Cactus Game Design Message Boards

I don't have any at the time BUT I do NOT want to see STAPLE (Has to be in everyone's deck) doms made. E.g. Son Of God. I would like to see some like doubt but a lil more beefed up.

Immoral Actions = No.
Thats a cbn battle winner, like christian martyr but better.

Breath of life isn't op'd but I'd like it to be
"Place all hero's from potter's field into territory. You may band 3 of these into battle for this turn."

imo NO more should be printed and from what ive seen no more will be printed any time soon but if one is it will be on the doubt scale and not a deck staple.

then we'd need more cbn art killers. Once you remove doms artifacts become super powered.

Nacho cheese actualy solidifies perty quick :-p

Redemption would not  have a turn 4 clock if there were no doms.

More Doms? 

I think definitely yes if certain other cards were made.  I've said this before but I think it still should be done.  Make multiple anti-Dom cards that realistically could fit with various deck types.  Now I DON'T mean the current protect from Dom cards.  I mean cards that target and strongly punish the opponent for using Doms.  Cards that would make a player think "the opponent might be playing with these cards so maybe I shouldn't use any Doms or if I do then not very many". 


Cards like:

placer enhancement
"Place in your territory.  Every time an opponent plays a Dominant discard the top 6 cards of their deck."

Artifact or curse
"Every time an opponent plays a Dominant search your discard pile for 3 evil cards except Dominants and place them in your territory or battle."

evil character
"Look at opponent's hand and remove a Dominant from the game to discard three cards in their territory or set-aside area."

evil enhancement
"Look at opponent's deck.  For every Dominant found in there discard a card from opponent's hand."


There are many other possibilities but powerful counter cards like these would allow for making more powerful Doms.

I think the game would be alot more interesting if there were no Doms to begin with.

I like having Doms but I would also like to see the game without them.  Did people like the Team rule of only being able to play one copy as a team and forfeiting the game if you played a second (I didn't)?  But can you really allow the playing of 2 per team?  This is why I've been pushing for having no Doms in Team play.  This would make the category more unique and allow an outlet for all the people that hate Doms.

Mr. Gawyn, those cards seem far, far too powerful.

Mr. Gawyn, those cards seem far, far too powerful.

Really?  If you make them weak, what's the point?  Doms are already inherently VERY powerful (so much that many people think they shouldn't exist) not to mention making more powerful Doms.  Almost every time someone suggests making a new powerful Dom, everyone shoots it down because its too much and we don't want more staple cards. so -

How do you open up the possibility to make more really cool, useful, Doms (not like Doubt) without having some very powerful counters to it? 
How do you make the average person think twice about using Doms so you can broaden the game and have more variety in strategic deck building?  (we could make none of the Doms be staple cards)

The current anti-Dom protect cards are either very limited or relatively easy to counter.  I don't want to have really strong protect cards that make it so you can't use Doms.  These ideas don't stop the player from using them but instead add a heavy cost for including them in your deck.  I don't see a light cost deterring anyone from using Doms.

As far as being too powerful, those card ideas would do almost nothing if my opponent doesn't use Doms.
You could have other weaker anti-Doms but they would have to have additional abilities to make them worthwhile.
These ideas were just off the top of my head and could be adjusted. 
The instead idea could help with new Doms but of course does nothing for the already existing ones.

I don't like how no one likes doubt. We keep saying, let's make doms but not staple, there it is, but then we all still think that it's worthless and does nothing. It seems everyone does want staple, but not to see them in other poeple's hand. So I say, let's make more doms like doubt!

I love doubt. It is awesome.

Amen to that RR. The only reason not many people use doubt is because every one plays T1 2 player, while in Multi Doubt is a beast.

We definitely do not need a dominant that discards fortresses, now that RoA is out. There needs to be a balance, and if there was a dominant to discard forts it would be in every deck and forts would become completely useless; that I don't like, especially with the varied and interesting themed things that the new RoA forts do.

I'd do three, You d/c 8 to stop a ls rescue. I'm thinking a fort<a ls by quite a bit.

If Cactus holds true to form, they'll print one new Dominant in each major (read: booster) expansion.  My personal opinion is that they should not be game-changers, however, the problem is that if they're not the most awesome dominants in the history of ever, they are dismissed as crummy or useless by some/most players (see also: Doubt, Glory).  Honestly, I end up using these Dominants as often or more than some of the "better" ones around (HT, Guardian, sometimes DoN).

DoN is probably in >90% of top decks.  Doubt is probably in <10% of top decks.  I think it would be good to make dominants cards that would be in about 40% of top decks.

So they need to be 4 times better than Doubt and half as good as DoN   Doubt would be in 40% of decks if it weren't limited to playing in the territory and playing only orange enhancements.  If Doubt could EITHER be played into battle, OR could be of a brigade of your choice, then it would be great.  If it were both of those things, then it would be in >90% of decks and would be bad in the opposite direction.

I agree with your assessment of how Doubt might've been in more decks. I agree also that new dominants should be in that middle power level.

Now go ahead and propose ideas for them that don't involve discarding fortresses.

Rebuild - Good Dominant
Discard a Fortress in your territory to search your deck or discard pile for a Fortress of the same alignment and put it in play.
Isaiah 9:10
"The bricks have fallen down, but we will rebuild with dressed stone; the fig trees have been felled, but we will replace them with cedars."

I like this idea, but I suspect that it would be in <10% of top T1 decks.  I don't think people would put a fortress in their T1 deck that they didn't really need, in which case they wouldn't want to discard it.

It might show up in T2 decks though which might have multiple copies of a few fortresses.  You could discard one in play when you had the other in your hand, then put the one in your hand down with the new one that you got to search for in your deck.

Overall, I don't think this is good enough to be a dominant.

It might be nice in conjunction with Nehemiah/Eliashib, but yes, I get the joke.

At least no one's brought up the Buckler dominant yet.

Why would the Lord strike down the righteous? And drop the "regardless" before Scott or Matt B see it.

Execution
Evil Dominant
-X=number of cards chosen opponent has drawn since draw phase-
"Chose an opponent. Discard X cards from his hand to Discard up to X good cards not in battle."

Perhaps if it were worded:
"Selected opponent must discard X cards from hand and X of his good cards in play."