Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
19 Posts

Dominion» Forums » General

Subject: Take that! rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Allen Doum
United States
Orange County
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
A number of the proposed cards are Reactions that will effect the player who played the attack. (Giving them Curses, Trashing cards, etc.)

Since none of the existing cards do that, I wonder what the wider group of players thinks of this general idea.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Kudzma
United States
Millsboro
Delaware
flag msg tools
designer
People are...
badge
SPOCKED!!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AllenDoum wrote:
A number of the proposed cards are Reactions that will effect the player who played the attack. (Giving them Curses, Trashing cards, etc.)

Since none of the existing cards do that, I wonder what the wider group of players thinks of this general idea.


I'm all for it. Both of those players will spend so much time fighting amongst themselves that my deck will glide to the win!

Seriously, I think there should be more attacks and more reactions.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
◖▸ ⓒ ⓐ ⓛ ⓔ ◂◗
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
There probably could be more attacks/reactions, but I hope they don't overdo it. The game is more about deck and resource management than attacking and defending. The attacks in the base set seem to nicely complement the management dynamic without changing the nature of the game. My fear with a game like this is that expansions will get too complex and stray too far from what makes the base set so interesting. Of course, all I'd need to do in that case is stick with the base.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
AxonDomini
United States
Smithtown
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I actually not in favor of these reaction cards. I would never buy an attack card if there was a possibility it would hurt me. The current attack cards are costed and designed so that, at worst, they have no effect. Reaction cards that add a chance of harm would throw the balance out of whack.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Casadonte
United States
Media
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
badge
The compass always points to Terrapin.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think the problem is that the Moat does nothing but protect you, so any other reaction has to do something else. I thing the only 2 choices are to further reward the player just protected or do something against the attacker.

I have 2 Reaction cards in the works (one mine, and one from a friend) and both act against the attacker. Now that I know that there's a desire for non-attacker-related reactions, I'll start the juices working on it....
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Loc Nguyen
United States
Alexandria
Virginia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
what about this as a reaction: draw 1 card when attacked. (IE no protection like Moat)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew M
United States
New Haven
Connecticut
flag msg tools
admin
8/8 FREE, PROTECTED
badge
513ers Assemble!
Avatar
mb
jeffk wrote:
I actually not in favor of these reaction cards. I would never buy an attack card if there was a possibility it would hurt me. The current attack cards are costed and designed so that, at worst, they have no effect. Reaction cards that add a chance of harm would throw the balance out of whack.


I don't find that to be a compelling argument. I would never use a Chapel strategy if a Thief is in the mix. That doesn't mean the Thief card shouldn't exist.

-MMM
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allen Doum
United States
Orange County
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Joe Casadonte wrote:
I think the problem is that the Moat does nothing but protect you, so any other reaction has to do something else. I thing the only 2 choices are to further reward the player just protected or do something against the attacker.

I have 2 Reaction cards in the works (one mine, and one from a friend) and both act against the attacker. Now that I know that there's a desire for non-attacker-related reactions, I'll start the juices working on it....

The Moat also acts a an Action to draw 2 cards, making it a cheaper and less powerful Smithy even if there are no attack cards in the mix. Other reaction cards could protect you, but give you different benefits when used as an action, and cost different amounts.

One the things that concern me is that more active reaction cards might make attack cards completely undesirable.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
AxonDomini
United States
Smithtown
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Octavian wrote:
jeffk wrote:
I actually not in favor of these reaction cards. I would never buy an attack card if there was a possibility it would hurt me. The current attack cards are costed and designed so that, at worst, they have no effect. Reaction cards that add a chance of harm would throw the balance out of whack.


I don't find that to be a compelling argument. I would never use a Chapel strategy if a Thief is in the mix. That doesn't mean the Thief card shouldn't exist.

-MMM


The difference is that the the effects of these reaction cards would almost never come into play. If there are no attack cards in the set, they obviously won't happen. If there are attack cards in the set people probably won't buy the attack cards because they could just end up hurting the person who paid for them them, and thus the reaction effects STILL won't happen. That does not strike me as good design.

The chapel, in contrast, is useful when the thief isn't in the set. Even when the thief is in the set you can buy one early to just trash your estates and jump start your deck. You just can't use it to its full effect to dump all your coppers as well.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Casadonte
United States
Media
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
badge
The compass always points to Terrapin.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jeffk wrote:
If there are attack cards in the set people probably won't buy the attack cards because they could just end up hurting the person who paid for them them, and thus the reaction effects STILL won't happen. That does not strike me as good design.


That has not been the case in our group when playing with both of our new Reaction cards. Of course, we're just one group, but it hasn't been a problem for us. Quite the opposite, in fact; it's opened up a new avenue of playing (bluffing and counter-bluffing). Just this past weekend, in fact, we had a game with 3 attack cards and a new Reaction that hurt the attacker, and let me tell you that no one was shy about playing the Attack cards. The Reaction seemed quite well balanced, actually.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
K. Bailey
United States
Sacramento
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AllenDoum wrote:
One the things that concern me is that more active reaction cards might make attack cards completely undesirable.

Yeah I think that's a strong possibility. Attacks generally aren't good buys for their non-attack powers alone, so any good reaction has the possibility of reducing the value of all the attack cards into the "don't buy" zone.

Moat isn't very good. It's non-cumulative; having 5 Moats in hand is no better than having 1. The positive benefit of negating the attack is very small; when you Moat an attack, your relative gain is only vs. 3rd or 4th players who didn't Moat, and you're never gaining ground on the attacker. The Moat also walks a narrow line between passable on its own vs. a card you don't much want.

I think the big problem with take-that reaction powers is that at heart they are merely crappy attacks. If no one attacks you they're wasted. If they do attack you, you're only targeting one player. If you want to attack other players, why not just buy a real attack?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allen Doum
United States
Orange County
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The ultimate defense against attack cards: buy the whole stack yourself!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
AxonDomini
United States
Smithtown
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Joe Casadonte wrote:
jeffk wrote:
If there are attack cards in the set people probably won't buy the attack cards because they could just end up hurting the person who paid for them them, and thus the reaction effects STILL won't happen. That does not strike me as good design.


That has not been the case in our group when playing with both of our new Reaction cards. Of course, we're just one group, but it hasn't been a problem for us. Quite the opposite, in fact; it's opened up a new avenue of playing (bluffing and counter-bluffing). Just this past weekend, in fact, we had a game with 3 attack cards and a new Reaction that hurt the attacker, and let me tell you that no one was shy about playing the Attack cards. The Reaction seemed quite well balanced, actually.


Since it's a new card, I'm not surprised that everyone wanted to put it through its paces and have fun with it. The real test will be seeing if those who do not buy attack cards when the new reaction card is in play gain a noticeable advantage. I suspect they will. After all, which is more likely to strengthen your deck - 4 coin card that may end up hurting you or a 4 coin card that will only ever help you? The current attack cards were given costs based on an environment where they will either hurt your opponents or have no effect on them. Once they have a chance to actually hurt the person who played them, without some counterbalancing mechanism they instantly become too expensive. I would never pay 5 coins for a witch that might end up cursing ME.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bwian, just
United States
Longmont
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jeffk wrote:
After all, which is more likely to strengthen your deck - 4 coin card that may end up hurting you or a 4 coin card that will only ever help you? The current attack cards were given costs based on an environment where they will either hurt your opponents or have no effect on them. Once they have a chance to actually hurt the person who played them, without some counterbalancing mechanism they instantly become too expensive. I would never pay 5 coins for a witch that might end up cursing ME.

Surely a high enough cost on the reaction cards could be a sufficient counterbalancing mechanism? It's not like card option synergy doesn't change card value now: Moats and Smithys seem to me much more valuable if Villages are available than if they aren't.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
AxonDomini
United States
Smithtown
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bwian wrote:
jeffk wrote:
After all, which is more likely to strengthen your deck - 4 coin card that may end up hurting you or a 4 coin card that will only ever help you? The current attack cards were given costs based on an environment where they will either hurt your opponents or have no effect on them. Once they have a chance to actually hurt the person who played them, without some counterbalancing mechanism they instantly become too expensive. I would never pay 5 coins for a witch that might end up cursing ME.

Surely a high enough cost on the reaction cards could be a sufficient counterbalancing mechanism? It's not like card option synergy doesn't change card value now: Moats and Smithys seem to me much more valuable if Villages are available than if they aren't.


I don't know if simply increasing the cost of the reaction cards is the answer. If they're too high for people to buy them, then they're irrelevant. If they're priced low enough for people to buy, people won't buy attack cards, again making them irrelevant.

Take, for example, the militia. +2 coins and your opponents must discard down to 3 cards. Not too bad. Now, suppose the woodcutter is also in play. Same cost (3 coins), also gives you +2 coins and it gives you an additional buy. Without any reaction cards in play, both are about the same in terms of utility. The +2 coins is always nice. The +1 buy for the woodcutter is sometimes useful, sometimes not. Your opponents' forced discard for the militia is sometimes useful, sometimes not (like when they have 2 VP cards in hand.) Add in a moat and the woodcutter becomes marginally more valuable since the moat has no effect on its +1 buy, but the militia still has a decent chance of doing some damage to your opponent and your deck may not really need additional buys to work well.

Now replace the moat with a reaction card that either gives the player of an attack card a curse or forces them to trash the attack card. It would be the same as adding the text "Roll a die. If the the result is 2 or lower you must trash this card (or take a curse card, or whatever)" to any attack card in play. Would you buy that card? I wouldn't. If I have eight cards to choose from that will never directly hurt me, why would I ever buy one that might? I would buy the woodcutter every single time, and if no woodcutter was available I would buy a silver. Instead of buying thieves, spies or bureaucrats I would buy any other 4 cost card, every time. Witches would be ignored in favor of markets, festivals, etc. etc.

Are there possible fixes? Sure. These reaction cards could lower the cost of all attack cards in play (which would more directly address the real problem as opposed to raising the cost of the reaction cards). Or, they could impose a cost on the person playing the reaction card each time they choose to play it as a reaction. I'm sure others could come up with more suggestions. The bottom line is that I think these types of reaction cards throw the balance of the game significantly out of whack if they're just thrown into the mix without additional adjustments. So much so that they would effectively nullify all of the attack cards, and in so doing nullify themselves.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bwian, just
United States
Longmont
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jeffk wrote:
Now replace the moat with a reaction card that either gives the player of an attack card a curse or forces them to trash the attack card. It would be the same as adding the text "Roll a die. If the the result is 2 or lower you must trash this card (or take a curse card, or whatever)" to any attack card in play. Would you buy that card? I wouldn't.

Why not? The target number on that die roll is a known quantity: I know how many reaction cards have been pulled, so I know when it isn't safe to play attacks any more. I know that these reaction cards are going to suffer from free-rider problems: why should you buy an expensive reaction card, when you get almost as much (or exactly as much, depending on card text) benefit from one of the other players buying it? I also get to force choices on my opponents: if I take a Militia instead of a Woodcutter, does that force you to take a Castle Wall (hypothetical reaction card) instead of a Market? That could certainly be worth it, depending on exactly how Castle Wall is worded.

jeffk wrote:
I don't know if simply increasing the cost of the reaction cards is the answer. If they're too high for people to buy them, then they're irrelevant. If they're priced low enough for people to buy, people won't buy attack cards, again making them irrelevant.

Well, if they can be priced too high or too low, then obviously there must be some price that is just right: call it the Goldilocks Principle . The exact market price would vary depending on what other cards are available, but I think that's already true for other cards. The only question is if the variation is too much, depending on exact combinations: that would require changing costs of other cards, or abandoning the "random combination" paradigm that some like to use.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
AxonDomini
United States
Smithtown
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bwian wrote:
jeffk wrote:
Now replace the moat with a reaction card that either gives the player of an attack card a curse or forces them to trash the attack card. It would be the same as adding the text "Roll a die. If the the result is 2 or lower you must trash this card (or take a curse card, or whatever)" to any attack card in play. Would you buy that card? I wouldn't.

Why not?


Because I can buy other cards that don't have any such drawbacks for the same price. I understand your reasoning above - I just don't agree with it. Paying 3 coins for a militia that may or not not hurt my opponent is one thing. Paying 3 coins for a militia that may or may not hurt ME is another thing altogether.

jeffk wrote:
Quote:
I don't know if simply increasing the cost of the reaction cards is the answer. If they're too high for people to buy them, then they're irrelevant. If they're priced low enough for people to buy, people won't buy attack cards, again making them irrelevant.

Well, if they can be priced too high or too low, then obviously there must be some price that is just right


I never talked about them being priced too low, only low enough for people to buy. That's not the same thing. Once they become feasible purchases, attack cards are no longer worth buying because they now come with an inherent risk that other cards of the same cost don't share.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Pakpreo
United States
Cambridge
MA - Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Something that I would like to see is a 3 or 2 cost card (haven't worked it out in my head that) that goes something like this.

Reaction:
Reveal this card to prevent an attack. You may trash this card and put a gold into your discard.

Action:

1+ card +1 buy
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1603-1714
United States
Georgia
flag msg tools
badge
Now I can add text to my avatar? Sweet! How do I do it?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Rappak wrote:
Something that I would like to see is a 3 or 2 cost card (haven't worked it out in my head that) that goes something like this.

Reaction:
Reveal this card to prevent an attack. You may trash this card and put a gold into your discard.

Action:

1+ card +1 buy

That's the kind of card I expect we'll see and it's the kind I'd prefer. Reaction cards that provide different actions than the moats +2 cards. Like a reaction card that block attacks but can be used to give +2 actions, or one that gives +1 action +1 card, or one that gives +1 action +1 coin. Another one or two groups of reaction cards will make it more likely that attack and reaction cards will be randomly drawn in a game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.