Print

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

[Commodore Chuckles]

Was Lich specifically intended to be a reverse Tactician, and if so, why does it not give +1 Buy?

[Donald X.]

Was Lich specifically intended to be a reverse Tactician, and if so, why does it not give +1 Buy?

For me, "here is inspiration for a card" absolutely does not carry with it "copy the inspiration as much as possible." "Reverse Tactician" has zero obligation to have +Buy. I wouldn't necessarily even start with +Buy and then work from there. I'd start wherever.

Lich's inspiration was "be a Lich." This does happen to line it up with reverse Tactician.

[vidicate]

Was Lich specifically intended to be a reverse Tactician, and if so, why does it not give +1 Buy?

For me, "here is inspiration for a card" absolutely does not carry with it "copy the inspiration as much as possible." "Reverse Tactician" has zero obligation to have +Buy. I wouldn't necessarily even start with +Buy and then work from there. I'd start wherever.

Lich's inspiration was "be a Lich." This does happen to line it up with reverse Tactician.

I’ve had some fun times with the Wizards. Have you read, or heard of, The Order of the Stick?

[Donald X.]

I’ve had some fun times with the Wizards. Have you read, or heard of, The Order of the Stick?

I know about it but have not read it.

[MeNowDealWithIt]

Throne room seems by far the hardest-to-grasp card in the base game, leading to the most rules questions. Did you predict this in playtesting?

[scolapasta]

Was there an intentional reason Envious only affects Silver and Gold and not just all Treasures?

[Donald X.]

Throne room seems by far the hardest-to-grasp card in the base game, leading to the most rules questions. Did you predict this in playtesting?

Throne Room was in fact a source of many questions in the early days, including before release. Throne / Feast was probably the most-asked question ever. And for a few early articles, I went over how the cards in the set worked with Throne Room.

[Donald X.]

Was there an intentional reason Envious only affects Silver and Gold and not just all Treasures?

We know everything about Silver and Gold, and can say they make $1 without needing to clarify what happens to below-the-line text or what have you.

[GendoIkari]

Was there an intentional reason Envious only affects Silver and Gold and not just all Treasures?

We know everything about Silver and Gold, and can say they make $1 without needing to clarify what happens to below-the-line text or what have you.

Horn of Plenty would get a nice little boost if Envious suddenly affected it.

[vidicate]

Was there an intentional reason Envious only affects Silver and Gold and not just all Treasures?

We know everything about Silver and Gold, and can say they make $1 without needing to clarify what happens to below-the-line text or what have you.

Horn of Plenty would get a nice little boost if Envious suddenly affected it.

Not to mention Crown and Sunken Treasure. And maybe Bank and Fortune, but that’s a stretch

[Jeebus]

But Envious makes the Treasures produce +$1 instead of what they normally do, so Horn of Plenty etc would just do that, right?

[scolapasta]

But Envious makes the Treasures produce +$1 instead of what they normally do, so Horn of Plenty etc would just do that, right?

I would've interpreted it as it produces $1 (instead of $0) but the rest works as is. AND this discussion* (well, avoidance of this!) is why it was designed to just affect Silver and Gold.

[GendoIkari]

But Envious makes the Treasures produce +$1 instead of what they normally do, so Horn of Plenty etc would just do that, right?

I would've interpreted it as it produces $1 (instead of $0) but the rest works as is. AND this discussion* (well, avoidance of this!) is why it was designed to just affect Silver and Gold.

Yeah this seems clear to me. Envious simply says how much the Treasure makes when played, it doesn't say anything about making that instead of doing anything else. Granted, it doesn't say "instead of their normal amounts" either, but I feel like people reading Envious must just automatically assume that "make this turn" means "make this turn instead of their normal amount".

Even so, the wording bugs me a bit because it introduces the word "make" into the rules. I never would have thought of Silver as a card that "makes when played", I thought of it as a card that when played gives you +, just like a Festival or Woodcutter does.

[vidicate]

Even so, the wording bugs me a bit because it introduces the word "make" into the rules. I never would have thought of Silver as a card that "makes when played", I thought of it as a card that when played gives you +, just like a Festival or Woodcutter does.

It seems to track with the rules:
The Treasures have no text, just a big coin with a number on it. You get that many coins to spend this turn … For example if you played four Coppers and a Silver, that makes (6) total …
The rules favor the term produce, it seems, when it comes to the big coin symbol (without the “+”), like on Treasures. But it’s not like an official term/keyword… ?

[Jeebus]

But Envious makes the Treasures produce +$1 instead of what they normally do, so Horn of Plenty etc would just do that, right?

I would've interpreted it as it produces $1 (instead of $0) but the rest works as is. AND this discussion* (well, avoidance of this!) is why it was designed to just affect Silver and Gold.

Yeah this seems clear to me. Envious simply says how much the Treasure makes when played, it doesn't say anything about making that instead of doing anything else. Granted, it doesn't say "instead of their normal amounts" either, but I feel like people reading Envious must just automatically assume that "make this turn" means "make this turn instead of their normal amount".

I see how that would be a way to think about it, but I don't think it follows naturally from how Dominion normally works. Envious changes the play abilities of Silver and Gold into "+$1". (And there has to be an implicit "instead of..."!) There is no reason to think that Envious drills down into the specific instructions of the Treasures and replaces some of them, keeping others. How would that be for Philosopher's Stone, Bank or Fool's Gold? It would have to be kind of like Way of the Chameleon I guess, replacing all instances of +$ into +$1, but that's reading a lot into it that isn't stated. (Even then, does Bank give you +$1 multiple times or the total amount once?) To me it's more natural that it just means "instead of what they normally do".

[josqvin]

For Importer, did you consider for it to give +5 favors (for a total of 6)? I only ask this because then in Importer only games we would be able to use Crafter's and Architects guild (and City-State) three times total. As it is, we can only use them twice which lessens their impact on the game and also leaves a useless favor on the mat (which somewhat bothers me aesthetically).

Thanks for the awesome expansion!!

[Donald X.]

For Importer, did you consider for it to give +5 favors (for a total of 6)? I only ask this because then in Importer only games we would be able to use Crafter's and Architects guild (and City-State) three times total. As it is, we can only use them twice which lessens their impact on the game and also leaves a useless favor on the mat (which somewhat bothers me aesthetically).

I didn't consider it. Another reason to do it would have been to be able to nudge Island Folk up to 6 favors.

[mxdata]

For Importer, did you consider for it to give +5 favors (for a total of 6)? I only ask this because then in Importer only games we would be able to use Crafter's and Architects guild (and City-State) three times total. As it is, we can only use them twice which lessens their impact on the game and also leaves a useless favor on the mat (which somewhat bothers me aesthetically).

I didn't consider it. Another reason to do it would have been to be able to nudge Island Folk up to 6 favors.

On a related note, why does Importer give Favors in set-up, but only there? Why does it either not have that setup at all, or have some way to gain Favors during the game?

[LastFootnote]

For Importer, did you consider for it to give +5 favors (for a total of 6)? I only ask this because then in Importer only games we would be able to use Crafter's and Architects guild (and City-State) three times total. As it is, we can only use them twice which lessens their impact on the game and also leaves a useless favor on the mat (which somewhat bothers me aesthetically).

I didn't consider it. Another reason to do it would have been to be able to nudge Island Folk up to 6 favors.

On a related note, why does Importer give Favors in set-up, but only there? Why does it either not have that setup at all, or have some way to gain Favors during the game?

The whole point was to have a different experience with Favors. You have to be careful how you spend them since you won’t get anymore.

[dz]

Are you prepared to deal with all the "I liked that card, why did you remove it" comments once Seaside 2E previews begin?
 
What are your thoughts on Tomb? I'm surprised that some people love it because it encourages trashing, and some people hate it...because it encourages trashing. (The actual problem with Tomb is Fortress, and well you already knew that I would think that.)

What was the motivation to finally errata Prince? And is it going to get the Command type?

What are your favorite cards from Allies?

How concerning was it to let Voyage be cumulative, in terms of power, slowness, and intuition (a LOT of people thought Voyage worked like Outpost; I think I would have added something about it in the rulebook)?

Were there thoughts to move +1 Favor before +1 Card on Underling, to get rid of the rules question with Order of Astrologers/Masons? Probably not because Emissary couldn't get that kind of fix?

Were there concerns that Skirmisher and Highwayman could continually prevent opponents from hitting 5, which would prevent them from attacking back? I mean, Raider got bumped to 6 for that reason.

[Donald X.]

Are you prepared to deal with all the "I liked that card, why did you remove it" comments once Seaside 2E previews begin?

Like a boy scout.
 

What are your thoughts on Tomb? I'm surprised that some people love it because it encourages trashing, and some people hate it...because it encourages trashing. (The actual problem with Tomb is Fortress, and well you already knew that I would think that.)

I still like Tomb. Many of the Landmarks just don't have enough of an impact in terms of what you do. Tomb does not have that issue. Some games it does nothing but I decided I could live with that, and so far so good.

What was the motivation to finally errata Prince? And is it going to get the Command type?

Ultimately just, all the other errata already going on.

As of today, the next time Jay asks me for the wording, it will be:

Prince: Action - Duration - Command, $8
You may set aside (on this) a non-Duration non-Command Action card from your hand costing up to $4. At the start of each of your turns, play that card, leaving it set aside.

Online, well probably TGG already has that wording, and who knows when dominion.games will get it.

What are your favorite cards from Allies?

I like the split piles a lot. Royal Galley is a stand-out besides those.

How concerning was it to let Voyage be cumulative, in terms of power, slowness, and intuition (a LOT of people thought Voyage worked like Outpost; I think I would have added something about it in the rulebook)?

I wasn't concerned about slowness from real-life, though vs. the TGG bot (which initially was broken and got no-limit extra turns, so it went nuts buying them and then kept doing it once it was fixed), it was a bummer.

Voyage is unique, you get an extra turn that's a little puzzle. It always seemed worth how long the puzzle took.

I'm not aware of power issues. Intuition issues, I mean I always work with what I've got. In the rulebooks I answer the questions we think of that we think will come up. If people keep misreading a card it tends to change into what they think it is, or something else they'll actually get right. We didn't have issues with Voyage and intuition.

Were there thoughts to move +1 Favor before +1 Card on Underling, to get rid of the rules question with Order of Astrologers/Masons? Probably not because Emissary couldn't get that kind of fix?

There were no thoughts there.

Were there concerns that Skirmisher and Highwayman could continually prevent opponents from hitting 5, which would prevent them from attacking back? I mean, Raider got bumped to 6 for that reason.

Not really. It wasn't missed that they could do that; it didn't get me to make them suck.

I'm okay with the worst card in each set being some attack that just didn't want to make the game suck. And that's mostly how it's going these days. But of course attacks like anything else are trying not to suck despite that; they just have a harder time getting to the sweet spot. Those attacks seemed good and still do; not game-breaking and not awful. Hooray!

[Jeebus]

As of today, the next time Jay asks me for the wording, it will be:

Prince: Action - Duration - Command, $8
You may set aside (on this) a non-Duration non-Command Action card from your hand costing up to $4. At the start of each of your turns, play that card, leaving it set aside.

Online, well probably TGG already has that wording, and who knows when dominion.games will get it.

Dominion.games already has it, but without "non-Command" and the Command type:



This means that this trick is possible there, but I guess that's the only difference.

[Commodore Chuckles]

Is the Count the wrinkly grey guy or the guy with black gloves? Or do you not know?

[jakav]

Are there any ideas for mechanics you have that have simply not worked out?
(Of course not ones that could come into a future expansion)

[Donald X.]

Is the Count the wrinkly grey guy or the guy with black gloves? Or do you not know?

It's up to all of us; the artist wasn't told "put the Count on the left" or any such thing. You could ask them directly.