Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 16  All

Author Topic: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands  (Read 106682 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4386
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #100 on: September 08, 2013, 07:36:15 pm »
0

So, question: if we have a card which is self-referrential (and don't read too much into this, I am typing up like 30 different cards for different expansions right now), how should we format that? Like,

"If this is the first time you played a Fool’s Gold this turn, this is worth $1, otherwise it’s worth $4."
Or
"If this is the first time you played a CARDNAME this turn, this is worth $1, otherwise it’s worth $4."
?

There are other situations (like the below the line of FG) where "this" is obviously correct - namely when it is the particular copy of a card you are worried about - but there are some which are not so clear.

Aren't those two examples the same?  I mean, obviously you would include the real name rather than "CARDNAME", unless your card has some sort of weird variable name.
No, they aren't the same. It's just that you think that the answer is obvious. It is NOT obvious to me at all - in fact, my strong inclination is to use the CARDNAME template, probably from long looking at the design of Magic cards.

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3249
  • Respect: +5460
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #101 on: September 08, 2013, 07:48:53 pm »
0

So, question: if we have a card which is self-referrential (and don't read too much into this, I am typing up like 30 different cards for different expansions right now), how should we format that? Like,

"If this is the first time you played a Fool’s Gold this turn, this is worth $1, otherwise it’s worth $4."
Or
"If this is the first time you played a CARDNAME this turn, this is worth $1, otherwise it’s worth $4."
?

There are other situations (like the below the line of FG) where "this" is obviously correct - namely when it is the particular copy of a card you are worried about - but there are some which are not so clear.

Aren't those two examples the same?  I mean, obviously you would include the real name rather than "CARDNAME", unless your card has some sort of weird variable name.
No, they aren't the same. It's just that you think that the answer is obvious. It is NOT obvious to me at all - in fact, my strong inclination is to use the CARDNAME template, probably from long looking at the design of Magic cards.

OK, I've never played Magic.  Transmute, Golem, Fool's Gold, Duchess,  Rats, and Cultist each refer to their own name.  Spoils and Madman refer to their pile as "Spoils pile" and "Madman pile" respectively.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4386
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #102 on: September 08, 2013, 07:56:44 pm »
0

So, question: if we have a card which is self-referrential (and don't read too much into this, I am typing up like 30 different cards for different expansions right now), how should we format that? Like,

"If this is the first time you played a Fool’s Gold this turn, this is worth $1, otherwise it’s worth $4."
Or
"If this is the first time you played a CARDNAME this turn, this is worth $1, otherwise it’s worth $4."
?

There are other situations (like the below the line of FG) where "this" is obviously correct - namely when it is the particular copy of a card you are worried about - but there are some which are not so clear.

Aren't those two examples the same?  I mean, obviously you would include the real name rather than "CARDNAME", unless your card has some sort of weird variable name.
No, they aren't the same. It's just that you think that the answer is obvious. It is NOT obvious to me at all - in fact, my strong inclination is to use the CARDNAME template, probably from long looking at the design of Magic cards.

OK, I've never played Magic.  Transmute, Golem, Fool's Gold, Duchess,  Rats, and Cultist each refer to their own name.  Spoils and Madman refer to their pile as "Spoils pile" and "Madman pile" respectively.

Once it gets to final cards, it always switches to the actual card's name - as in Dominion. But when they are designing/testing/playtesting/etc., they use CARDNAME, because things are liable to change, and that way it's standardized and easier.

Tables

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2817
  • Build more Bridges in the King's Court!
  • Respect: +3349
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #103 on: September 08, 2013, 08:09:49 pm »
0

Presumably, that's because they have physical copies of the card they're using and tweaking. Here we'd only ever use substitutes anyway, so just using the genuine name seems better to me.
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.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4386
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #104 on: September 08, 2013, 08:33:44 pm »
0

Presumably, that's because they have physical copies of the card they're using and tweaking. Here we'd only ever use substitutes anyway, so just using the genuine name seems better to me.
While they do have physical copies they're using, they just make new ones whenever they make a change. They generally have a whole bunch of blank cards, then they print up stickers they slap on. All the references I'm referring to are there, but mostly I'm thinking of the electronic files.

Maybe it's because some massive percentage of cards get re-named by their thematic/flavor department.

Anyway, it's looking pretty clear that the consensus is using the actual testing name, so if I end up submitting such a card, that is what I'll do.

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #105 on: September 08, 2013, 08:46:26 pm »
0

I just got a wacky idea for Intrigue.  Not sure whether or not I can make it work.
I also came up with an idea that I thought was super awesome for Intrigue. Now I'm not sure about it after playtesting it a bit. I'm trying to tweak it so it's not totally unbalanced without making it ultimately too dull.
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9413
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #106 on: September 08, 2013, 10:09:48 pm »
0

I was thinking it would be cool to have a card called "Khan" or "Khanate", possibly as a $6-cost, Action/Attack/Victory? Something to do with building up a big deck ("empire") for yourself while conquering or exacting tribute from your opponents? I think it could fit the flavor of Hinterlands well, and certainly the Mongolian presence outside Europe was very significant in the approximate timeframe of Dominion. For example, in establishing the Silk Roads!

Really just a vague conception though, and I don't really intend on submitting it, so if anyone wants to steal the idea and run with it be my guest.

OK, now I need to find a way to create a custom card, just so I can make this:

KHAN
[shatner.jpg]

Khaaaaaaan!
Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!



Thank you!
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1400
  • Respect: +1706
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #107 on: September 09, 2013, 01:29:07 am »
0

Well, I came up with an idea at the last minute, but I don't think it was particularly good.

In the future, if anyone wants help naming a card then I'd be happy to help through PMs.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #108 on: September 09, 2013, 12:00:49 pm »
0

So, question: if we have a card which is self-referrential (and don't read too much into this, I am typing up like 30 different cards for different expansions right now), how should we format that? Like,

"If this is the first time you played a Fool’s Gold this turn, this is worth $1, otherwise it’s worth $4."
Or
"If this is the first time you played a CARDNAME this turn, this is worth $1, otherwise it’s worth $4."
?

There are other situations (like the below the line of FG) where "this" is obviously correct - namely when it is the particular copy of a card you are worried about - but there are some which are not so clear.

Use the name you gave the card, not "CARDNAME".
Logged

XerxesPraelor

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1069
  • Respect: +364
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #109 on: September 09, 2013, 12:24:01 pm »
0

Is the deadline past?
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Logged

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2644
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3391
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #111 on: September 09, 2013, 01:54:22 pm »
+1

Quote
Palanquin
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. You may discard an Action card. If you do, +1 Card per $ it costs.

Didn't even get past the first one yet, OMG this is so ridiculously unbalanced. You just buy this and only this. Play Palanquin, discard Palanquin, get +1 Action +5 Cards??? You will be drawing your whole deck with like 3 of these. It's not even terribroken, it's just broken.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2644
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3391
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #112 on: September 09, 2013, 01:56:09 pm »
+1

Quote
Quagmire
Types: Victory
Worth 1 VP.

When you gain this, trash 3 cards from a Supply pile.

Cost?
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2707
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #113 on: September 09, 2013, 02:05:20 pm »
0

Hey, thanks for naming my card...
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

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2644
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3391
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #114 on: September 09, 2013, 02:08:10 pm »
+4

Quote
Quagmire
Types: Victory
Worth 1 VP.

When you gain this, trash 3 cards from a Supply pile.

Cost?

I assume the cost is low, though it has to be more than $2, or it's strictly superior to Estate.

Although, man, if this WERE cheap, it can really, really tip the game in favor of the first guy to get a Province.

Or actually, hang on, this is 1 VP.

Three gains of this ends the game. Assuming the other guy didn't get any VP, you win.

Yeah... bad, bad card. Unless you can't trash Provinces, or something.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #115 on: September 09, 2013, 03:05:42 pm »
0

Factory is also missing cost.
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
  • Respect: +2146
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #116 on: September 09, 2013, 03:11:32 pm »
0

Quote
Palanquin
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. You may discard an Action card. If you do, +1 Card per $ it costs.

This seems dangerously broken, as mentioned by Robz888.

Quote
Quagmire
Types: Victory
Cost: $3
Worth 1 VP.

When you gain this, trash 3 cards from a Supply pile.

Very crazy, not in a good way.  The first player to set up a triple-Workshop turn, or a double-Workshop with $3, or a $9 and 3 buy turn, just wins.

Quote
Trade Agreement
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+3 Cards.

While this is in play, when you gain a Trade Agreement, gain a card costing up to $5.

So these can just auto-pile?  I don't like that...it means that if you have $5 and a Trade Agreement in play at the right time, the game ends one pile early.  I mean I guess that's a pretty specific situation, but that might make it even weirder...do I empty the second pile, hoping my opponent doesn't have $5 and a Trade Agreement?  I don't really like it, but maybe it's not broken.

Quote
Vendor
Types: Action
Cost: $1
+1 Action

When you buy this, +2 Buys.

This seems like a dead card on most boards.  Trade off $1 for an extra buy and a dead card in your deck.  I doubt that that is almost ever worthwhile.  Obviously there are some cases where it is, but the odds that you get one of those cases while this is actually on the board seems really, really unlikely.

Quote
Factory
Types: Action – Reaction
+1 Action. You may discard a card that is not a Victory card. If you do, gain a copy of it.

When you gain a card, you may reveal this from your hand and put it onto your deck. If you do, put the gained card into your hand.

This needs a cost.  This is actually pretty interesting, and I think I like it.  I think I've seen the top half before, but the bottom half makes it feel a little more exciting.

Quote
Shoreline
Types: Victory
Cost: $6
Worth 4 VP.

When you gain this, +1 Buy.

This has problems with gaining not on your turn.  It should probably say "When you gain this during your turn, +1 Buy."

Quote
Travelling Salesman
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $5
Discard any number of Treasure cards from your hand. +2 Cards per card discarded.

When another player gains a Victory card, you may discard this. If you do, gain a card costing less than it.

Is "it" the Travelling Salesman, or the victory card that another player gained?  I would guess the latter.  I think I like this.  I thought it was strong at first glance but thinking about it a little more it seems reasonable.

Quote
Commander
Types: Victory
Cost: $5
Worth 2 VP

When you gain this, gain a Reinforcement card, putting it on top of your deck.
Setup: Add an extra Action Kingdom card pile costing $5 to the Supply. Cards from that pile are Reinforcement cards and cannot be bought.

Clarification: Unlike most Victory cards, there are always 10 copies of Commander in the Supply regardless of the number of players.

So the Reinforcement cards are in the supply and can be gained by other cards, just not bought.  I think I've seen this card or something very similar to it somewhere before, and I like it a lot.

Quote
Midnight Gathering
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. You my put your deck into your discard pile. Look through your discard pile and reveal an Action card from it; put it into your hand.

I think this is too strong, but I'm not sure.  It makes it very easy to make sure your engine goes off whenever this is in hand.  Actually this seems very similar to Band of Misfits.  It's whatever you need it to be at the time.  BoM can be any card costing $4 or less, while Midnight Gathering can be any card in your deck but not in your hand.  But most of the cards in your deck are in your deck because you want them in your deck (at least most of the cards that you would want to draw from your deck), so it almost seems like this has to be better than BoM.  I guess for BoM you don't have to take the time to buy the cards that you want, and you can't whiff by already having the card (but if you already have the card, then you most likely don't need a second copy of it right away), but it can whiff by having the supply pile empty.  I don't know, I guess there are a lot of small differences between Midnight Gathering and BoM but I would guess Midnight Gathering is better about 80% of the time.

Quote
Bargain
Types: Action
Cost: $4
You may trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it, a card costing exactly $2 more than it, and a card costing exactly $3 more than it. Discard down to 2 cards in hand.

When you gain this, each player (including you) may trash a card from his hand.

This sounds bonkers strong.  You trash Estates with it, gain a $3 and a $5, and a Bargain to trash a Copper from your hand.  Then the discarding down to 2 doesn't matter, and you've replaced a Copper and Estate in your deck with a $3, a $5, and another Bargain.  Granted, everyone else gets to trash too when you gain it.  It is interesting though.  I don't think that the discard down to 2 penalty really fits, maybe it would be good with some other penalty.  I'm also not sold on the on-gain effect.  It might be interesting if it gained Estates on-gain, like how Death Cart gains ruins on gain.  It gives you stuff that you normally wouldn't like, and probably overall you don't like, but if you collide it with your Bargain, you can make good use of it.  I'm not sure whether that would be a buff or nerf.

Quote
Shaman
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action. Name a card. Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Action card with that name. Put it into your hand and discard the rest.

When you gain this, each other player discards any number of cards from his hand then draws a card per card discarded.

This seems like a different way of doing what Midnight Gathering did, but cheaper and limited to action cards.  But the restriction to action cards probably doesn't make almost any difference, since it's really an engine card anyway.  Since I was worried that Midnight Gathering was too strong at $5, I really think this is too strong at $4.  The on-gain is a nerf, but I don't think it's big enough.

Quote
Construct
Types: Action
Cost: $3
Trash a card from your hand. Gain two cards each costing exactly $1 more than it.

When you gain this during your Action phase, +1 Card and +1 Action.

This is kind of interesting and could be a lot of fun.  Really not sure on the balance, I could see it being really weak or really strong or just right...

Quote
Missionary
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Victory card. Gain an Action or Treasure card costing up to the Victory card's cost, putting it onto your deck. Discard the revealed cards.

When you buy this, reveal a card from your hand. If that card costs $6 or less, gain a copy of it.

This is really swingy in games without good Estate trashing and really strong in games with good Estate trashing.  I would guess that it's actually pretty weak overall though, since by the time you want it, Gold-gaining is not spectacular.  So actually it's probably fine.  Not sure about the on-buy though.

Quote
Barn
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card. +1 Action. Discard a card. If you discarded a Victory or Curse card, gain a Treasure costing up to $4. Otherwise, +$1 and gain a Victory card costing up to $4. Put the gained card into your hand.

When you gain this, gain an Action card costing up to $4, putting it onto your deck.

It's worth noting that these can auto-pile with just one Highway or Bridge in play, and even top-deck themselves while doing it.

Quote
Courier (B)
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Action. +1 Buy.

When you discard this from play, if you bought no more than one card this turn, you may put this on top of your deck.

I think this is too weak.  Normally I won't want it on top of my deck, even if I have the chance to.  It's just a limited Pawn, or a Candlestick Maker without the coin token, that I can do several turns in a row.  Might be important in draw-to-X engines that have no other +buy, but that's kind of specific.  I don't know, not every card has to be a power card...

Quote
Sawmill
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Action. +1 Buy.

When you gain this, set it aside onto your Sawmill mat. At the start of each of your turns, you may put any number of cards from your mat into your hand.

Actually identical above-the-line text to the previous card.  I would guess this is even weaker just because of the higher cost, where it competes with Silver.  The below-the-line text is significantly better than Courier (B)'s below-the-line text, but I doubt it's worth it for $3 on most boards.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #117 on: September 09, 2013, 03:12:52 pm »
0

A few edits:

Quagmire now has a cost: $3! Sorry about that.

Factory also has a cost: $4. Apologies.

At the request of the author, I have changed Artefact's wording back such that when you buy it, it will eventually make its way into your discard pile without you actually ever gaining it.

I am currently talking to the author of Midnight Gathering about that card, which I changed because the original version lacked accountability (did not make you reveal the Action card you put into your hand to prove that it is indeed an Action card). It may change soon depending on how that resolves. I'll keep you posted.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 03:23:57 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1708
  • Respect: +1788
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #118 on: September 09, 2013, 03:14:15 pm »
+1

Quote
Palanquin
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. You may discard an Action card. If you do, +1 Card per $ it costs.

Didn't even get past the first one yet, OMG this is so ridiculously unbalanced. You just buy this and only this. Play Palanquin, discard Palanquin, get +1 Action +5 Cards??? You will be drawing your whole deck with like 3 of these. It's not even terribroken, it's just broken.

I was going to say "Strictly better than Apprentice" but then I would have to qualify it with "when there are no Potion cards in the kingdom" and also be prepared for all those edge cases where you actually want to trash a card instead of discarding it (Rats, etc.). So I'll just almost say it, instead.

Edit: misread. I agree with Robz, though.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 03:19:40 pm by Polk5440 »
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
  • Respect: +2146
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #119 on: September 09, 2013, 03:17:29 pm »
+1

Quote
Palanquin
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. You may discard an Action card. If you do, +1 Card per $ it costs.

Didn't even get past the first one yet, OMG this is so ridiculously unbalanced. You just buy this and only this. Play Palanquin, discard Palanquin, get +1 Action +5 Cards??? You will be drawing your whole deck with like 3 of these. It's not even terribroken, it's just broken.

I was going to say "Strictly better than Apprentice" but then I would have to qualify it with "when there are no Potion cards in the kingdom" and also be prepared for all those edge cases where you actually want to trash a card instead of discarding it (Rats, etc.). So I'll just almost say it, instead.
Apprentice doesn't have to trash action cards...
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1708
  • Respect: +1788
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #120 on: September 09, 2013, 03:19:02 pm »
0

Quote
Palanquin
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. You may discard an Action card. If you do, +1 Card per $ it costs.

Didn't even get past the first one yet, OMG this is so ridiculously unbalanced. You just buy this and only this. Play Palanquin, discard Palanquin, get +1 Action +5 Cards??? You will be drawing your whole deck with like 3 of these. It's not even terribroken, it's just broken.

I was going to say "Strictly better than Apprentice" but then I would have to qualify it with "when there are no Potion cards in the kingdom" and also be prepared for all those edge cases where you actually want to trash a card instead of discarding it (Rats, etc.). So I'll just almost say it, instead.
Apprentice doesn't have to trash action cards...

Oh, I totally missed this was restricted to Actions cards! Anyway, Robz's comment still holds.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #121 on: September 09, 2013, 03:22:25 pm »
0

Quote
Shaman
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action. Name a card. Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Action card with that name. Put it into your hand and discard the rest.

When you gain this, each other player discards any number of cards from his hand then draws a card per card discarded.

This seems like a different way of doing what Midnight Gathering did, but cheaper and limited to action cards.

Midnight Gathering is also limited to Action cards (for the time being).
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
  • Respect: +2146
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #122 on: September 09, 2013, 03:25:48 pm »
0

Quote
Shaman
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action. Name a card. Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Action card with that name. Put it into your hand and discard the rest.

When you gain this, each other player discards any number of cards from his hand then draws a card per card discarded.

This seems like a different way of doing what Midnight Gathering did, but cheaper and limited to action cards.

Midnight Gathering is also limited to Action cards (for the time being).
Oh, right.  I think I even took that into account while commenting on it, but then somehow forgot it when I got to Shaman.
Logged

andwilk

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 201
  • Respect: +152
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #123 on: September 09, 2013, 03:28:22 pm »
0

Quote
Palanquin
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. You may discard an Action card. If you do, +1 Card per $ it costs.

Didn't even get past the first one yet, OMG this is so ridiculously unbalanced. You just buy this and only this. Play Palanquin, discard Palanquin, get +1 Action +5 Cards??? You will be drawing your whole deck with like 3 of these. It's not even terribroken, it's just broken.


I was going to say "Strictly better than Apprentice" but then I would have to qualify it with "when there are no Potion cards in the kingdom" and also be prepared for all those edge cases where you actually want to trash a card instead of discarding it (Rats, etc.). So I'll just almost say it, instead.

Edit: misread. I agree with Robz, though.


To defend Palanquin a bit here... I don't see how it is broken, maybe a little overpowered.  Play Palanquin, discard Palanquin is like trying to line up Treasure Maps, not to mention the opportunity cost of not buying other $5-costers.  It's not as easy to use (early-game anyways) as Stables, for example, since you don't start with any actions in your deck.  It's a strong card for sure, but I think with a small nerf it would be an interesting drawing card.
Logged

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2644
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3391
    • View Profile
Re: Treasure Chest Design Contest — Card #2: Hinterlands
« Reply #124 on: September 09, 2013, 03:31:46 pm »
0

Quote
Palanquin
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. You may discard an Action card. If you do, +1 Card per $ it costs.

Didn't even get past the first one yet, OMG this is so ridiculously unbalanced. You just buy this and only this. Play Palanquin, discard Palanquin, get +1 Action +5 Cards??? You will be drawing your whole deck with like 3 of these. It's not even terribroken, it's just broken.


I was going to say "Strictly better than Apprentice" but then I would have to qualify it with "when there are no Potion cards in the kingdom" and also be prepared for all those edge cases where you actually want to trash a card instead of discarding it (Rats, etc.). So I'll just almost say it, instead.

Edit: misread. I agree with Robz, though.


To defend Palanquin a bit here... I don't see how it is broken, maybe a little overpowered.  Play Palanquin, discard Palanquin is like trying to line up Treasure Maps, not to mention the opportunity cost of not buying other $5-costers.  It's not as easy to use (early-game anyways) as Stables, for example, since you don't start with any actions in your deck.  It's a strong card for sure, but I think with a small nerf it would be an interesting drawing card.

Totally disagree. This will be a must-buy, and strategically uninteresting. Just keep buying this, and other actions if you can't afford this, and you will be drawing your deck in no time at all. It's much easier to line up then TMap, because the card itself draws cards even when they don't connect (presuming you have other actions). And the thing with TMap is, extra copies make it more likely that you connect once, but then you get rid of the primaries and probably won't connect again. Here, you will keep connecting over and over again.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 16  All
 

Page created in 2.622 seconds with 21 queries.