Print

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

[Squidd]

I think dealing out a modifier for everything sounds like crazy overkill, but then I am the guy who has been forcing all my games to exactly 3 Dark Ages cards. I like my strange in small doses, so I can savor it.

I'd much prefer shuffling the modifiers in with all the other randomizers, so they come out in proportion. Then dig for the first valid kingdom card for each modifier in play, just like digging for a bane.

[Awaclus]

I think dealing out a modifier for everything sounds like crazy overkill, but then I am the guy who has been forcing all my games to exactly 3 Dark Ages cards. I like my strange in small doses, so I can savor it.

I'd much prefer shuffling the modifiers in with all the other randomizers, so they come out in proportion. Then dig for the first valid kingdom card for each modifier in play, just like digging for a bane.

Everyone is free to choose the kingdom they play with using any method they like.

[ahyangyi]

I didn't see enough cost-reducers.

Small [Remote?] [Aged?]__
Cost -$1

If this is a Treasure or Action, when you play this, you may discard a card, If you do, "card effect."

The problem is, of course, draw-to-X cards like Library or Jack-of-all-trades are actually improved with the discard effect. A Small Library lets you to Cellar one card in addition to what a normal Library does, and at a cheaper cost!

Perhaps it'd be better to just discard 2 cards afterwards. This is what brings Witch to Young Witch (of course there's also a Bane card... but see below). This is only exploitable when you discard all your cards (for example, storeroom). But you can't really do too much broken things without cards, so it's probably not broken.

By the way, I think we should generally forbid these negative template from Attacks. For example, imagine a Small (Young?) Sea Hag or a Small Saboteur. They will make the game way too slow. I don't think they're acceptable or fun, at all.

Even in regular dominion, you prefer hamlet to village in draw-up-to kinds of games. Small _ cards are weaker in the presence of sifters and discard attacks. Small_ cards don't work as well in multiples in most games.

You are right. But I think that if we can avoid the occasional "strictly stronger and cheaper" relationship, we should.

[ahyangyi]

I think dealing out a modifier for everything sounds like crazy overkill, but then I am the guy who has been forcing all my games to exactly 3 Dark Ages cards. I like my strange in small doses, so I can savor it.

I'd much prefer shuffling the modifiers in with all the other randomizers, so they come out in proportion. Then dig for the first valid kingdom card for each modifier in play, just like digging for a bane.

Yes, this is what I have in mind. And if we can get the most random format to work, other formats (like predefined sets) will work well too.

[Drab Emordnilap]

I think dealing out a modifier for everything sounds like crazy overkill, but then I am the guy who has been forcing all my games to exactly 3 Dark Ages cards. I like my strange in small doses, so I can savor it.

I'd much prefer shuffling the modifiers in with all the other randomizers, so they come out in proportion. Then dig for the first valid kingdom card for each modifier in play, just like digging for a bane.

Well, it depends on how many modifiers have restrictions. If restrictions are common, then you might only end up with 3 valid pairs out of ten, and so you'd have seven unmodified cards.

[ahyangyi]

The Noble ___ seems simple enough, but already has some strange things:

Noble Great Hall and Noble Tunnel are strictly better than Duchy (assuming they would be worth 3 and 4 VP respectively) by a far margin. Noble Island seems like it would be pretty great. Noble Harem seems interesting, although not much more interesting than Harem itself.

Fun thing: Noble Curse would be basically identical to an Estate.

Cards that interact with Victory cards in a positive way would be much better (spamming Noble Scout seem like it may work to keep the engine going through heavy greening). Noble Crossroads in particular would be amazing. Noble Hoard would be pretty interesting, but not clearly dominant competing with Provinces at $8.

Really cheap cards seem like they would be way better if the increase does not break the 4/5 barrier. Noble Chapel seems a lot better than Chapel with 3/4, although it probably means both players would get +2VP and the game would be the same as with Chapel.

Now I think the coolest part about this general idea is that a really simple idea like "substract two cards and make a modificator" already brings up a lot of strange interactions.

The Settled X card in the original post increases the price by $3 for the 2VP and requires a card costing $2-3. That doesn't have the "strictly better than Duchy" problem with cheap Victory kingdom cards and also doesn't let the Peddler player get additional 16VP for free.

By the way, I now think that letting Settled X to cost $6 for X costing $4 is perhaps reasonable too. The reasoning is that, by abusing the known property that no $4 card is strictly preferred than Silver, Settled $4 cards are never strictly preferred than Harem. Harem is not particularly strong. Therefore, if a card is sometimes preferred over Harem and sometimes not, it's probably fine too.