Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

Dominion» Forums » Variants

Subject: Card-Type Ideas rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Derek Whaley
New Zealand
Christchurch
flag msg tools
Darius I – 73rd Great Khan of the Illustrius Barbarian Horde, Duque San Lorenzo, Marquis de Feltón, Chief of the Zayante, Baron von Whaleyland, Lord Kennedy
badge
Arrgh!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Standing around at work today, I thought of a few new ideas for cards using a few new card types and combos. Here's what I thought up:

"Pick-Pocket"
TREASURE-ATTACK
Cost: 5
Value: *

All other players reveal a Treasure card from their hand or reveal a hand with no Treasure cards. * +1 Coin for each Coin revealed by other players. All other players discard revealed Treasure cards.


"Con Artist"
INTERRUPT (Black colored)
Cost: 5

Reveal during an opponent's Clean-up Phase. Before he has discarded his cards, choose one Treasure card from his played cards and place it on your discard pile.

"Depreciated Estate"
VICTORY-ATTACK
Cost: 5
Value: 0*

When you buy this card, place it in an opponent's discard pile. It and an Estate are reduced to 0 VP.


Sorry about the wording. I don't have Donald and Jay's eloquent consistency. In any case, what's the verdict? Are they too expensive? Too cheap? Too powerful? Too weak? Be brutal. Be honest. Enjoy!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roberta Yang
msg tools
Whaleyland wrote:
"Pick-Pocket"
TREASURE-ATTACK
Cost: 5
Value: *

All other players reveal a Treasure card from their hand or reveal a hand with no Treasure cards. * +1 Coin for each Coin revealed by other players. All other players discard revealed Treasure cards.

Scales badly for no good reason; contrast Tribute. Also, is ill-defined because it works based on the amount of "Coin" revealed - which makes sense when you're just playing with Coppers, Silvers, and Golds, but stops working when it hits a Philosopher's Stone and a Bank. Also,is grossly overpowered when played in multiples and can easily stun-lock a player.

EDIT: I didn't notice at first that this was a Treasure rather than an Action. Okay, now it's even more broken, since in 4-player games it's a cheap Gold with a super-Cutpurse attack tacked on, and it actually goes out of its way to demonstrate how badly it is designed. Forget Philosopher's Stone and Bank and Fool's Gold; simply revealing another Pick-Pocket (how is a Pick-Pocket a Treasure? This doesn't follow the usual naming scheme in any way) in response to a Pick-Pocket is already enough to raise the question of how much this is worth. Which is why effects are always based on number of Treasure/Victory cards and never on their total Coin/VP values.

Whaleyland wrote:
"Con Artist"
INTERRUPT (Black colored)
Cost: 5

Reveal during an opponent's Clean-up Phase. Before he has discarded his cards, choose one Treasure card from his played cards and place it on your discard pile.

So, um, it's a super-Thief that absolutely hits everyone's best Treasures with no risk. This is silliness. There also seems to be no particular reason for making this a new card type instead of a Reaction.

EDIT: It also comes with massive scaling problems, since in a four-player game this will steal 3 Silvers (or better) per round, while in a two-player game this will steal only one Treasure per round.

Whaleyland wrote:
"Depreciated Estate"
VICTORY-ATTACK
Cost: 5
Value: 0*

When you buy this card, place it in an opponent's discard pile. It and an Estate are reduced to 0 VP.

First of all, the point of making a card an "Attack" is to allow cards like Moat to react to it when it is played. This is never played, so the Attack type is pointless.

Second of all, loltargetedattacks.

Third of all, have a look at Ill-Gotten Gains from Hinterlands. This is basically that except worse in several ways (only one victim, victim can benefit from its high cost with trash-for-profit cards, victim benefits from its Victory type with cards like Scout and Crossroads that care, can't be used to rush for three piles, vastly inferior wording) for the same cost.


These really aren't very well-designed cards, in all honestly. They're all just badly-done retreads of existing cards (Pick-Pocket is a badly-designed Cutpurse, Con Artist is a badly-designed Thief, Depreciated Estate is a badly-designed Ill-Gotten Gains). I'd recommend taking a gander through this to avoid beginner mistakes in designing cards: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=699
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Staines
United Kingdom
Grimsby
Lincolnshire
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Pick pocket is almost certainly plus 3 coin in a three player game, with a decent attack attached. But it scales poorly with 2. Perhaps put the cost as 4/5/6 for 2/3/4+ players? I don't see why this shouldn't be done with cards if they do have a clearly different value with different numbers.

Con artist, reword it to any victory point card in his hand during the clean up phase otherwise you will only target action/victory cards of which there aren't many. I like it though and I think 5 is right, maybe 6

The depreciated estate is an odd one. It's basically very similar to a curse. It basically is a curse if you have any estates left at the end and it is value of 0 so the same as a curse. I think though that paying 5 coin to force another player to take a single curse is too much though. Paying 3 might work?

Edit: I forgot to add, I really like that con artist card, the pick pocket I like but it scales amazingly/terribly depending on your perspective as for the depreciated estate; I like the idea of the interrupt cards but that just seems a bit boring?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
D Stu
msg tools
mbmb
High Elf Andrew wrote:
Pick pocket is almost certainly plus 3 coin in a three player game, with a decent attack attached. But it scales poorly with 2. Perhaps put the cost as 4/5/6 for 2/3/4+ players? I don't see why this shouldn't be done with cards if they do have a clearly different value with different numbers.


"Almost certain" plus 3 coins + decent attack is no way balanced at $5. Look at the cards at $5 that might give you +$3. Mandarin comes with problems, Harvest is much more unreliable. And they both don't attack.

2 player is the only mode where you might start thinking if this is card is balanced. Obvious comparison is Cutpurse.
This cards negative is that it only gives you +$2 if you hit a Copper, but it is
a) a Treasure, and so easily stackable
b) might also hit higher treasures, especially considering a), and then it is a harder attack and benefits you more.

In two player the standard case (hitting Copper) might be a little better Cutpurse (works better with non-terminals), but as soon as you think about playing two or more of them it's getting much better. And with more players it get's much much to strong.

I would guess a "treasure version" of Cutpurse is already worth $5, without the ability to attack higher treasures and gaining more coins for you. Maybe even more...

Edit: The problem with the "treasure Cutpurse" is still that it is easily stackable, hitting players that still rely on Copper to get to $5 very hard.
Maybe one should, to also combine it with your idea, let it be worth $2 if it hits a Copper, and $0 or $1 if it doesn't). So that you don't want to load up with them too much, because eventually they might be worthless for you.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennison Milenkaya
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Every thing Salty said is pure gold. If you want new card types or combinations, who can fault you?

But Interrupt isn't a new card type, just a synonym for Reaction.

A Treasure-Attack, as mentioned, is easily played in multiples, so make certain that it has no cumulative effect or nothing to serious--unless you really want to turn games with it to hell. See Militia or Minion for examples of non-cumulative Attack effects. Perhaps:

$0 Treasure-Attack 2 All other players reveal [the top card of their deck] -or- [cards from the top of their deck until finding a Treasure card, discarding the rest]. If it is a Treasure card, that player must choose to trash it or discard it.

Not a terribly powerful Attack, as it is like other players using Loan (but you get the coin for playing it) and they may be happy to trash Coppers but it will often cycle beyond their good cards in the later part of the game or with a trimmed deck or else skip their good Treasure cards, which is a minor annoyance. Bulk hits from this card won't ruin a game. Actually, it might be a bit too advantageous but it is really cheap Silver! (Which, considering how easy it is to pick up free Silver, not a bad thing--I'm talking about you, Traders!)

A Victory-Attack is also interesting in concept but I'm not sure that there is much room to play in there that will produce a good card. Perhaps a Victory-Duration card works (but that would also require it to be an Action card ... for that matter, so too would a Victory-Attack, since you can't play Victory cards, how could it Attack?), if it is something like:

$6 Victory-Action-Duration 3bacon +1 Action. At the start of your next turn, discard this card.

(Why no Victory emblem icons, BBG? Is this game not vastly popular? C'mon! You have raw materials for Power Grid! But, who doesn't want bacon? Bacon will do for now.)

Basically, it is a Duchy-worthy Victory card that you won't draw twice in a row and can often miss a re-cycle. Pretty weak but not bad for just 1 coin more, 'eh?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roberta Yang
msg tools
FlatOnHisFace wrote:
Every thing Salty said is pure gold.

We need to stop going around agreeing with each other everywhere; we're starting to look like alt accounts. whistle

FlatOnHisFace wrote:
$6 Victory-Action-Duration 3bacon +1 Action. At the start of your next turn, discard this card.

Basically, it is a Duchy-worthy Victory card that you won't draw twice in a row and can often miss a re-cycle. Pretty weak but not bad for just 1 coin more, 'eh?

Not so keen on this part, though. It looks fine in terms of being balanced in terms of card strength for cost, but I don't really see it as adding anything to the game. Like, I guess it technically combos with cards like Library, but what new strategies is this really going to bring to the table that would be lost without it? It's still not a useful card in your hand, which means you'll take Gold over this until the Provinces start being bought (since this is still a bad card in your hand, just very slightly less bad than Duchy itself), and once you get to the buy-Duchy phase of the game (which is almost immediately after the Provinces start being bought), you obviously buy this over Duchy if you can afford it. I suppose it might persuade me to take this with exactly 6 or 7 Provinces left when I would have taken Gold otherwise, but that seems like an awfully narrow window.

And by the time it's worth buying something like this, will the slow cycling be all that useful? How likely are you to buy Duchy, reshuffle, go through your deck, get Duchy in the last hand of the next run, shuffle it back in during cleanup, and then draw that Duchy again before the game ends? And how often will that be what decides the game? This card is certainly better than Duchy, but not by very much.

Harem seems like a stronger implementation of a similar concept. With Harem, the fact that it's still a good card (Silver) in your hand, plus the fact that it provides fewer VP than Duchy, makes decisions more interesting. I'll definitely start buying Harems long before I would usually stop buying Golds (possibly even before the Provinces start to go), and I'll keep buying them for at least some time after I would normally start buying Duchies - but there is a point where I may be able to afford Harem but should take Duchy instead. It splits the usual decision of when to transition from Gold to Duchy into two smaller decisions, both of which are nontrivial. But this card just very, very slightly shifts the Gold to Duchy transition decision to very, very slightly earlier (it's weak enough that I'm not sure it would bias me by even a full turn!), and since it's worth as much VP as Duchy, there is no decision at all to transition from this to Duchy - just buy whichever you can afford.

Or compare Great Hall. It's another basic-Victory-card-for-one-extra-coin-with-Action-tacked-on-to-make-it-less-bad card, but instead of cycling slightly more slowly, Great Hall just makes itself invisible. I normally wouldn't have any interest in that either, but the thing is that Great Hall is cheap, which means you can feasibly pick it up to combo with the cards that support it (Scout, Ironworks, Conspirator, Scrying Pool, Throne Room, Crossroads...). Something like this doesn't have that advantage; who cares if it kinda combos with Library when it costs as much as Gold? It's too expensive to be worth going out of your way to put together cute combos like that.

It kind of reminds me of a card someone posted recently that was a 7-buy for a $3 Treasure that was worth 1VP at the end of the game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennison Milenkaya
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm not disagreeing with you again. Okay! I admit! I have an alt account! But seriously:

I know it isn't all that hot. But let's face it: Any card worth building a strategy around should be about acquiring the Victory cards or not sacrificing deck integrity. This isn't about acquiring a Victory card so much as it is a Victory card to acquire with all the merit of a Duchy but that it has slightly less detriment to deck integrity.

For that matter, the strategy that I see possible is going for a Duchy-esque card earlier than you would. You say that Duchies aren't too damaging because you pick them up late but in this case, you might not wait as long as you once did and I see that as adding immensely to the game; it isn't so much a race to consistently reach 8 coins before it peters out but a race to get to 8 coins well enough and 6 keeps you competitive even in the middle. There are some combo-potential uses but I know they are slight or corner-cases.

Great Halls are -so much better- with Scouts and I see this card idea as -so much better- with hand refillers (Library, Watchtower, Jacks) which already gives it more combo-potential than a very popular hybrid. It also counts toward Peddlers, Horns, etc.

Sometimes--just sometimes--you want 8-9 coins of Treasure cards in a deck and no more. And for decks like that, it is rare that you cannot buy a Province every round but certain Attacks or poor luck don't always allow that and this could be far more fetching than Gold or some extraneous card that doesn't help your completed engine. Perhaps that isn't a new strategy option but a way of improving or providing alternate paths to existing strategies.

Basically, I think of Great Halls and Islands as not so much adding new strategy to the game but offering less-damaging Victory card options. For a Victory card worth 3bacon, that "less-damaging" part needs to be noticed but not nearly as strong as Great Hall or Island's contribution to integrity. And it was a spring-board idea for contemplating a Victory-Duration card. It wasn't meant to be the best idea since this is someone else's idea thread and I'm trying to get the juices flowing more so than just mop up the mess that spills out.

As to the argument of "something that exists, slightly better, slightly more expensive, no-brainer decision" I totally agree about the Gold + Victory card not adding interesting decisions but for that matter, cards that do this kind of thing already exist: Woodcutter is decent in certain situations, but next to Festival, you'd never buy it when you had 5 coins so there is no decision here. And so what? Granted, those aren't always in the same set-up but Duchies are ever-present so this argument is applicable here and regarding the Gold +Victory card. Still, I see Harem as a very different approach and not really filling the same role, since it is of a different hybrid mix, it has several facets that just won't apply to this card and vice-versa.

But you are insightful and I cannot help but to accept that your rebuke is correct. I may disagree about whether it makes for an interesting card but the point about it being an obvious alternate-to-Duchy buy (except where Dukes are concerned or Duchesses, if anyone actually ever wanted Duchessess) does diminish its viability. Mostly, I see you putting up more of an argument against it just to prove we aren't the same person.
 
 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.