there needs to be a indicator on which cards are sweets

[Great Blue]

i mean it could sound obvious but the confusion comes from multiple cards sounding like a "sweet", like dinner etc (might be a stretch but it'd still be nice to have labeling)

chris has a specific function that naturally dictates "MAX ONES" work, and max ones are a type of card labeled on said cards
There should be text or an icon that shows the card is a sweet-type card for the new DLC characters.

[泉 こなた]

I concur, so much confusion!

There's also the fact that pudding trap cards like "Dangerous Pudding, Tragedy in the Dead of Night or Bad Pudding" don't count towards activating Sweet Creator's passive despite though they are sweet type traps...

Her passive says:
"When anyone activates a Sweets type trap card, gain stars equal to 2x Lvl of the card"

It's so illogical, they should update the game or something, I really don't understand

[mel]

Originally posted by 𝓘𝔃𝓾𝓶𝓲𝓴𝓸:

I concur, so much confusion!

There's also the fact that pudding trap cards like "Dangerous Pudding, Tragedy in the Dead of Night or Bad Pudding" don't count towards activating Sweet Creator's passive despite though they are sweet type traps..."

Tragedy and Bad Pudding are not sweets type cards, they do not interact with Sweet Maker or Sweet Blogger's passives. Dangerous Pudding is though

[Kit Fulvas]

devs need a major quick fix to that, like how did they not see this being a problem.

I went into the game looking for "sweet" non-hyper cards and only found sweet destoryer and the valentines card assuming that was it cause its "sweet" in the name. Play with Sweet Saki and end up drawing saki cookie?!

like other characters specify cards specifically like "when you play a max 1", "for each gift", ect. why not add (Sweet) or "This card is a sweet card" in the text.

If the devs dont fix it, pretty sure someone might just make a steam workshop mod that adds it to the cards

[Prof.Paradox]

i dont think pet snack count towards it either but one could argue its sweets for pets def needs to have a pudding symbol for sweets

[Kraleck]

Originally posted by Prof.Paradox:

i dont think pet snack count towards it either but one could argue its sweets for pets def needs to have a pudding symbol for sweets

I'd say make it so the Sweets symbol has customization to show it as a pudding, a small pile of cookies, a wrapped candy drop, a chocolate bar, a shortcake topped with a strawberry, a candy corn, a candy cane, etc.

[Phuderoso]

Cookies, hmmm.... Pudding!

[Vapor Dosh]

Cookie or cake sounds like a safe bet. I'd refrain from using the pudding icon just in case since it's already used to mark the expansion pack cards, even though I believe they'd put a symbol denoting Sweets cards somewhere else, presumably a more visible place.

[Meneluma]

Just use the sweet icon from Saki's cookie minigame.

[Oldspice Bodyshots]

Originally posted by melanie:

Originally posted by 𝓘𝔃𝓾𝓶𝓲𝓴𝓸:

I concur, so much confusion!

There's also the fact that pudding trap cards like "Dangerous Pudding, Tragedy in the Dead of Night or Bad Pudding" don't count towards activating Sweet Creator's passive despite though they are sweet type traps..."

Tragedy and Bad Pudding are not sweets type cards, they do not interact with Sweet Maker or Sweet Blogger's passives. Dangerous Pudding is though

Wait whaaat. One kind of pudding trap arbitrarily isn't sweet but the other is??

I get why False Cake isn't counted given that A it's event only and B the rest of the sweet gods are actively opposing it, but this seems just stupid and arbitrary. Say nothing about the traps laid by Sweet Creator's hyper inexplicably not counting despite clearly being a sweet.

[Granger]

Originally posted by Oldspice Bodyshots:

Originally posted by melanie:

Tragedy and Bad Pudding are not sweets type cards, they do not interact with Sweet Maker or Sweet Blogger's passives. Dangerous Pudding is though

Wait whaaat. One kind of pudding trap arbitrarily isn't sweet but the other is??

I get why False Cake isn't counted given that A it's event only and B the rest of the sweet gods are actively opposing it, but this seems just stupid and arbitrary. Say nothing about the traps laid by Sweet Creator's hyper inexplicably not counting despite clearly being a sweet.

I mean think of it, why would a putting ruined by soy sauce and a stolen pudding count? They're both sweets you DONT eat.

I do agree that "sweets" is a confusing desingation, especially since qpd does work with "pudding" cards which includes those two.

[Oldspice Bodyshots]

A stolen pudding would taste just the same, wouldn't it?

I suppose I could kinnnda see the reasoning for the soy sauce one, but the base pudding underneath still is sweet. It just has soy sauce mixed in to terrorize the tongue.

[Meneluma]

Originally posted by Oldspice Bodyshots:

A stolen pudding would taste just the same, wouldn't it?

I suppose I could kinnnda see the reasoning for the soy sauce one, but the base pudding underneath still is sweet. It just has soy sauce mixed in to terrorize the tongue.

Since Yuki says pudding with soy sauce tastes like sea urchin, is sea urchin also a sweet then?

[Granger]

Originally posted by Oldspice Bodyshots:

A stolen pudding would taste just the same, wouldn't it?

Sure but can you eat it? Thats not a pudding you stole but a pudding that was stolen from you.

[Vapor Dosh]

Originally posted by Meneluma:

Originally posted by Oldspice Bodyshots:

A stolen pudding would taste just the same, wouldn't it?

I suppose I could kinnnda see the reasoning for the soy sauce one, but the base pudding underneath still is sweet. It just has soy sauce mixed in to terrorize the tongue.

Since Yuki says pudding with soy sauce tastes like sea urchin, is sea urchin also a sweet then?

Sea urchin may taste like pudding with soy sauce, but it contains neither the pudding (the sweet part) nor the soy sauce.

Originally posted by Granger:

Originally posted by Oldspice Bodyshots:

A stolen pudding would taste just the same, wouldn't it?

Sure but can you eat it? Thats not a pudding you stole but a pudding that was stolen from you.

The one that stole it could eat it.

[Oldspice Bodyshots]

Originally posted by Vapor Dosh:

Originally posted by Meneluma:

Since Yuki says pudding with soy sauce tastes like sea urchin, is sea urchin also a sweet then?

Sea urchin may taste like pudding with soy sauce, but it contains neither the pudding (the sweet part) nor the soy sauce.

Originally posted by Granger:

Sure but can you eat it? Thats not a pudding you stole but a pudding that was stolen from you.

The one that stole it could eat it.

A card taken by Tragedy temporarily becoming "Sweets" until used would be an amazingly spicy implementation of this idea.