Print

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

[Compynerd255]

Quite a few of the card variants involve having "wild cards" like Band of Misfits, such as Master of Disguise (copy a card the last guy played) and Joker (take on any card while in hand for interaction with other cards). Here's another idea for such a card:

---
Treason - Cost $5 - Action / Attack
All other players reveal their hands. Play this card as one of the revealed Action cards other than Treason cards that you choose. This is that card until it leaves play.
---
FAQ / Clarifications:
- When you play this, all other players (who have not invoked Moat or Lighthouse) reveal their hands. Then, you choose any one of the Action cards that are revealed.
  - If a player reveals Moat, it can't be copied by Treason.
- Then, you play the card again as the Action you chose. Treason remains that card you chose until it leaves play. (Look at the Band of Misfits FAQ for clarification on this point).
- If there are no Actions revealed, Treason does nothing.
- You must choose an Action card if you can, even if it provides an undesirable effect.

Essentially, this is a variant on Band of Misfits, but instead of copying $4 or less cards from the Supply, it copies any card that any opponent happens to have in hand. This implies a few things:
- The card is more useful in the mid or endgame, when players have a lot of Action cards in hand. This plays especially well against Action-heavy or mirror players, since you have a lot of Actions to choose from.
- It can suffer the same weakness as Golem, in that it can force you to play cards that you don't want to play (such as a one-shot). Thus, this card combos extremely well with other cards that reveal opponent's hands, such as Pillage, Cutpurse, and Taxman.

What are your thoughts on this card?

EDIT (9-1-13): Changed card to cost $5 and not allow duplication of Treason (which is useless).

[ta56636]

I think this would work very well in 3/4 people games - not sure it'd be worth the risk in 2 player.  Also possibly overpriced, given that you could have had you choice of 5/6 instead of buying this...

[AJD]

Why is it an Attack? It's less attacky than Possession, certainly. Just because people don't want to have to reveal their hands?

[Tables]

I agree with both of the above. I'd probably price this at $5, maybe at $4. Perhaps also to avoid scaling issues you could have it check the player on your lefts hand instead of everyone's (at that point, $4 definitely sounds right). And there's no reason for this to be an attack. Revealing hands isn't usually a big deal in Dominion (and when it is, it's a little extra incentive to get the card).

[Compynerd255]

I think this would work very well in 3/4 people games - not sure it'd be worth the risk in 2 player.  Also possibly overpriced, given that you could have had you choice of 5/6 instead of buying this...

I would agree with that - much like the issue with Thief and Pirate Ship, this card only becomes good with a lot of other cards. And, thinking more about it, I would agree that it's overpriced, and would probably work better at $4. I only put it at such a high price because it can duplicate any card, including cost 6-7 cards and cards that cost Potion (Possession, anyone?).

Why is it an Attack? It's less attacky than Possession, certainly. Just because people don't want to have to reveal their hands?

The thing about Possession is that it only affects the player to your left, while Attack cards affect all other players. But it does make sense not to have to reveal your hand - you can give your opponent less to choose from. Also, other Reaction cards can protect you - for instance, if you have Secret Chamber, you can use it to topdeck cards that you don't want your opponent to play.

Perhaps also to avoid scaling issues you could have it check the player on your lefts hand instead of everyone's (at that point, $4 definitely sounds right).

It would probably work better if you look at the hand of the guy to your right - this is more of a defensive measure than an attacking one. But revealing everyone's hands has a certain amount of power to it, so that Treason isn't as dependent on a mirror game.

Oh, and another point I forgot - the card shouldn't let you choose another Treason. Otherwise, we could get an infinite loop if Treason was the only other Action card revealed.

[SirPeebles]

If you reduce the price to $4, then it had better not be able to mimic a Band of Misfits either, or you are right back into an infinite loop.

[LastFootnote]

If you reduce the price to $4, then it had better not be able to mimic a Band of Misfits either, or you are right back into an infinite loop.

Solution: Cost it at $5 and give it +1 Action. That way you're less afraid to play it.

[GeoLib]

If you reduce the price to $4, then it had better not be able to mimic a Band of Misfits either, or you are right back into an infinite loop.

This doesn't seem like a really big issue because someone can create an infinite delay by revealing moat a bunch too, and Donald ruled that wasn't a problem with the game because if you do that you're just a dick. I guess if treason was the only card in the supply costing less than $5 this would force an infinite loop.

PPE: I like LF's suggestion. Does that make it too powerful though? Any action, but non-terminal. Hmmm...

[LastFootnote]

Two more things:

First, the card incentivizes other players to play an actionless deck, which is bad. As a fix for this, perhaps it should give +$3 (along with the +1 Action) if there are no Action cards revealed.

Second, I'm not certain this generates a loop even if played as itself or Band of Misfits. The two cards have no on-play effect, after all.

[GeoLib]

Second, I'm not certain this generates a loop even if played as itself or Band of Misfits. The two cards have no on-play effect, after all.

Yeah they do. The "All other players reveal their hands..." part. So if you play it and the only action revealed is a Treason then you have to play it as Treason, which causes all players to reveal their hands and the only thing revealed is Treason... etc.

With BOM this only happens if the only action costing less than $5 is Treason

[eHalcyon]

Why is it an Attack? It's less attacky than Possession, certainly. Just because people don't want to have to reveal their hands?

The thing about Possession is that it only affects the player to your left, while Attack cards affect all other players. But it does make sense not to have to reveal your hand - you can give your opponent less to choose from. Also, other Reaction cards can protect you - for instance, if you have Secret Chamber, you can use it to topdeck cards that you don't want your opponent to play.

That's not why Possession is not an attack.  Possession does not actively hurt the other player.  It gives you an extra turn that happens to use an opponent's deck.  On average, it makes no different to the possessed player.  It may feel like an attack because if your opponent does something good with your deck, you feel like his reward should have been yours.  But on average it doesn't matter.  Now, it can hurt a bit in combination with cards like Masquerade or Ambassador, and it kind of hurts if you get possessed when you are getting Tactician benefit or benefits from various durations.  But that's just part of the interaction between those cards.  Possession in itself does not hurt opponents.

[rrwoods]

This is a little strange -- after you choose a card, you play this card as if it were that card. That is, when you play this card, something happens, then you play this card again.

I guess band of misfits does the same thing, but I've always read misfits to have text only "under the line" rather than reading its text as what happens when you play it.

I do think you should say "that is not a Treason card" here.

[eHalcyon]

This is a little strange -- after you choose a card, you play this card as if it were that card. That is, when you play this card, something happens, then you play this card again.

I guess band of misfits does the same thing, but I've always read misfits to have text only "under the line" rather than reading its text as what happens when you play it.

I do think you should say "that is not a Treason card" here.

Misfits doesn't do that.  You can imagine a "would play" step before you actually play it, which is when BoM "transforms".  This is why you can't play BoM as two different things when you throne it.

Note that this is may not be entirely accurate.  But you do NOT act as if you played BoM first and then choose an X according to BoM's instructions; BoM is simply X when it is played.

[scott_pilgrim]

This is a little strange -- after you choose a card, you play this card as if it were that card. That is, when you play this card, something happens, then you play this card again.

I guess band of misfits does the same thing, but I've always read misfits to have text only "under the line" rather than reading its text as what happens when you play it.

I do think you should say "that is not a Treason card" here.

I think all rulings on Band of Misfits (except for the weird Throne Room BoM as Feast thing) are consistent with treating it as if the text is under a line.

[rrwoods]

This is a little strange -- after you choose a card, you play this card as if it were that card. That is, when you play this card, something happens, then you play this card again.

I guess band of misfits does the same thing, but I've always read misfits to have text only "under the line" rather than reading its text as what happens when you play it.

I do think you should say "that is not a Treason card" here.

Misfits doesn't do that.  You can imagine a "would play" step before you actually play it, which is when BoM "transforms".  This is why you can't play BoM as two different things when you throne it.

Note that this is may not be entirely accurate.  But you do NOT act as if you played BoM first and then choose an X according to BoM's instructions; BoM is simply X when it is played.

"This is that card until it leaves play" makes it work that way if isn't under the line text; the second time you play the card, it's what you chose the first time since the card hasn't left play yet. Of course this is inconsistent with the feast ruling but I haven't seen an interpretation of the card that is consistent (the feast ruling is acknowledged to be a hand wave so I don't consider it important that an interpretation is consistent with it anyway).

[Compynerd255]

Two more things:

First, the card incentivizes other players to play an actionless deck, which is bad. As a fix for this, perhaps it should give +$3 (along with the +1 Action) if there are no Action cards revealed.

Second, I'm not certain this generates a loop even if played as itself or Band of Misfits. The two cards have no on-play effect, after all.

I totally see both points. I could probably include the +1 Action in with the "if no Actions were revealed" part of the card - it can do something useful when it can't copy, but does a fantastic job when it can.
Also, it would not generate a loop when played as Band of Misfits (unless it was forced to copy Treason) but it would create an infinite loop if it is forced to play as itself. Setting the cost to $5 fixes the first problem.

This is a little strange -- after you choose a card, you play this card as if it were that card. That is, when you play this card, something happens, then you play this card again.

I guess band of misfits does the same thing, but I've always read misfits to have text only "under the line" rather than reading its text as what happens when you play it.

I do think you should say "that is not a Treason card" here.

I guess it is a little strange, since you have to play the card twice. Perhaps it morphs and you follow the instructions explicitly, rather than actually playing it twice. Another thing you could do is actually play the opponent's card (as in take it from them or get a copy of it from the Supply) then return it to them when the effect resolves, but I don't like that as much.

So, how does the card look with those revisions?:
---
Treason - Cost $5 - Action / Attack
All other players reveal their hands. Choose one of the revealed Action cards that are not Treason cards. This card becomes a copy of that card until it leaves play. Follow the instructions on that card as if you had played it.
If no non-Treason Actions were revealed, +1 Card, +1 Action.
---

[eHalcyon]

This is a little strange -- after you choose a card, you play this card as if it were that card. That is, when you play this card, something happens, then you play this card again.

I guess band of misfits does the same thing, but I've always read misfits to have text only "under the line" rather than reading its text as what happens when you play it.

I do think you should say "that is not a Treason card" here.

Misfits doesn't do that.  You can imagine a "would play" step before you actually play it, which is when BoM "transforms".  This is why you can't play BoM as two different things when you throne it.

Note that this is may not be entirely accurate.  But you do NOT act as if you played BoM first and then choose an X according to BoM's instructions; BoM is simply X when it is played.

"This is that card until it leaves play" makes it work that way if isn't under the line text; the second time you play the card, it's what you chose the first time since the card hasn't left play yet. Of course this is inconsistent with the feast ruling but I haven't seen an interpretation of the card that is consistent (the feast ruling is acknowledged to be a hand wave so I don't consider it important that an interpretation is consistent with it anyway).

It may seem like that from a very strict reading of the card text, but that is not how BoM works.  If you are curious about it, go back to the threads in this forum from when Dark Ages first leaked.  There was lengthy, lengthy discussion and debate about this, both before and after Donald X. clarified.

[GeoLib]

So, how does the card look with those revisions?:
---
Treason - Cost $5 - Action / Attack
All other players reveal their hands. Choose one of the revealed Action cards that are not Treason cards. This card becomes a copy of that card until it leaves play. Follow the instructions on that card as if you had played it.
If no non-Treason Actions were revealed, +1 Card, +1 Action.
---

Looks good. I think I prefer the wording that matches BoM (this is that card, etc.) for consistency with an official card. It looks like you've fixed all the infinite loops successfully though. It still encourages the opponent to play an actionless deck, but I don't think it's so absurdly powerful as to cause someone to play BM when it otherwise wouldn't be viable. I also don't think it should have the attack type for the same reason others have pointed out (see Masquerade, Possession, and Tribute for cards that mess with your opponents deck/hand, but aren't actually attacks).

[Compynerd255]

So, how does the card look with those revisions?:
---
Treason - Cost $5 - Action / Attack
All other players reveal their hands. Choose one of the revealed Action cards that are not Treason cards. This card becomes a copy of that card until it leaves play. Follow the instructions on that card as if you had played it.
If no non-Treason Actions were revealed, +1 Card, +1 Action.
---

Looks good. I think I prefer the wording that matches BoM (this is that card, etc.) for consistency with an official card. It looks like you've fixed all the infinite loops successfully though. It still encourages the opponent to play an actionless deck, but I don't think it's so absurdly powerful as to cause someone to play BM when it otherwise wouldn't be viable. I also don't think it should have the attack type for the same reason others have pointed out (see Masquerade, Possession, and Tribute for cards that mess with your opponents deck/hand, but aren't actually attacks).

I do see wanting consistency with an official card, and I might consider rewording that. I still want to insist that it is an Attack because there is completely an incentive to block it: if your Actions don't get revealed, they don't get copied, which means that you can safely play them, which also partially fixes the Actionless deck problem.

In fact, I thought of a few other ways Treason could work:
- Each player either discards Treason or reveals a hand without Treason. You can choose from the hands that don't have Treason in them - in this way, Treason explicitly serves as a counter to itself, encouraging players to buy it even if they have no plan to copy Actions.
- Each player reveals one Action card from their hand (or a hand with no Actions) and you choose from those. In this way, not only are more valuable Actions protected from Treason, but Treason also serves as a counter to itself.

[GeoLib]

I do see wanting consistency with an official card, and I might consider rewording that. I still want to insist that it is an Attack because there is completely an incentive to block it: if your Actions don't get revealed, they don't get copied, which means that you can safely play them, which also partially fixes the Actionless deck problem.

But wanting to block it isn't a reason to make it an attack. I also want to block possession, but not because it does anything bad for me necessarily. That's what makes something an attack: it causes some negative effect to your opponent. Possession definitely has more cases where it damages your opponent (ambassador, masquerade, bad reshuffles), but it still doesn't get the attack label.

In fact, I thought of a few other ways Treason could work:
- Each player either discards Treason or reveals a hand without Treason. You can choose from the hands that don't have Treason in them - in this way, Treason explicitly serves as a counter to itself, encouraging players to buy it even if they have no plan to copy Actions.
- Each player reveals one Action card from their hand (or a hand with no Actions) and you choose from those. In this way, not only are more valuable Actions protected from Treason, but Treason also serves as a counter to itself.

The latter solution makes it seem really weak to me: play the worst action in someone else's hand? No thanks. Especially since they could reveal one-shots. Also, how does treason counter itself then? If you reveal treason we just get infinite loop problems.

If you wanted, you could make them reveal and discard an action and you could pick an action to play. This makes it primarily an attack and removes the infinite loop problem. Here, discarding a Treason to Treason would actually be bad because then you would get hit by it again. Actually, never mind. This just makes the attack way to stackable and also really discourages buying actions. I think the BoM wording is the best, and I really don't see it as an attack.

[ta56636]

As another thought - what about the opposite:

Cost $5 - Action
When you play this reveal a card from your hand.

This is that card until it leaves play.


NB
This could also duplicate treasures etc.

Edit
It could even be an Action - Reaction card with the same text (for things like Tunnel)

Edit again
I guess it would actually have to be Action - Reaction - Attack - Treasure