2nd Edition Only?

[Cave-O-Sapien]

I've been a little out of the loop. I didn't even realize until a few weeks ago that there were 2nd edition cards.

Are the 1st edition cards gone from Dominion Online, never to be played with again?

[Watno]

That is indeed the current plan.

[Philothea]

I would like to see the retired cards return eventually. Players could opt out of playing with them. I would pay for retired cards, like I paid for Promos on MF.

I could see leaving them out of tournaments.

In real life, no one is going to throw away all their retired cards and never play them again. They will add the new ones in and play games with everything in the mix.

I'd also like to see fan expansions but I'm resigned to that not happening. Retired cards, though. Once the dust settles here and all features are implemented I'd really like to see retired cards come back.

[gkrieg]

I would like to see the retired cards return eventually. Players could opt out of playing with them. I would pay for retired cards, like I paid for Promos on MF.

I could see leaving them out of tournaments.

In real life, no one is going to throw away all their retired cards and never play them again. They will add the new ones in and play games with everything in the mix.

I'd also like to see fan expansions but I'm resigned to that not happening. Retired cards, though. Once the dust settles here and all features are implemented I'd really like to see retired cards come back.

I'm just curious, which of the old cards do you miss?

[JW]

Even before these 12 cards were removed, I played with only two of them IRL. There are more interesting and stronger cards, and once you own several sets there was already plenty of variety without them. The average kingdom is improved by not using the removed cards.

[Philothea]

I'm just curious, which of the old cards do you miss?

Tribute I will miss the most. Also Sabateur, Secret Chamber. Maybe even Spy a little.

[LastFootnote]

In real life, no one is going to throw away all their retired cards and never play them again. They will add the new ones in and play games with everything in the mix.

I will never play with the retired cards again. I didn't literally throw them away, but they have been removed from my collection. They make games Dominion worse, and I for one am glad they're not in the new implementation.

[Cave-O-Sapien]

In real life, no one is going to throw away all their retired cards and never play them again. They will add the new ones in and play games with everything in the mix.

I will never play with the retired cards again. I didn't literally throw them away, but they have been removed from my collection. They make games Dominion worse, and I for one am glad they're not in the new implementation.

I was surprised that Woodcutter was removed. So many cards in the base set are instrumental for teaching core concepts of the game, and that one very simply introduces players to the value of an extra buy.

[Watno]

well, so does Market.

[Ranna156]

I was surprised that Woodcutter was removed. So many cards in the base set are instrumental for teaching core concepts of the game, and that one very simply introduces players to the value of an extra buy.

I was too. I usually had my decks set up random (on MF I had them all...guess i do here now too since i bought empires) and i don't know how many times that card would show up and be the only extra buy on a board. Not necessarily a card I would choose in a premeditated deck but i didn't like that it was retired.

and @Watno the market is different because it also gives you a plus one card, +1 action, +1 coin as well as a +1 buy. The Woodcutter was different and could teach you a lot about buying it early as well...because if you wait too long and have a huge spending power, it is rare that someone wants to pay 3 coins for a card...or was it 4...whatever. I liked that card and used it. Chancellor on the other hand...i don't think i have ever once bought that card...

The other card i have had a lot of fun with and was a great teaching tool was the thief. Takes a while to learn that it isn't a card you might want to buy at the beginning of a game (unless you are going for the gardens) or even at all concerning certain decks...but it could also be a spectacularly awesome card at certain times and in certain decks.

[allanfieldhouse]

In real life, no one is going to throw away all their retired cards and never play them again. They will add the new ones in and play games with everything in the mix.

I removed all but one or two of them -- even before/without getting the update packs. Most of them simply make the game less fun than replacing it with any random card that still exists. A lot of them have some cool niche cases, but in general they just suck.

[ElisabetK]

Actually, I really liked Woodcutter in some situations - if you are going for a big cheap garden deck it was a good buy. Also Thief: when you see opponents buying Mines or getting gold-generating cards it can pay off, especially with Throne Room. But then I'm a base set player for the most part, online and IRL. Maybe I'd play better without those cards on the table though!

[gkrieg]

Actually, I really liked Woodcutter in some situations - if you are going for a big cheap garden deck it was a good buy. Also Thief: when you see opponents buying Mines or getting gold-generating cards it can pay off, especially with Throne Room. But then I'm a base set player for the most part, online and IRL. Maybe I'd play better without those cards on the table though!

Well I don't feel like you can complain about thief.  Bandit has the exact same effect, except it is like you always rob a gold (for 2-player), and it doesn't trash your opponent's coppers, which was the other major downside to thief.

[Ranna156]

Actually, I really liked Woodcutter in some situations - if you are going for a big cheap garden deck it was a good buy. Also Thief: when you see opponents buying Mines or getting gold-generating cards it can pay off, especially with Throne Room. But then I'm a base set player for the most part, online and IRL. Maybe I'd play better without those cards on the table though!

Well I don't feel like you can complain about thief.  Bandit has the exact same effect, except it is like you always rob a gold (for 2-player), and it doesn't trash your opponent's coppers, which was the other major downside to thief.

if you play with platinum and colonies though you can only ever get a gold...so i disagree on there being reasons to complain about thief. Also, isn't bandit more expensive. I can't remember...

[ElisabetK]

It looks like Bandit is better most of time, especially in two player games, but more complicated, and less interactive. I liked the straightforwardness of Thief. It was in one of the first games I played, I think, and a good introduction to player interaction. Somehow it's different when another player gets YOUR gold. Moat started looking better right about then.

[LastFootnote]

It looks like Bandit is better most of time, especially in two player games, but more complicated, and less interactive. I liked the straightforwardness of Thief. It was in one of the first games I played, I think, and a good introduction to player interaction. Somehow it's different when another player gets YOUR gold. Moat started looking better right about then.

It is possible that it only seems to you like Thief is less complicated because you're used to it? Bandit is fewer words, and I think it's quite a bit simpler.

[MVoltaire]

After finding out that 7 cards from both Base and Seaside were going to be removed, we set up a kingdom with 10 out of these 14 cards and it was fun. In the right (bad) kingdom they can be useful. ;)

I find the argument that many people actually don't own the second edition (and might never) and want to play the same game online and offline quite appealing. People who don't want to play with the first edition cards could just ban them from their games as an option in settings.

[werothegreat]

I find the argument that many people actually don't own the second edition (and might never) and want to play the same game online and offline quite appealing. People who don't want to play with the first edition cards could just ban them from their games as an option in settings.

Or, when they play with the replacement cards online and realize how much better they are than the crap that was removed, they'll go out and buy the second edition. :)

[Ranna156]

in referencing the bandit and the thief, i think they are two different cards and that one isn't necessarily better than the other. They both can come in handy at different times and they both have their downside. Again, it is a matter of the deck and number of people playing etc. I just think we should have the option of playing with them like we would with a real life deck if one had the original.

[MrCochese]

Thief is a very weak card. Though Bandit costs one more and is still a terminal action, that is well compensated by the fact that you always get a gold, and can't trash all of your opponent's coppers for them. Thief-to-Bandit is pretty much a straight upgrade.

[allanfieldhouse]

in referencing the bandit and the thief, i think they are two different cards and that one isn't necessarily better than the other. They both can come in handy at different times and they both have their downside.

There are some very specific situations where Thief is good. 4 player Gardens games. Stealing Counterfeit or Platinum from a trashed down deck. The problem is that these situations are just super rare. In a typical deck, an early Thief literally helps your opponent more than hurting them (even if you trash some golds eventually). In almost any normal deck, you would be better off just buying a Silver instead of the Thief.

Bandit, on the other hand is a really good card in any sort of kingdom where you want your money to come from treasure cards. It simultaneously gives you a high-value treasure (unconditionally) while also attacking your opponent's high value treasures.

So yes, the cards are different. But Bandit is way way better. There just isn't any argument between the two cards.

[Ranna156]

in referencing the bandit and the thief, i think they are two different cards and that one isn't necessarily better than the other. They both can come in handy at different times and they both have their downside.

There are some very specific situations where Thief is good. 4 player Gardens games. Stealing Counterfeit or Platinum from a trashed down deck. The problem is that these situations are just super rare. In a typical deck, an early Thief literally helps your opponent more than hurting them (even if you trash some golds eventually). In almost any normal deck, you would be better off just buying a Silver instead of the Thief.

Bandit, on the other hand is a really good card in any sort of kingdom where you want your money to come from treasure cards. It simultaneously gives you a high-value treasure (unconditionally) while also attacking your opponent's high value treasures.

So yes, the cards are different. But Bandit is way way better. There just isn't any argument between the two cards.

I don't think there was an argument about which is better. They are different. The discussion is really about whether or not we should have the option to play with the first edition and i think we should. Furthermore, there is already a very similar card to bandit. It is called the Soothsayer...they even cost the same amount. I didn't even use the thief all that much, but when i did use it, it was usually effective and i think we should have the option to use it.

[LastFootnote]

in referencing the bandit and the thief, i think they are two different cards and that one isn't necessarily better than the other. They both can come in handy at different times and they both have their downside.

There are some very specific situations where Thief is good. 4 player Gardens games. Stealing Counterfeit or Platinum from a trashed down deck. The problem is that these situations are just super rare. In a typical deck, an early Thief literally helps your opponent more than hurting them (even if you trash some golds eventually). In almost any normal deck, you would be better off just buying a Silver instead of the Thief.

Bandit, on the other hand is a really good card in any sort of kingdom where you want your money to come from treasure cards. It simultaneously gives you a high-value treasure (unconditionally) while also attacking your opponent's high value treasures.

So yes, the cards are different. But Bandit is way way better. There just isn't any argument between the two cards.

I don't think there was an argument about which is better. They are different. The discussion is really about whether or not we should have the option to play with the first edition and i think we should. Furthermore, there is already a very similar card to bandit. It is called the Soothsayer...they even cost the same amount. I didn't even use the thief all that much, but when i did use it, it was usually effective and i think we should have the option to use it.

I have no problem with Shuffle iT implementing the 1st edition cards, with the limitation that they only be used in pre-created tables (not automatch) where the person making the table specifically selects those cards for use. But implementing those cards has got to be a bottom priority. Features that make games better are much more important than a bunch of cards that (usually) make games worse.

[Polk5440]

But implementing those cards has got to be a bottom priority. Features that make games better are much more important than a bunch of cards that (usually) make games worse.

Exactly. It's nice to think they can be programmed up at a later date relatively easily as nostalgic promo cards or rewards or something, but this has got to be last on the list of things to do.

[Donald X.]

I have no problem with Shuffle iT implementing the 1st edition cards, with the limitation that they only be used in pre-created tables (not automatch) where the person making the table specifically selects those cards for use. But implementing those cards has got to be a bottom priority. Features that make games better are much more important than a bunch of cards that (usually) make games worse.

Agreed.

The 1E cards that were replaced, were replaced because it would make the game better. Adding them back in makes the game worse. It is great that they are not in the online version.

I can understand some players missing whatever pet cards though. I don't mind if they're someday added. But it would be a super-low priority and thus not happen for oh a year or two. And it would be important to not have the cards randomly show up in games - because they would be showing up in place of better cards.

[Ranna156]

I have no problem with Shuffle iT implementing the 1st edition cards, with the limitation that they only be used in pre-created tables (not automatch) where the person making the table specifically selects those cards for use. But implementing those cards has got to be a bottom priority. Features that make games better are much more important than a bunch of cards that (usually) make games worse.

Agreed.

The 1E cards that were replaced, were replaced because it would make the game better. Adding them back in makes the game worse. It is great that they are not in the online version.

I can understand some players missing whatever pet cards though. I don't mind if they're someday added. But it would be a super-low priority and thus not happen for oh a year or two. And it would be important to not have the cards randomly show up in games - because they would be showing up in place of better cards.

if and when they ever show up, I like the idea of them sort of being their own kingdom like the promos. So you could select it or not select them and still set a random deck that could include them if you wanted.

LOL i don't have any pet cards. There are a few that i did use on occasion during a certain kind of board but i hated saboteur and wish you would have kicked the mountebank to the curb as well. but that speaks more of my playing style rather than how good/bad a card is. I rarely buy attacks unless they do something good for me...like soothsayer.

[shedletsky]

Another vote here to make the 1st edition cards that got cut into promos (or separate pseudoset is fine too, maybe even better).

:D

[allanfieldhouse]

Promos seems like the best way to go. A cool way to introduce them would be to give them out as rewards for various things. Win a tournament/league? You get 1st edition cards! Get some achievement (play a Bandit 20 times in one game)? You get Thief. There are a ton of different ways they could be given out. Obviously, they could just be sold as well.

In any case, the 1st edition cards should never be used unless they're specifically selected for inclusion at a table.

[Jacob Marley]

Promos seems like the best way to go. A cool way to introduce them would be to give them out as rewards for various things. Win a tournament/league? You get 1st edition cards! Get some achievement (play a Bandit 20 times in one game)? You get Thief. There are a ton of different ways they could be given out. Obviously, they could just be sold as well.

In any case, the 1st edition cards should never be used unless they're specifically selected for inclusion at a table.

I really don't like this idea.  You want to "reward" someone by giving them something that is worse than what they have already?  For an experienced player, this is just a let down, for a newbie, it might make them think these are actually good cards.

I'm ok with having the first edition cards available so long as implementing them doesn't take time away from something actually important, but then they should only be available from a table someone creates, and the table marked that those cards are included.  They should never appear in automatch games.