mine IMHO. So do I downgrade those cards to $4? Or do I upgrade the witch and torturer to $6? And if I were to do the latter, would they be worth that compared to gold?

Thanks for your help everyone 

[theory]

I think as you play more, you will find that the prices are appropriately set.  Price is not just based on power, it's also based on access.

One of the reasons Witch costs $5 is that it ensures equal access to everyone.  If it cost $6, then on Turns 3-4, some people will randomly get $6 and then win.  Since it costs $5, you can almost always get one by Turn 4.

[WanderingWinder]

Leave the cards where they are. They are there for a reason. The game is so well balanced, even if some cards are stronger than others.


Bigger point: buy them over gold when they cost $5, too. You don't have to use all your money.

[eHalcyon]

Trading Post is strong. $4 price would make it one of the best openers around! Lab and Library are also too strong for a $4 price. Not sure about Mine as it's on the weaker side of $5.

I agree with theory that it's better to leave prices as they are.

[rinkworks]

Seconded.  I know I had the same urge to tweak card prices after I played several games and found certain cards to be undesirable.  But the more I played, the more I trusted the official pricing.  theory makes a good point about cards being priced for access as well as power level.  This is particularly true of $4 and under.   The distinction between $3 and $4 often has nothing to do with power level but whether or not you should be allowed to open with two copies of the card in question.  And the difference between $2 and $3 is often only about how easy it should be to pick extras up with extra buys.

It's actually very common to want to pick up a strong $5 action card over Gold.  That's actually a good thing, because if actions weren't often a slightly better deal than money, you'd simply only buy money, and that would be the winning strategy every time out.  Even as it is, new players go through a phase in the learning process where that appears to be true.  Then they get better at learning how to use actions and how to make judicious purchases, and it all pans out.

Then there are lots of cards whose utility isn't immediately obvious.  Used right, Trading Post is one of the stronger (non-attack) $5 cards in the game!  But it took me a while to learn this, because it never looked attractive, and when I experimented with it I bought it too late, and it didn't work out very well.  My point is, the strength you perceive in certain cards fluctuates with experience.  Some cards are notorious for having typical learning curves that go back and forth a couple times before settling down.   But if you tweak the costs of the cards in the middle of that process, you change how they play, and that warps the learning process.

[gman314]

Trading post is an awesome opener. Trashing two estates to get a Silver in hand is rare, but spectacular when it happens. If there are cursers on the board, it's even more useful. You can improve your buying power while getting rid of junk.

[ednever]

If you open 5/2 to an opponent's 3/4 and Trading Post is in the Kingdom, they are in a lot of trouble...

Ed

[Powerman]

Mine would be sooo good at 4 though.  Open Mine/Silver.  Draw them together as MSCCC... Hello 2 golds on turn 3!

[Dr Who]

Thanks for your input everyone. I see what you mean, but my favourite cards are witch and torturer - I think multiplayer games are much less fun without at least one of them. As I only have the base set and intrigue, and as the only time I ever play the game is with friends coming over now and then, I'm going to stick with one them (I know that's not how most people view the game but that's fine with me). And I think this will always mess up the other $5 cards because they're not as good (this link says the samehttp://dominionstrategy.com/2011/04/08/the-five-best-5-attacks/) So just if those two cards were $6, would people sometimes still buy them over gold? Would you buy Minion over Gold?

Bigger point: buy them over gold when they cost $5, too. You don't have to use all your money.

Thanks for your advice, WanderingWinder

[Dr Who]

Mine would be sooo good at 4 though.  Open Mine/Silver.  Draw them together as MSCCC... Hello 2 golds on turn 3!

Thanks Powerman. How likely is that though? Any more likely than getting gold from treasure maps on turn 4?

[iangoth]

Thanks for your input everyone. I see what you mean, but my favourite cards are witch and torturer - I think multiplayer games are much less fun without at least one of them. As I only have the base set and intrigue, and as the only time I ever play the game is with friends coming over now and then, I'm going to stick with one them (I know that's not how most people view the game but that's fine with me). And I think this will always mess up the other $5 cards because they're not as good (this link says the samehttp://dominionstrategy.com/2011/04/08/the-five-best-5-attacks/) So just if those two cards were $6, would people sometimes still buy them over gold? Would you buy Minion over Gold?

Bigger point: buy them over gold when they cost $5, too. You don't have to use all your money.

Thanks for your advice, WanderingWinder

Yes, people often buy witch, torturer, and minion with $6.

[iangoth]

Mine would be sooo good at 4 though.  Open Mine/Silver.  Draw them together as MSCCC... Hello 2 golds on turn 3!

Thanks Powerman. How likely is that though? Any more likely than getting gold from treasure maps on turn 4?

The odds of two treasure maps colliding on turn 4 are essentially zero, since you can only buy one before the first reshuffle.

[Ozle]

Mine would be sooo good at 4 though.  Open Mine/Silver.  Draw them together as MSCCC... Hello 2 golds on turn 3!

Thanks Powerman. How likely is that though? Any more likely than getting gold from treasure maps on turn 4?

Im no expert, but I would say much much more likely!

Plus, you couldnt match Treasure maps till turn 5 could you? (unless you have dropped the price of them as well?) buy one on your 1st or 2nd, then another with your 3rd, but that doesnt get shuffled into your draw until you have finished turn 4 (unless you buy another card drawer on top!)

Also, another thing to consider, if you drop these down to cost 4 instead of 5, wont that make them more powerful than a lot of the 4's, meaning you will have to drop them down, and so on...?

[eHalcyon]

Mine would be sooo good at 4 though.  Open Mine/Silver.  Draw them together as MSCCC... Hello 2 golds on turn 3!

Thanks Powerman. How likely is that though? Any more likely than getting gold from treasure maps on turn 4?

Far more likely, because you can't open TM/TM. (Edit: ninja'd)

On the main issue though -- just because other $5 cards are competing with Witch and Torturer, it doesn't mean these two need to have a price increase.  In the case of Witch, you rarely want more than 2.  After that, grabbing a few Labs instead would be more effective -- you'll be drawing bigger hands so you can buy better stuff (like Gold), and you'll also cycle your deck more quickly so you can play your Witches more often.  Similarly, in a Torturer game, it can be a good idea to buy Trading Post instead of more Torturers.  As your opponents play Torturer, pick up two curses with TP in hand.  Enjoy a free silver on your turn.

[rinkworks]

Thanks for your input everyone. I see what you mean, but my favourite cards are witch and torturer - I think multiplayer games are much less fun without at least one of them. As I only have the base set and intrigue, and as the only time I ever play the game is with friends coming over now and then, I'm going to stick with one them (I know that's not how most people view the game but that's fine with me). And I think this will always mess up the other $5 cards because they're not as good (this link says the samehttp://dominionstrategy.com/2011/04/08/the-five-best-5-attacks/) So just if those two cards were $6, would people sometimes still buy them over gold? Would you buy Minion over Gold?

Sure.  It happens anyway, with them priced at $5.   Underbuying is important sometimes.  Minion is a particularly great example, since if you're playing a Minion strategy you shouldn't be buying Gold at all.  You want as many Minions as possible with as little other stuff as possible.  Gold actually gets in the way, because every Gold is one less Minion, and you'll probably cycle past it anyway, rather than getting to play it.

Similarly, since cursing attacks are so powerful -- and MORE powerful the earlier you get them -- you'll often use an early $6 to buy a Witch instead of a Gold.  But you don't want too many terminals (and Curses in particular, since they become super weak once the Curses are gone), so you wouldn't do that EVERY time you have $6.

Bottom line, you will never ever ever ever be able to price the cards so that they are directly proportional to their strength for every occasion.  Because great cards in one strategy are junk in another.  There's a strategy where you'd buy Chancellor over Gold, amazingly enough.*

*Though not if you're only using Base + Intrigue.

[Dr Who]

Mine would be sooo good at 4 though.  Open Mine/Silver.  Draw them together as MSCCC... Hello 2 golds on turn 3!

Thanks Powerman. How likely is that though? Any more likely than getting gold from treasure maps on turn 4?

Far more likely, because you can't open TM/TM. (Edit: ninja'd)

On the main issue though -- just because other $5 cards are competing with Witch and Torturer, it doesn't mean these two need to have a price increase.  In the case of Witch, you rarely want more than 2.  After that, grabbing a few Labs instead would be more effective -- you'll be drawing bigger hands so you can buy better stuff (like Gold), and you'll also cycle your deck more quickly so you can play your Witches more often.  Similarly, in a Torturer game, it can be a good idea to buy Trading Post instead of more Torturers.  As your opponents play Torturer, pick up two curses with TP in hand.  Enjoy a free silver on your turn.

Good idea! Since I only play the game occasionally, I usually put in my favourite combination: torturer, masquerade and minion. That makes trying to decide whether to pick up the curses much harder: if you have a masquerade you can just pass the curse to the person next to you (who might be forced to pass you something good if hediscarded with the torturer). But if someone plays minion before your next turn -> ouch! your curse goes in the discard Well, maybe it's only me that finds this a fun way to play

[popsofctown]

If for no other reason, play with the cards at normal prices so that when you meet someone new who plays dominion, you've been playing the same game.

[WanderingWinder]

My biggest advice: play games with all kinds of sets, rather than forcing your favorite cards in every single game. Trust me, it's more fun.

[Robz888]

This reminds me of when I changed the continent reinforcement bonuses in Risk (although I still think that was good idea):

Australia: 2 --> 2
South America: 2 --> 3
Africa: 3 --> 4
North America: 5 --> 5
Europe: 5 --> 6
Asia: 7 --> 10

Of course, Risk's flaws don't stop there. So pretty soon I re-designed the map layout, drawing a new map on the fictional planet of Terrabrynne, which had over 100 territories and 15 continents. And then I added "Morale" bonuses and weapons upgrades. And magic spells. And character abilities. And binding alliances. And then we weren't really playing Risk anymore.

[WanderingWinder]

This reminds me of when I changed the continent reinforcement bonuses in Risk (although I still think that was good idea):

Australia: 2 --> 2
South America: 2 --> 3
Africa: 3 --> 4
North America: 5 --> 5
Europe: 5 --> 6
Asia: 7 --> 10

Of course, Risk's flaws don't stop there. So pretty soon I re-designed the map layout, drawing a new map on the fictional planet of Terrabrynne, which had over 100 territories and 15 continents. And then I added "Morale" bonuses and weapons upgrades. And magic spells. And character abilities. And binding alliances. And then we weren't really playing Risk anymore.

Yes. Only THEN were you not playing Risk anymore.
Still, I'm not sure how you ever get past the terrible kingmaking in that game. Or my biggest annoyance, that a bad player can take out a strong player by playing badly.

[theory]

Risk is like Twilight Struggle, if someone tried to identify every single good part about Twilight Struggle, cut it out, and then add every single bad part not previously in Twilight Struggle.

[Captain_Frisk]

Risk is like Twilight Struggle, if someone tried to identify every single good part about Twilight Struggle, cut it out, and then add every single bad part not previously in Twilight Struggle.

I just tried to imagine what that game would be - if you actually followed this literally.

Everything good removed from twilight struggle would leave you with a 70 turn themeless dice-based version of WAR.

Adding everything bad in - would add roll & move, some unconnected mini games to resolve conflicts, a trading in the Mediterranean theme and free parking?

[Robz888]

This reminds me of when I changed the continent reinforcement bonuses in Risk (although I still think that was good idea):

Australia: 2 --> 2
South America: 2 --> 3
Africa: 3 --> 4
North America: 5 --> 5
Europe: 5 --> 6
Asia: 7 --> 10

Of course, Risk's flaws don't stop there. So pretty soon I re-designed the map layout, drawing a new map on the fictional planet of Terrabrynne, which had over 100 territories and 15 continents. And then I added "Morale" bonuses and weapons upgrades. And magic spells. And character abilities. And binding alliances. And then we weren't really playing Risk anymore.

Yes. Only THEN were you not playing Risk anymore.
Still, I'm not sure how you ever get past the terrible kingmaking in that game. Or my biggest annoyance, that a bad player can take out a strong player by playing badly.

Well, I also eliminated book turn-ins that increased in value. In my version, you just get between 4-12 troops, depending upon what your cards are, no matter how many books were previously turned in. Which means no one can ever win by themselves!

So we made it so that 2 players win the game. We play with 6 players. Basically, the strategy is to convince everybody to gang up on one person, eliminate that person together, and then make an alliance with 2 other players. With 3 strong, you kill until you are the only 3 left. Then you throw one of your buddies under the bus, and if that person doesn't flip the board in furious, vengeful anger, you win with the other person about 5 hours after you started playing.

Eventually, we did fix ALL the flaws in Risk... by switching to Dominion.

[ftl]

I think as you play more, you will find that the prices are appropriately set.  Price is not just based on power, it's also based on access.

One of the reasons Witch costs $5 is that it ensures equal access to everyone.  If it cost $6, then on Turns 3-4, some people will randomly get $6 and then win.  Since it costs $5, you can almost always get one by Turn 4.

I think this deserves to be restated, Dr Who. The price of a card is NOT  measure of how powerful it is. It's simply how many coins it takes to get it. This is a compromise between many different things - when players are able to get it, how easy it is to pick up many of them, how likely it is for some players to get extra-lucky and get it early, and so on and so forth.

In addition to power levels:
$2 cards are ones that need to be accessible to everyone, even players who get a 5/2 start; they're also cards which it's okay for players to pick up in bulk with spare buys.
$3 cards are ones that it's okay to open with two copies of, if you start 3/4.
$4 cards are ones that mess up the game a little if you get too many of them immediately, but it's still okay to start with one of them on turn 1.
$5 cards are ones that you want to have a little bit of buildup before you get. You probably have to buy a silver or silver equivalent; or even two; you can't guarantee that you get those cards unless you deliberately aim to do so.
$6 cards are ones are late-game cards - it's impossible to get them on turns 1 or 2, and even fairly likely to miss them on turns 3 and 4. You may only get a few chances to get these before you have to start picking up Provinces, at least in a Big Money-like game.

And there are plenty of other considerations that I'm not thinking of at the moment.

So, when asking whether Witch should be moved up from 5 to 6, "would I take it above gold" isn't the right question to ask. There's plenty of cards that I'd take over Gold if they were at 6; and plenty of cards that I take over Gold while they're at 5, or sometimes even 4, or 3, or 2. (I might be a little hard-pressed to find a game log where I take a 2-cost card over a Gold, but I bet those situations happen occasionally.) The question you should ask is "would the game be better if this card were harder to get?" (Or easier to get, if you're talking about making them cheaper)

So, I would restate the suggestions to keep the prices where they are. They've been playtested a lot; I bet that Donald and his playtesting crew has tried basically all of the different things you're mentioning. Every single card you've mentioned has pretty good utility at their listed price. Instead of making them more usable, making them cheaper will likely turn them in to "must-buy" unavoidable cards, and making them more expensive will just delay when players can get them without making the game more interesting.

[pingpongsam]

Mine would be sooo good at 4 though.  Open Mine/Silver.  Draw them together as MSCCC... Hello 2 golds on turn 3!

Thanks Powerman. How likely is that though? Any more likely than getting gold from treasure maps on turn 4?

Far more likely, because you can't open TM/TM. (Edit: ninja'd)

It does happen that the stupid things line up on Turn 5 with no draw assistance:

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120625-110651-07f5ed18.html

No latent resentment, no sir.