Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15  All

Author Topic: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity  (Read 97991 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Tables

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2817
  • Build more Bridges in the King's Court!
  • Respect: +3350
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #325 on: September 09, 2013, 10:02:29 pm »
0

Quote from: Archetype
Treasure Chest
Types: Treasure
Cost: $4
Worth $1. When you play this, discard the top card of your deck. If it is a Treasure, gain a Silver

I'm surprised so many people didn't like this! It's true that it's only good for BM, but that's sort of the point of Prosperity! Ah well. If I could change it, I'd probably change it to "When you play this, look at the top card of your deck. You may discard it. If it is a Treasure, gain a Silver." and then make it cost $3.

Congrats, Sir Peebles! Tables' Philanthropist was my favorite, so I'm sad it didn't win. Even though I didn't end up voting.

Thanks :). It still has round 2, hopefully I'll fix it up for that contest, tweak the numbers. I'll also hopefully have had a chance to playtest it at those numbers.
Logged
...spin-offs are still better for all of the previously cited reasons.
But not strictly better, because the spinoff can have a different cost than the expansion.

cluckyb

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 215
  • Respect: +169
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #326 on: September 10, 2013, 02:22:22 am »
0

Also, a slightly random question - what criteria did you use to decide what to vote for? Were people voting for "This card [possibly with tweaks] is stellar and I want to see it available in every game I play", or "This card works and [possibly with tweaks] would fit well into the rest of the set", or "There's an interesting mechanic here, even if I'm not sure it could ever be meaningfully implemented"? I was going more for the second, but I'm guessing some people went for the first more.

I honestly did more of the third. I voted for the stuff with cool mechanics (a lot of the you get a bonus everyone else also gets a pretty big bonus stuff, anything else that made me go 'cool') and worried less about "is this actually properly balanced". As long as it wasn't obviously over powered and fit the theme and was interesting I was happy
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 440
  • Respect: +703
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #327 on: September 10, 2013, 05:53:34 am »
0

4 votes:
Quote from: Fragasnap
Mediator
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $3
+$3. Reveal 3 cards from your hand. The player to your left selects one of them. Discard it or put it on top of your deck.

When another player plays an Attack, you may set this aside from your hand. If you do, +1 Card, +1 VP, and at the start of your next turn, discard this.
I can't say I'm terribly surprised to see that it only got 4 votes. I was surprised to hear...
The on-play effect is very interesting but I'd guess it's too strong for $3.  I don't like the reaction at all though, it seems very tacked on, and without it the card isn't very Prosperityish.  Also I don't understand why you have to set it aside and then discard it?  Maybe I'm missing something...
Concept: Cheap terminal Gold with a drawback.  +VP reaction.
Prosperity fit: Big effect (for a $3 card at least).  VP tokens.  Non-attack interaction.
Comments: The reaction seems kind of tacked on, but without it the connection to Prosperity is kind of weak.  This doesn't actually hit any of the major themes as listed by LastFootnote, though it hits two of the minor themes.  I don't think it's a close enough fit for this contest.
Too complicated. But risky, and I love it. But it doesn't belong to Prosperity to me.
Man, I wasn't aware that Prosperity was all big money and good times, what with the illicit Contraband, the extorting Goons-- some people are even putting up Watchtowers for one reason or another! You've got Kings working people overtime in their courts and Hoarding their masses of treasure while handing out piddling Loans to the unsuspecting townsfolk, his overworked kingdoms attracting Peddlers who are only desperate for some coin from all the action in your land. Sometimes you just need someone to help talk things over. You can't really undo all that pillaging that Rabble already did and all the swindling this Mountebank already perpetrated, but you can make it a little better if you'd take the time to talk it out.
You can even maintain relations with your neighbor just by meeting up with him every so often-- there's big bucks in that, the friendly meeting of rulers, you know. Bring some stuff to show him. People like stuff. Maybe he'll kind of wreck that cool Silver, but hey, don't worry, his people will fix it right up and have it sent over to you post haste. Or maybe that Copper wasn't so important so they'll take their time. No biggie.
Logged
Dominion: Avarice 1.1a, my fan expansion with "in-games-using-this" cards and Edicts (updated Oct 18, 2021)

Schneau

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1174
  • Shuffle iT Username: Schneau
  • Respect: +1461
    • View Profile
    • Rainwave
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #328 on: September 10, 2013, 07:05:35 am »
+1

By the way, i voted for cards i liked, not so much considering whether they were fit for the set. Considering mine was one of few cards that didn't fit, that probably made no difference... I didn't vote for Aqueduct, myself, and now i wonder who did.

That was me  ;D I was probably the only one that liked the non-attack clause as an idea, and thought it could be tweaked to work with it.
Logged

awildnoobappeared

  • Coppersmith
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 48
  • Respect: +100
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #329 on: September 10, 2013, 07:36:32 am »
0

This was my card, it got 5 votes:

Quote
Savant
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+3 Cards. +1 Action. Each other player draws a card, then reveals and discards one or more cards. He gets +1 VP per Action or Treasure card he discards.

I noticed that Prosperity doesn't have much in the way of draw cards, so I decided to add one which I thought fit the theme of "more expensive but better version of something that already exists". It's intended to be a stronger Laboratory with a drawback to keep it in check somewhat, but of course it's ended up being a heck of a lot like the draw option of Governor. Some people thought it was cool anyway, I still like it as I think the drawback is noticeable but not crippling.

If I were to change it I'd give it something a little extra to boost it over Governor, $1 might be too much but could work. I don't really want it to have +buy, that would make it a little too easy to get over the VP penalty.

At least it's better than my Hinterlands entry, man that card stinks.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #330 on: September 10, 2013, 12:08:37 pm »
+1

4 votes:
Quote from: Fragasnap
Mediator
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $3
+$3. Reveal 3 cards from your hand. The player to your left selects one of them. Discard it or put it on top of your deck.

When another player plays an Attack, you may set this aside from your hand. If you do, +1 Card, +1 VP, and at the start of your next turn, discard this.
I can't say I'm terribly surprised to see that it only got 4 votes. I was surprised to hear...
The on-play effect is very interesting but I'd guess it's too strong for $3.  I don't like the reaction at all though, it seems very tacked on, and without it the card isn't very Prosperityish.  Also I don't understand why you have to set it aside and then discard it?  Maybe I'm missing something...
Concept: Cheap terminal Gold with a drawback.  +VP reaction.
Prosperity fit: Big effect (for a $3 card at least).  VP tokens.  Non-attack interaction.
Comments: The reaction seems kind of tacked on, but without it the connection to Prosperity is kind of weak.  This doesn't actually hit any of the major themes as listed by LastFootnote, though it hits two of the minor themes.  I don't think it's a close enough fit for this contest.
Too complicated. But risky, and I love it. But it doesn't belong to Prosperity to me.
Man, I wasn't aware that Prosperity was all big money and good times, what with the illicit Contraband, the extorting Goons-- some people are even putting up Watchtowers for one reason or another! You've got Kings working people overtime in their courts and Hoarding their masses of treasure while handing out piddling Loans to the unsuspecting townsfolk, his overworked kingdoms attracting Peddlers who are only desperate for some coin from all the action in your land. Sometimes you just need someone to help talk things over. You can't really undo all that pillaging that Rabble already did and all the swindling this Mountebank already perpetrated, but you can make it a little better if you'd take the time to talk it out.
You can even maintain relations with your neighbor just by meeting up with him every so often-- there's big bucks in that, the friendly meeting of rulers, you know. Bring some stuff to show him. People like stuff. Maybe he'll kind of wreck that cool Silver, but hey, don't worry, his people will fix it right up and have it sent over to you post haste. Or maybe that Copper wasn't so important so they'll take their time. No biggie.

I think I explained my thought process pretty well, but I'll try to be more clear.

LF posted the themes of Prosperity in the OP.  Arguably his list is not complete, but those are the rules and so those are the themes I am going by.  Not every card in official Prosperity hits those themes either, but that's because it's a complete set and there will be off-theme roles that need to be filled.  For a Treasure Chest, the winners should be very much on theme.

The 3 major themes (again, according to the OP) are:

• Is a Treasure card.
• Interacts with Treasure cards (either cards with the Treasure type [like Mint], or one or more specific Treasure cards [like Counting House]).
• Costs $6 or more.

Mediator is not any of those.

The two minor themes are:

- Uses Victory Point tokens.
- Provides a non-Attack interaction.

Mediator does these two things.  But since it only hits the minor themes, the connection to Prosperity feels weaker to me.  Moreover, the VP tokens only come into play with the reaction, and the reaction felt kind of tacked on to me.  That is a personal thing and mostly a matter of taste, and taste is fairly arbitrary.

Hope that makes sense.  I think the card itself is fairly interesting as a sort of Horse Traders variant.
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 440
  • Respect: +703
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #331 on: September 10, 2013, 03:15:11 pm »
0

Hope that makes sense.  I think the card itself is fairly interesting as a sort of Horse Traders variant.
Thank you for your time in analyzing the card. You and the others were perfectly clear and entirely fair. I was being facetious in my argument for its flavor and thought that some of the users might find the dark spin to Prosperity entertaining.

I would criticize LastFootnote's categorization of Prosperity's major themes, largely in that VP tokens are only listed as minor. Yes, there are only 3 of the 25 cards in the set that produce VP tokens, but VP tokens are components and components are expensive when you're printing a mass market game. VP tokens are important game changing cards in Prosperity. Winning on VP tokens definitely feels like Prosperity. He similarly calls Looters a minor theme in Dark Ages which I also contest.

I can certainly understand that Mediator's connection to Prosperity was seen as weak because in the many games that exist without worthwhile Attacks it is going to be a pretty weak Horse Traders\Mandarin\Courtyard thing. A card that encourages everyone to play nice seems pretty thematically relevant to Prosperity to me (and even to try to drive Prosperity into the mixed Kingdoms it would often appear in), but most people decided it wasn't. So be it.
Logged
Dominion: Avarice 1.1a, my fan expansion with "in-games-using-this" cards and Edicts (updated Oct 18, 2021)

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5460
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #332 on: September 10, 2013, 06:57:25 pm »
+12

 :)

First and foremost, thank you to LastFootnote for initiating and organizing this contest!  And you are putting in the effort to fix/standardize the wording of each entry?  Wow!  You are awesome.

Beyond LastFootnote, thanks for the support and serous scrutiny that so many of you offered Indulgence.  I feel like there were other good ideas here which never got a close enough look, frankly because there were just so many entries that no one could really give each one a thorough and thoughtful analysis.  Or at least, I couldn't.  I like my Hinterlands submission more than I like Indulgence, but most people are dismissing it so far, so I definitely sympathize.

I always really liked reading the Secret Histories that Donald X. would share.  I think it would be really cool if we wrote Secret Histories for at least the winning cards.  What is an expansion without a Secret History, after all?

The Secret History of Indulgence:

Believe it or not, Indulgence began its life as an attempt to get a cost increase card to work.

The idea, vaguely, was to have a card named Aristocrat and a "trendy" marker.  There would be just one marker, and you'd put it on a Supply pile.  Cards from that Supply pile would cost $1 more.  I never nailed it down entirely, but one idea was that, at the start of clean-up, if you had an Aristocrat in play, then you would move the marker to a Supply pile which you purchased from that turn.  Thematically, your Aristocrat started a trend by buying something, and so now that thing is more expensive.

By using a marker, and moving it during clean-up, I felt that the primacy issue with cost increases would be addressed.  That is, obviously the cost increase is factored in before any decreases from Bridge et al. since the marker was there before your turn began, and somehow a "In games using" rule trumps on-card rules.  (I knew that could still be contentious, which is part of why I ultimately scrapped the marker)

Cost increasers have other issues.  By having one marker, it didn't have stacking issues, but I still didn't want it messing with the costs of the basic cards, especially Province and Copper.  "Kingdom Card" isn't often referred to, so I decided that you could only put the marker on Action piles.  This was doable, since Aristocrat was an Action.  And I decided that the marker would start out on the Aristocrat pile.

So why would you want to increase costs?  It would have some fun interactions with Trash-for-Benefit, or cards like Band of Misfits, Catacombs, or Border Village.  I guess it could foil your opponent's attempt to buy cards.  But in order to make the trendy theme work, you had to move it to something you bought.  But hey, I want those.  It sucks that they cost more now.  How about a bonus if you pay up?  I decided you could give a VP token or so if you bought the trendy card.

Hey, VP tokens for buying a particular card?  That sounded pretty cool in itself.  Both the cost increase and the marker felt like they could be contentious, so I decided to look more closely at just this new idea.  Now, it is no fun getting VP tokens for buying what you would anyway.  So lets  have your opponent pick the distinguished card, like with Contraband.  I don't want them to just pick Curse or Copper though.  So let's restrict the choice to Action cards still.  After all, Aristocrat is an Action, so there will always be one.  And even if Aristocrat were in the Black Market deck, at least Black Market is an Action in the Supply.  Awesome.

But now, what would the on-play effect be?  Your opponent is likely to insist that you buy a bunch of weak terminals, so it should be something which makes that more manageable.  The obvious solution was Village.  So Aristocrat was a village with the Indulgence effect.  Oh, and you don't want to have to remember all of the cards your opponent named throughout your engine-y Action phase, so there was a delay on the naming:  "At the start of your buy phase, the player to your left...".

I wanted Aristocrat to cost $6, so I felt that it needed to be something more than just vanilla village.  Every attempt felt too wordy.  An extra buy would be nice, since then you could buy the named cheap card along with another, or even two copies of the named card for double points.  Eventually I decided that I could lower the price while still being on-theme by making it a kingdom treasure.  This also let me avoid the awkward "At the start of your buy phase..." delay on the Indulgence effect.  I decided on making it a $5 Silver with a buy.  I thought it would be cool that, on certain boards, you would buy the Indulgence just for the buy.  Also, Silver is decent card in just about any deck.

Making it a Treasure card also meant that it coudn't be named Aristocrat.  I had recently looked at an old list of proposed fan card names, and saw that werothegreat suggested Indulgence. [redacted].  Anyhow...

Oh!  But now I can't require that your opponent choose an Action card, since now it is possible that there are no Actions at all (not likely, but this is f.ds.  y'all would have torn me a new one.).  I didn't want people to name Curse.  "Between $3 and $6" is a familiar restriction for us all.  Rules out junk.  Sucks a bit that it rules out expensive stuff, especially in Prosperity, but then it is kind of unfair to name Colony on turn 5, knowing full well that your opponent couldn't possibly afford it.  One nice thing about Indulgence being a Silver is that you are likely able to afford anything between $3 and $6.  In retrospect, I saw that the $3 to $6 restriction also avoids potion costs being named.  What if your opponent were a dick and named p-stone when you clearly had no Potion?  Well, he could still name Potion, but at least you could buy that if you deemed the VP important enough.

Yeah, so that's the summary.

« Last Edit: September 12, 2013, 11:36:13 pm by SirPeebles »
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #333 on: September 10, 2013, 07:06:53 pm »
0

Very interesting SirPeebles!  Thanks for taking the time to type all that up.

I'm not all that fond of the name.  Are indulgences something commonly understood?  I've learned of them before, but it took a while before it clicked that you were referring to the Catholic thing and not just gratification.  Also, artwork might be hard to find for something so abstract!
Logged

Just a Rube

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 197
  • Respect: +385
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #334 on: September 10, 2013, 07:10:56 pm »
+3

Very interesting SirPeebles!  Thanks for taking the time to type all that up.

I'm not all that fond of the name.  Are indulgences something commonly understood?  I've learned of them before, but it took a while before it clicked that you were referring to the Catholic thing and not just gratification.  Also, artwork might be hard to find for something so abstract!
I'd say that they're certainly more widely known a term than, say "feodum". But maybe that's cheating.

But they played a huge part in triggering the Protestant Reformation (Martin Luther's 95 thesis were written in direct response to a passing Indulgence seller, who used the catchy advertising jingle "As soon as a coin in the box rings, another soul from purgatory springs"). You could probably find a picture of an Indulgence seller.
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5460
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #335 on: September 10, 2013, 07:15:34 pm »
0

Very interesting SirPeebles!  Thanks for taking the time to type all that up.

I'm not all that fond of the name.  Are indulgences something commonly understood?  I've learned of them before, but it took a while before it clicked that you were referring to the Catholic thing and not just gratification.  Also, artwork might be hard to find for something so abstract!

I had done a google image search back then, and there are lots of painted images.  You see, it was usually written as a certificate.  For instance:

Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #336 on: September 10, 2013, 07:22:07 pm »
0

Maybe something just Catholic would work?

I've found two public domain paintings entitled The Catholic Mass, by Fyodor Bronnikov:

http://www.wikipaintings.org/en/fyodor-bronnikov/the-catholic-mass-1869
http://www.wikipaintings.org/en/fyodor-bronnikov/the-catholic-mass

There's Confession of an Italian Woman, by Karl Bryullov:

http://www.wikipaintings.org/en/karl-bryullov/confession-of-an-italian-woman-1830

and The Confession by Pietro Longhi:

http://www.wikipaintings.org/en/pietro-longhi/the-confession

I don't know enough about indulgences to say if any of these fit.

There's a black and white public domain image on the Wikipedia page for Indulgence, supposedly showing the sale of indulgences although the print is entitled "A Question to a Mintmaker":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jeorg_Breu_Elder_A_Question_to_a_Mintmaker_c1500.png

PPE: OK, I guess the above don't really fit. :P




Edit: found that image as well, but the name is... confusing?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6a/Antichrist1.jpg
« Last Edit: September 10, 2013, 07:25:09 pm by eHalcyon »
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4389
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #337 on: September 10, 2013, 07:53:12 pm »
0

The Catholic church used to sell indulgences.  Very roughly, if some rich guy was willing to finance some fancy building or what not for the church, then he would get out of some number of years from purgatory.  I know that's not an entirely accurate account of indulgences historically, but I don't want to start an argument about that right now.

This is actually categorically false, but hey, a common misconception.

If you really don't want to start an argument, (and I don't really), I would suggest not posting such things outside RSP, and just trusting that everyone understands it well enough - if people don't, then your card name probably isn't all that hot.

WalrusMcFishSr

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 642
  • An enormous walrus the size of Antarctica
  • Respect: +1793
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #338 on: September 10, 2013, 09:00:04 pm »
+1

The wikipedia article on Indulgence is very interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indulgence

It would seem that the original intention of the idea was noble but abuses of the system came to be common, to summarize non-argumentatively (I hope)

For what it's worth, I just imagined a fat rich guy eating a huge ham or something...
Logged
My Dominion videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/WalrusMcFishSr   <---Bet you can't click on that!

Powerman

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
  • Respect: +605
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #339 on: September 10, 2013, 10:17:21 pm »
0

14 votes:
Quote from: Powerman
Usurer
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+1 Card. +1 Action. Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Treasure. Discard the rest. Trash the Treasure; gain a Treasure costing up to $3 more than it, putting it on top of your deck. Each other player may gain a Copper, putting it into his hand.

So, it looks like my card was (generally) well received.  As many of you so rightly pointed out, it is Rebuild for treasures (or kind of cantrip Mine).  But that is so much weaker than Rebuild, it got a +1 Card.  I then added putting it on top of your deck so you see the new treasure sooner, and put in the optional copper gain because it A) fits thematically and B) it is a drawback that I think is very very interesting.  I was debating between $5 and $6, but ultimately went with $6 because this outclasses (IMO) Mine by quite a bit.  Some people thought that this could cost $4 or $5, while some thought this was too strong even at $6.

Any suggestions on improving it?
Logged
A man on a mission.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4389
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #340 on: September 12, 2013, 05:46:03 pm »
0

The wikipedia article on Indulgence is very interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indulgence
Apparently controversial topics in which lots of public misinformation exist are like *the* biggest area where Wikipedia is unreliable.

Quote
It would seem that the original intention of the idea was noble
It's irksome to me when people talk about 'ideas' in such contexts.
Quote
but abuses of the system came to be common,
Vague and misleading.
Quote
to summarize non-argumentatively (I hope)
Naive.

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2644
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3391
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #341 on: September 12, 2013, 05:58:14 pm »
+5

For something less controversial, how about Donation?

It makes you spend money for a cause you aren't the keenest on, but you reap rewards beyond money (VP, in this case).
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #342 on: September 12, 2013, 06:03:38 pm »
+4

For something less controversial, how about Donation?

It makes you spend money for a cause you aren't the keenest on, but you reap rewards beyond money (VP, in this case).

There should be a house rule that you cannot play Taxman on Donation.
Logged

Just a Rube

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 197
  • Respect: +385
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #343 on: September 12, 2013, 06:09:56 pm »
0

Too bad Inheritance was a different card. I really want to envision it as:

"Sure you can inherit Uncle Bob's stash of VP tokens, but only if you agree to spend the night in the Haunted Mines"

or

"Sure you can inherit, but only if you agree to take care of that lonely old Scout."
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4389
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #344 on: September 12, 2013, 06:12:19 pm »
0

For something less controversial, how about Donation?

It makes you spend money for a cause you aren't the keenest on, but you reap rewards beyond money (VP, in this case).
FWIW, I don't find the name at all controversial - only subsequent comments.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9191
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #345 on: September 12, 2013, 06:32:13 pm »
0

The wikipedia article on Indulgence is very interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indulgence
Apparently controversial topics in which lots of public misinformation exist are like *the* biggest area where Wikipedia is unreliable.

Can you give a brief explanation of indulgences, for those of us who are not familiar?
Logged

A Drowned Kernel

  • 2015 World Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1067
  • They/Them
  • Respect: +1980
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #346 on: September 12, 2013, 06:34:56 pm »
+1

The wikipedia article on Indulgence is very interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indulgence
Apparently controversial topics in which lots of public misinformation exist are like *the* biggest area where Wikipedia is unreliable.

Quote
It would seem that the original intention of the idea was noble
It's irksome to me when people talk about 'ideas' in such contexts.
Quote
but abuses of the system came to be common,
Vague and misleading.
Quote
to summarize non-argumentatively (I hope)
Naive.

Do you have a link to information that you consider more accurate? I'm not trying to be confrontational, I'm honestly curious about the subject, and if you say that the Wikipedia article is misleading, then I'd like to know what the real deal is.
Logged
The perfect engine
But it will never go off
Three piles are empty

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4389
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #347 on: September 12, 2013, 06:42:32 pm »
+2

From CCC 1471 through 1479 (http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P4G.HTM):
"To understand this doctrine and practice of the Church, it is necessary to understand that sin has a double consequence. Grave sin deprives us of communion with God and therefore makes us incapable of eternal life, the privation of which is called the "eternal punishment" of sin. On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory. This purification frees one from what is called the "temporal punishment" of sin. These two punishments must not be conceived of as a kind of vengeance inflicted by God from without, but as following from the very nature of sin."
...
"The forgiveness of sin and restoration of communion with God entail the remission of the eternal punishment of sin, but temporal punishment of sin remains."
...
"An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints."

Edit: the wikipedia is not as bad here as it is on other issues you might find similar, though it has its own perspective. The history gets a bit slanted, the phrasing is not as square as I'd like, but the bulk substantially isn't so far askew here, in this particular case. At least as I read it now.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2013, 06:45:37 pm by WanderingWinder »
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2708
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #348 on: September 12, 2013, 06:45:38 pm »
+1

While I'm fine with this discussion here, it probably belongs in RSP...
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4389
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #1: Prosperity
« Reply #349 on: September 12, 2013, 06:47:18 pm »
0

While I'm fine with this discussion here, it probably belongs in RSP...
Well, I originally said this and reported to the mods, but they seem to have left it. So, it is what it is.
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15  All
 

Page created in 0.066 seconds with 23 queries.