On Vacation

[sinful sequoia]

Whenever another Joker doesn't trigger during or after playing a hand, add chips equal to double its sell value to this joker.

[somber lantern]

this seems way too convoluted

[sinful sequoia]

How? If a joker does nothing when you play a hand it gives this chips

So utility jokers this benefits from

[somber lantern]

a joker that's conditional on something else not triggering, which then scales chips on itself for 2x it's own sell value.
that's a lot for one joker to do. if it was half as convoluted, I wouldn't have that problem with it.
I.e "when another joker fails to trigger, this joker gains 'x' chips" or "this joker gains chips equal to double it's sell value"

also it scales far too quick; for EVERY joker that doesn't trigger, per hand, you scale DOUBLE its sell value in chips? that's a lot of chips.

[sinful sequoia]

Not really? You'd have to have a lot of utility jokers which would hurt your scoring.

[sinful sequoia]

And this I simply just disagree with.

[shadow dawn]

This feels too complex and I don’t get why it’s sell value specifically

[sinful sequoia]

I just don't understand how it's complex. If the joker does nothing -> gain chips

[shadow dawn]

Cause it’s too reliant on other jokers, basically what Lilo said

[somber lantern]

"double its sell value" let's say the sell value is $4 (this feels like a rare/uncommon in complexity)
this joker gains 8 chips whenever any other joker doesn't trigger

[somber lantern]

it's also about the sell value part. why does it need to be double scaling

[sinful sequoia]

I thought it'd scale to slowly to be worth it

[shadow dawn]

Yeah this doesn’t need random gift card synergy for no reason

[sinful sequoia]

And this synergies with utility jokers, but if you have too many utility jokers your score is going to suffer

[somber lantern]

even if it was "this joker gains +3 chips whenever any other Joker that can trigger, doesn't" would be very useful

[somber lantern]

It shouldn't work on passives imo

[sinful sequoia]

Wee joker gives you 8 chips for each scored 2

[somber lantern]

a specific rank, and it's scoring.
this is much more versatile than wee

[sinful sequoia]

If it doesn't work on passive then it would be way to niche

[somber lantern]

absolutely not

the vast majority of jokers are conditional / non-passive

[sinful sequoia]

So if we went with your tweaks it'd be

"Whenever another Joker doesn't trigger during a hand, add 3 chips to this joker. Does not trigger on passives" correct?

[somber lantern]

there are 29 jokers that aren't compatible with blueprint/brainstorm (some of these arent passive, so it's not a completely fair example)
but even in an extreme case, this works with 121/150 of the current joker roster

[sinful sequoia]

Except generally speaking the game doesn't recognize "passives" as triggering during hand.

[somber lantern]

if the effect is compatible, then it can't be a passive

which, to me, means it "triggers" at some point

[sinful sequoia]

What are you talking about? There are more than 121 jokers that trigger during a hand?

Not 121

The other number

150 - 121 my brain slow right now

[somber lantern]

29

[sinful sequoia]

Yes

Am tired need sleep

But just woke up so I cant

But my point is there are more than 29 jokers that trigger during a hand

[somber lantern]

29 jokers are incompatible with BS/BP. Some of these can trigger during a hand, such as Midas and 6th Sense,

[sinful sequoia]

Wait why are we bringing BS and BP into this though?

[somber lantern]

that was not my point at all. I'm saying that 29/150 aren't compatible, and passive effects are never compatible, so EVEN IF all incompatible jokers were passive effects; there would still be 121/150 jokers that "trigger"

[sinful sequoia]

So only 29 that would affect this joker?

[somber lantern]

what

I'm saying if all 29 DO NOT TRIGGER AND CAN NOT TRIGGER so they would never scale this joker

[sinful sequoia]

I think we are on different pages here. I'm talking about how many jokers would scale this joker

Like I'm fine with it being 3 chips for each untriggered joker

But it should count passive abilities as well

Because in the games eyes, it doesn't get "triggered"

Otherwise people use it and look at a joker that doesn't trigger and don't get the chips and ask, "why is this thing not working?"

Cause jokers have a very clear visual indication of when they trigger

[somber lantern]

it should only include effects that are capable of triggering because including passive effects doesn’t make sense since they can never fail to trigger; they simply don’t activate at all. having them alongside triggerable effects makes the interaction with a joker ‘not triggering’ feel inconsistent

[sinful sequoia]

That just makes this more convoluted which I thought you were against?

[sinful sequoia]

Also like I said, jokers have a clear indication of when they trigger. So it would be easy for someone to know whether or not it would affect this joker or not

[somber lantern]

I was against the joker doing too much. it being logically consistent isn't it being more convoluted. take matador for example. it's convoluted because it's not logically consistent, if it was logically consistent it would less convoluted.

[sinful sequoia]

I don't agree that this is logically consistent

If I am playing the game. When I see a joker do the little trigger effect that they do when they trigger. I, as a player, would think "hey this joker wouldn't scale On Vacation" and if it didn't do that animation, I would logically think, "hey this joker would scale On Vacation,"

Not including passive which do not trigger and as such do not have the animation of a triggering joker would make it feel inconsistent.

Also from a coding standpoint point, jokers do not fail to trigger, they either do trigger or they do not. The game can't tell the difference between a joker that can trigger but doesn't vs a joker that just doesn't trigger at all.

[somber lantern]

it can actually

if the joker has a condition to trigger and does not meet that condition, then the game can recognise that as "failing" to trigger.

blackboard is basically just coded to check if it fails, not if it succeeds, if it doesn't fail then it gives x3

[somber lantern]

it checks if the number of cards in hand > the number of spades and clubs in hand, if not then it gives x3

[pulsar plume]

i dont think any jokers should be based on other jokers triggering

[pulsar plume]

also unrelated but i like your pfp

[wheat totem]

it scales at the same rate as square at worst

which is good enough as far as i'm concerned

[stoic notch]

well, too conditional and WAY TOO OP if used correctly, just imagine a egg dude.. it never does anything and keeps adding chips and chips and chips

this might even surpass the wee joker with a hack if the egg is big enough

also if this is triggered more than once gift card also makes it incredible

feels like more of a modded joker to me, or just too specific idk.

[somber lantern]

i interpreted it as it takes double the sell value of On Vacation, but if it takes the sell value of the joker that didnt trigger than its even stronger than anticipated

[shadow dawn]

Yeah it really sounded like that

That’s what I thought it meant

[small nova]

I feel like using any other joker would be a good idea
Use any other joker who gives you chips or mult, why use a joker who only gives that if none of your other jokers are doing anything
If you want something similar which benefits more the less jokers are being used, Stencil Joker already exists

Imagine how this card would act if you had multiple copies or it was blueprinted
Each Joker wouldn’t be able to help eachother because when one triggers the other one won’t be able to trigger off of it

[stoic notch]

that might be good as a uncommon but definetly shouldnt work with other jokers, if it will it should be only one, like left-most/right-most/on-right kinda thing.