Unrelated: I keep confusing Amulet and Talisman. It takes a while for me to understand why people are talking about either until I understand they are talking about the other one.
On topic: I tend to use +2 cards when I have spare actions, and +2$ when I need the certainty that I will hit some amount of $. Otherwise, it depends on my Treasure density.
I tend to open with only one Steward... not sure if it's the right decision.
Do you usually use non-English terms for the cards? I find it easy to distinguish between them because Talisman is an old name and Amulet is new. :P
Steward is still my favourite card in the game.
Not sure if serious.Steward is still my favourite card in the game.
Want to write an article? ;)
Which would you say is more useful/powerful: the +2 Cards, or the +$2? And don't just say "depends on the kingdom."
Once a deck is adequately built, you expect a card to be worth more than a coin, so in general, if there is an action to spare, the cards is usually better. Once you have nothing left to draw (or will only draw actions dead) then +$2 becomes the obvious choice.
Which would you say is more useful/powerful: the +2 Cards, or the +$2? And don't just say "depends on the kingdom."
Which would you say is more useful/powerful: the +2 Cards, or the +$2? And don't just say "depends on the kingdom."It depends less on the kingdom and more on what part of the game you're in. In the early game, the +$2 can help you hit $5/$6/$7 and help you grab that Minion, Hunting Party, Hunting Grounds, King's Court, etc for an early advantage. The terminal draw is unlikely to net you much more than $2 anyway, and there is less risk involved. Once you have your engine going and you have ample extra Actions, the draw tends to become better. Obviously there are exceptions to both rules - the +2 cards option helps manage shuffles in the early game, and the +$2 virtual coin can make a big difference in the late game.
I've seen some use the +$2 to spike an early 6 or 7, though the situations in which one would do this seem scarce...thoughts?
The other thing that hasn't really been mentioned here is how good Steward is in money decks. It's actually pretty good. You just trash 1-2 times instead of 4-6 times an then start using it as +2 cards. It's better than MasqueradeIs this actually true? The turns you trash with Steward you can't buy anything. Masquerade on the other hand can trash an estate and buy gold. That seems way better.
I think it's the other way around. The trashing is obviously the most useful early, then the +cards, then eventually the +$ (once you can draw enough without using the Steward). Assuming you've trashed even once, the +cards will usually do more than the +$ if you have cards left in your deck.
The other thing that hasn't really been mentioned here is how good Steward is in money decks. It's actually pretty good. You just trash 1-2 times instead of 4-6 times an then start using it as +2 cards. It's better than Masquerade.
Now usually this won't be important, since if there's a reasonable engine, it will be better. But you don't have to force yourself to play a slow engine just because Steward is around. You have to make sure it's something that will actually amount to something, not just eventually a Province a turn with no attack. Steward makes *everything* faster. It favors engines because they are more powerful in general if you don't have the slow early game phase, not because it's not good for money decks.
Who the hell is Stewart?
Who the hell is Stewart?
That's his name... didn't you know? Everyone knows it's Stewart the Steward.
5 almost never. It's not hard to hit 5. If there is a really important 5, you probably also got a Silver, and you can buy a 5 with that. 6 can be spent on Gold for a money deck (since the alternative is just trashing Copper -- it's like taking Cache over nothing). It's also good for Altar or Forge in an engine. That trashing will easily make up for the skipped trashing of Steward. And maybe Goons to get the attack going early. Almost anything else is usually a no-go. You should be able to get those cards eventually and having them a little earlier usually isn't worth taking 2 junk cards.
I've seen some use the +$2 to spike an early 6 or 7, though the situations in which one would do this seem scarce...thoughts?
This is a great question, I'd love to hear thoughts on how good a 6 or 7 (or even 5) would have to be to forgo the trashing early on.
The other thing that hasn't really been mentioned here is how good Steward is in money decks. It's actually pretty good. You just trash 1-2 times instead of 4-6 times an then start using it as +2 cards. It's better than MasqueradeIs this actually true? The turns you trash with Steward you can't buy anything. Masquerade on the other hand can trash an estate and buy gold. That seems way better.
Well, either way you'd want some additional BM support to make them both competitive, say from cards like Hoard. If you can make +2 cards draw more than $2 on average then BM starts with these cards are formidable. The same applies to Junk Dealer actually.The other thing that hasn't really been mentioned here is how good Steward is in money decks. It's actually pretty good. You just trash 1-2 times instead of 4-6 times an then start using it as +2 cards. It's better than MasqueradeIs this actually true? The turns you trash with Steward you can't buy anything. Masquerade on the other hand can trash an estate and buy gold. That seems way better.
Masquerade trashing Estate and buying Gold on the first play is really rare. It's much more likely to get you $5.
I should clarify my statement though. Masquerade is a better card for BM because you do often want a $5 card. But pure Steward + money seems empirically faster than Masq + money (I haven't seen any good Steward simulations since you actually have to make choices).