Scrying Pool doesn't need fixing. I rather like annoying people by playing several in a row.
I think SP should still have the self-spy, though. It's the attack that's mostly unnecessary and annoying.
How about Throne Room and Moneylender that either say may, or have the "(or reveal a hand with no)"?
How about Throne Room and Moneylender that either say may, or have the "(or reveal a hand with no)"?
And Mine. People forget about Mine. I'll do those when I get the chance. Odds are I won't change their names, though, since the effect will be almost identical.
EDIT: (Oh, and they will say, "You may." Having to reveal a hand without is wordier and clunkier, and the cards won't mind the tiny buff.
Don't forgot Graverobber.
And I'm pretty sure there's at least 1 or 2 others...
Treasure Map!
Don't forgot Graverobber.
I didn't forget Graverobber so much as purposefully omit it and hope nobody noticed. Adding a "you may" to Graverobber's second option would make the wording really awkward. I guess it could just say, "You may choose one:" For all practical purposes, if they pick the second choice and then opt not to trash an Action card, they are effectively picking neither choice.
Treasure Map!
Good call, but rewording Treasure Map is not high on my priority list. Like, the number of situations in which you buy Treasure Maps and then play one with another one in hand that you opt not to trash, while perhaps nonzero, is pretty damn small.
Nice, but I probably prefer the change to Scout where you add +1 VP (or possibly even +2) and make it an action-victory (I saw this somewhere here): then it has a nice self synergising feature.That was mine; thanks. Personally even if it were just a Victory card that gives you 0 VP, like Overgrown Estate, or if the card just said "Victory cards or Scouts", I would still like this change.
MineNice, but I probably prefer the change to Scout where you add +1 VP (or possibly even +2) and make it an action-victory (I saw this somewhere here): then it has a nice self synergising feature.That was mine; thanks.
Fixed that for you:MineNice, but I probably prefer the change to Scout where you add +1 VP (or possibly even +2) and make it an action-victory (I saw this somewhere here): then it has a nice self synergising feature.That was mine; thanks. Personally even if it were just a Victory card that gives you 0 VP, like Overgrown Estate, or if the card just said "Victory cards or Scouts", I would still like this change.
$5 Action - Victory
Trash a Treasure card from your hand. Gain a Treasure card costing up to $3 more; put it into your hand.
_________
Worth 1 VP (or possibly even 2)
Nice, but I probably prefer the change to Scout where you add +1 VP (or possibly even +2) and make it an action-victory (I saw this somewhere here): then it has a nice self synergising feature.
LookoutSafe-trashing Lookout is for wimps!
Action
Cost $3
Look at top 3 deck cards, discard one, topdeck one, and either discard, topdeck, or trash the third. If you trash a card, +1 action.
(This is my casual wording. I guess you probablly wouldn't use the verb "topdeck" in an official wording, but this makes it shorter.)
People don't have a problem with just not playing Chapel in the midgame, why is Lookout different? OK, occasionally you get a freak early play where it sees two Familiars and a Silver, but is that much worse than getting your Sea Hag Sea Hagged?
LookoutSafe-trashing Lookout is for wimps!
Action
Cost $3
Look at top 3 deck cards, discard one, topdeck one, and either discard, topdeck, or trash the third. If you trash a card, +1 action.
(This is my casual wording. I guess you probablly wouldn't use the verb "topdeck" in an official wording, but this makes it shorter.)
In all seriousness, this seems like a reasonable fix, although personally I imagine that I'd be willing to trash good cards late game to avoid the "terminal Tournament" problem. That's just me.
Edit: With this card, I still think the correct move will be to not play it in the mid-late-game to late-game. It doesn't affect much, really.
Why wouldn't you play it? The only reasons I can think of are limited actions and shuffle/cycling control, which isn't that much different from early game. I think official Lookout is fine as is and making it safer also makes it much less interesting.
This is all just to say: Lookout doesn't need a fix for its forced trashing, if anything it'd be fun to be able put one of the "looked-at" (not revealed mind you) cards in your hand, but that bumps it to $4 at least, maybe a mediocre $5.
There is no one forcing you to play Lookout,
There is no one forcing you to play Lookout,
Throne Room and Golem are forcing me to play it. :(
Buying Golem with forced trashers in your deck is begging for trouble.
Limited actions can be a pretty big deal sometimes. If I'm buying Lookout, I'm usually counting on it being non-terminal. If I do have spare actions, well then okay I'll play the Lookout, but it's really a gimped Navigator if you don't trash anything.LookoutSafe-trashing Lookout is for wimps!
Action
Cost $3
Look at top 3 deck cards, discard one, topdeck one, and either discard, topdeck, or trash the third. If you trash a card, +1 action.
(This is my casual wording. I guess you probablly wouldn't use the verb "topdeck" in an official wording, but this makes it shorter.)
In all seriousness, this seems like a reasonable fix, although personally I imagine that I'd be willing to trash good cards late game to avoid the "terminal Tournament" problem. That's just me.
Edit: With this card, I still think the correct move will be to not play it in the mid-late-game to late-game. It doesn't affect much, really.
Why wouldn't you play it? The only reasons I can think of are limited actions and shuffle/cycling control, which isn't that much different from early game. I think official Lookout is fine as is and making it safer also makes it much less interesting.
Also, with this selection, you might have opened Lookout/Potion which isn't the best for getting early Familiars so you've already gotten a bit lucky to be able to get 2 so quickly with your less than ideal opening.Or Lookout/Squire. :-D
Harvest
$5 - Treasure
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put them back in the order they were in. +$1 per differently named card revealed.
QuoteHarvest
$5 - Treasure
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put them back in the order they were in. +$1 per differently named card revealed.
Why didn't they make Harvest as a treasure card in the first place?
Harvest
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put one of them back and discard the rest. +$1 per differently named card revealed.
Buying Golem with forced trashers in your deck is begging for trouble.
Beggar is not a forced trasher.
Nah, Golem/Beggar is a big combo, Golems become terminal +$6 and still skip over the Coppers. The trouble is buying enough Golems, so you need an Alchemy reprint of Beggar that gains three Potions to your hand.How flavorful!
While not strictly better than Gold, that will usually be a Treasure worth at least $3 for $5.QuoteHarvestWhy didn't they make Harvest as a treasure card in the first place?
$5 - Treasure
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put them back in the order they were in. +$1 per differently named card revealed.
If I were to try to fix Harvest, I'd do this:QuoteHarvest
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put one of them back and discard the rest. +$1 per differently named card revealed.
Harvest
$5 - Treasure
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put them back in the order they were in. If all revealed cards are differently named then this is worth $4, otherwise this is worth $2.
I would probably have scout give +1 Card instead of the money. Before the revealing, though (we don't want to be too generous).
TransmuteAlternatively, I might use this without the potion cost as cost $3 or $4.
$1p - Action
Trash a card from your hand. If it is an… Action card, gain a victory card costing up to $5; Treasure card, gain a transmute; Victory card, gain a Gold. | If you trashed a treasure and have a second transmute in your hand, you may reveal it. If you do, you may gain any action card costing up to $5 or $2p instead of another transmute.
Transmute
$1p - Action
Trash a card from your hand. If it is an… Action card, gain a victory card costing up to $5; Treasure card, gain an action card costing up to 4 or 1p; Victory card, gain a Gold.
Suggestion for another card:QuoteTransmuteAlternatively, I might use this without the potion cost as cost $3 or $4.
$1p - Action
Trash a card from your hand. If it is an… Action card, gain a victory card costing up to $5; Treasure card, gain a transmute; Victory card, gain a Gold. | If you trashed a treasure and have a second transmute in your hand, you may reveal it. If you do, you may gain any action card costing up to $5 or $2p instead of another transmute.
Transmute
$1p - Action - Reaction
Trash a card from your hand. If it is an…
Action card, gain a victory card costing up to $5;
Treasure card, gain a Transmute;
Victory card, gain a Gold.
When you would gain a Transmute, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead, gain any action card costing up to $2p.
I would probably have scout give +1 Card instead of the money. Before the revealing, though (we don't want to be too generous).
That makes it too similar to Cartographer and probably puts it on roughly the same power level as well. On a non-terminal card, every +1 Card is a huge buff. +$1 is much less drastic while still being significant.
I would probably have scout give +1 Card instead of the money. Before the revealing, though (we don't want to be too generous).
That makes it too similar to Cartographer and probably puts it on roughly the same power level as well. On a non-terminal card, every +1 Card is a huge buff. +$1 is much less drastic while still being significant.
But Scout would still not skip Coppers, Curses and other junk like Cartographer does. I think this buff would "only" make it a strong $4 card, at about Caravan's level. A probably smaller (and IMO more interesting) buff would be to draw a card only if Scout fails to reveal green cards, as was sometime suggested in an older thread.
Personally, I'd like to buff Scout by making it also skip Coppers and Curses; this seems most thematic to me. Since drawing Coppers would be too strong, I'd just add "You may discard all revealed cards costing $0." to the card text before the last sentence.
(This would make it similar to a weaker "automatic" Cartographer, removing the AP of that card.)
What about a Thief that lets you put one of the gained cards on your deck, or even in your hand?
I like the cards in the OP. Now I wants one.
I would probably have scout give +1 Card instead of the money. Before the revealing, though (we don't want to be too generous).
That makes it too similar to Cartographer and probably puts it on roughly the same power level as well. On a non-terminal card, every +1 Card is a huge buff. +$1 is much less drastic while still being significant.
But Scout would still not skip Coppers, Curses and other junk like Cartographer does. I think this buff would "only" make it a strong $4 card, at about Caravan's level. A probably smaller (and IMO more interesting) buff would be to draw a card only if Scout fails to reveal green cards, as was sometime suggested in an older thread.
Personally, I'd like to buff Scout by making it also skip Coppers and Curses; this seems most thematic to me. Since drawing Coppers would be too strong, I'd just add "You may discard all revealed cards costing $0." to the card text before the last sentence.
(This would make it similar to a weaker "automatic" Cartographer, removing the AP of that card.)
I don't feel like I have much AP when using Cartographer. As for Scout, I'd rather have a card that's more unique than one that's a weaker Cartographer. If Scout's main issue is straight-up power level, why not use the more simple, straightforward fix? I don't think the card needs a bunch of other clauses; they'll just make it less compelling to most players. I think the amount of complexity it currently has is ideal.
What about a Thief that lets you put one of the gained cards on your deck, or even in your hand?
I think gaining it into hand would only make Thief more swingy than it is. Right now it ranges from helping its targets (trashing Copper for free) to hurting or really hurting them. It's already quite swingy in that the benefit to you is greater precisely when it hurts your opponent(s) most. If one of the Treasures went right into your hand, that'd be even more swingy. Even if you only hit Silver, that's like an Explorer that also hurts your target. I do like how it tempts you to gain Copper, but I don't think that's worth it.
I like gaining one on top of your deck a lot better, even if it doesn't tempt you to gain Copper. It also helps to differentiate it from Noble Brigand on boards that don't have special Treasures. Cool idea!
As far as I know, all Action cards that give exactly +$1 are Peddler variants
I agree that my fix might be less compelling to casual players; but it's not just a weaker Cartographer since it still draws the revealed VP cards.
Your fix is more simple, but to me it seems less elegant to add an "unrelated" +$1; also it makes Scout a little too similar to Oasis (and other Peddlers) in my opinion. As far as I know, all Action cards that give exactly +$1 are Peddler variants (except for Noble Brigand, whose +$1 I also find rather inelegant.)
The most straightforward fix IMO would be to just increase the number of revealed cards to 5 (or even more) and/or also draw Curses. Or would this make Scout too strong in Intrigue-heavy games?
But I'd happily try your version if it succeeds in balancing Scout. Thanks for sharing!
What about a Thief that lets you put one of the gained cards on your deck, or even in your hand?
I think gaining it into hand would only make Thief more swingy than it is. Right now it ranges from helping its targets (trashing Copper for free) to hurting or really hurting them. It's already quite swingy in that the benefit to you is greater precisely when it hurts your opponent(s) most. If one of the Treasures went right into your hand, that'd be even more swingy. Even if you only hit Silver, that's like an Explorer that also hurts your target. I do like how it tempts you to gain Copper, but I don't think that's worth it.
I like gaining one on top of your deck a lot better, even if it doesn't tempt you to gain Copper. It also helps to differentiate it from Noble Brigand on boards that don't have special Treasures. Cool idea!
What about, "You may choose one of the trashed cards. If it is a Copper, put it in your hand. Otherwise, put it on top of your deck."?
Oops, you're totally right. I should not have made that claim from memory...I agree that my fix might be less compelling to casual players; but it's not just a weaker Cartographer since it still draws the revealed VP cards.
Sure, but it's much closer to Cartographer than either Scout or my updated version (Guide).Your fix is more simple, but to me it seems less elegant to add an "unrelated" +$1; also it makes Scout a little too similar to Oasis (and other Peddlers) in my opinion. As far as I know, all Action cards that give exactly +$1 are Peddler variants (except for Noble Brigand, whose +$1 I also find rather inelegant.)
Here is a list of Kingdom cards that can give exactly +$1 (but no more) that are not Peddler variants: Bridge, Ironworks, Pawn, Herbalist, Bishop, Noble Brigand, Squire, Merchant Guild.
EDIT: Ninja'd by AJD. Although I didn't list Lighthouse and Fishing Village because they technically give more than $1 total.
So it's uncommon, but not as rare as you might think. I used Bishop as an example earlier in this thread because its +$1 also seems unrelated to the rest of the card. I understand what you mean by the inelegance of just slapping a +$1 on there, but if Scout had originally had that +$1, I doubt most people would have been like, "What does +$1 have to do with the rest of the card?"The most straightforward fix IMO would be to just increase the number of revealed cards to 5 (or even more) and/or also draw Curses. Or would this make Scout too strong in Intrigue-heavy games?
I think drawing Curses is a fine idea. I'm not sure it would save the card, but I don't think it's a bad thing to try. Revealing 5 cards I'm less fond of. Each card you reveal potentially adds much more AP when you put those cards back on your deck. There are 24 ways to return 4 cards to your deck. There are 120 ways to return 5 cards. Navigator gets away with it because you usually don't care about the order you're returning those cards. You're either discarding them or drawing them all in your next hand.
[...]
Didn't the Clairvoyant variant Donald tried still have the self-spy effect on it? Not that that's an issue, you're making it even weaker, and with the unbounded maximum draw power effect still present on the card it will still be very useful in many many kingdoms. Just pedantic I guess.
Pirate Ship is already a weak card, I don't see the point in making it weaker.
edit: Oh, I see you made it a terminal Copper. Carry on.
Pirate Ship is already a weak card, I don't see the point in making it weaker.
edit: Oh, I see you made it a terminal Copper. Carry on.
To me pirate ship seems plently strong, especially with villages. Near the end of the game, you can easily be getting $4 to $6 or possibly even more from a $4 cost card.
LF's version seems very similar to the way it's usually played now, except that it gives something when you're attacking and doesn't have the flexibility of doing the attack when you already have as much coin in your hand as you want. Also, you have to wait a shuffle between playing the galley to get the retired pirate and getting the benefit of the retired pirate which is a significant drawback. It's a neat idea, but I like the original better.
Yeah, this change wasn't meant to be a power tweak. It's more of a, "What might Pirate Ship have looked like if Donald had decided to go the Retired Pirate route?"
Yeah, this change wasn't meant to be a power tweak. It's more of a, "What might Pirate Ship have looked like if Donald had decided to go the Retired Pirate route?"
Rather than choosing attack or retire, I would make Pirate Ship always attack and then follow up with the option to trash and retire. Otherwise, the turn when you retire will be awfully weak.
Yeah, this change wasn't meant to be a power tweak. It's more of a, "What might Pirate Ship have looked like if Donald had decided to go the Retired Pirate route?"
Rather than choosing attack or retire, I would make Pirate Ship always attack and then follow up with the option to trash and retire. Otherwise, the turn when you retire will be awfully weak.
That thought had occurred to me as well. The reason I did it this way is because it's the way it was described in the Secret History of Dark Ages.
Yeah, this change wasn't meant to be a power tweak. It's more of a, "What might Pirate Ship have looked like if Donald had decided to go the Retired Pirate route?"
Rather than choosing attack or retire, I would make Pirate Ship always attack and then follow up with the option to trash and retire. Otherwise, the turn when you retire will be awfully weak.
That thought had occurred to me as well. The reason I did it this way is because it's the way it was described in the Secret History of Dark Ages.
You can give +1 Action and gain to hand, or even gain and play immediately, to combine both.
Does "gain and play immediately" break anything? What if you are possessed, for instance? Do you play it from an opponent's discard?
Actually, Galley never has track of Retired Pirate in the first place because it never gains one. It tries to gain one, but fails, because Possession tells you that something else happens instead.Does "gain and play immediately" break anything? What if you are possessed, for instance? Do you play it from an opponent's discard?
Since Possession is "would gain", it triggers before the play immediately, moving the card. Thus, Galley losses track of Retired Pirate and cannot play it. That seems a reasonable behavior.
To me pirate ship seems plently strong, especially with villages. Near the end of the game, you can easily be getting $4 to $6 or possibly even more from a $4 cost card.However, you have to play it as a do-nothing terminal for the first half of the game, which harms your own economy, and it even removes Coppers from your opponent's deck. Trashing your opponent's Coppers without even hurting his current hand, that's a big drawback. If your Pirate Ship is worth $6, then you probably trashed at least 5 of your opponent's Coppers. Normally, he would have to buy a trasher (cost: one turn) and waste another few turns to get rid of those Coppers. (Of course, if there is a trasher, he can buy it and get rid of the rest of his Coppers, and then your Pirate Ships may never have anything to hit.)
Sea Hag
Action/Attack $4
Each player puts his deck in his discard pile.
Each other player gains a Curse, putting it on top of his deck.
It removes the "attack only" nature of the card, and no more swingy, arbitrary looking discard. It looks a little cleaner too.
What do people think of giving Secret Chamber +1 Action? It seems like the best buff to me.
What do people think of giving Secret Chamber +1 Action? It seems like the best buff to me.
im not sure, i think there is reason why all (okay there are just three...) discard-for-$ are terminal. there are some pretty strong combos you can do with them, sc/scrying pool, sc/menagerie, sc/library, sc/watchtower. all of those are already out there, but with sc being non-terminal, they become much easier to pull off.
mabye just reveal more cards in the reaction part?
im not sure, i think there is reason why all (okay there are just three...) discard-for-$ are terminal.
Keep
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card. +1 Action. Discard any number of cards. +$1 per card discarded.
Keep
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card. +1 Action. Discard any number of cards. +$1 per card discarded.
It's just as well that this card didn't get published; it would have been very confusing.
"I'll keep 2 cards."
"Wait, do you mean you're discarding 2 cards with Keep, or not discarding 2 cards?"
Keep
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card. +1 Action. Discard any number of cards. +$1 per card discarded.
It's just as well that this card didn't get published; it would have been very confusing.
"I'll keep 2 cards."
"Wait, do you mean you're discarding 2 cards with Keep, or not discarding 2 cards?"
I'm not quite sure if these are stronger or weaker than the published version; at least the second version sounds equally "insane"...
I'm not quite sure if these are stronger or weaker than the published version; at least the second version sounds equally "insane"...
They seem stronger. You can counter Possession by greening earlier and then make the expensive Possessions of your opponent (pun intended) worse. If you Possess yourself, you can just megaturn in several turns, and there is nothing that will stop you. The opponent greening early would actually help.
I'm not quite sure if these are stronger or weaker than the published version; at least the second version sounds equally "insane"...
They seem stronger. You can counter Possession by greening earlier and then make the expensive Possessions of your opponent (pun intended) worse. If you Possess yourself, you can just megaturn in several turns, and there is nothing that will stop you. The opponent greening early would actually help.
i agree, but either way it stops being insanely stupid, and that's what matters
And at least as a thought experiment, regular Possession is actually quite interesting, with all kinds of interactions with other cards. It can feel stupid when you get burned by one of these interactions, but there is almost always something you can do to stop it.
I'm not quite sure if these are stronger or weaker than the published version; at least the second version sounds equally "insane"...
They seem stronger. You can counter Possession by greening earlier and then make the expensive Possessions of your opponent (pun intended) worse. If you Possess yourself, you can just megaturn in several turns, and there is nothing that will stop you.
I think if anything Self Possession is more stupid. It allows the person to get it first be in a huge advantage. More than normal possession, or KC or any other power card. This is just super outpost.
And at least as a thought experiment, regular Possession is actually quite interesting, with all kinds of interactions with other cards. It can feel stupid when you get burned by one of these interactions, but there is almost always something you can do to stop it.
And at least as a thought experiment, regular Possession is actually quite interesting, with all kinds of interactions with other cards. [...]
self-possession doesn't have this problem, good decks get rewarded again. I actually don't think it's that great of a concept, because outpost already does it, but it does solve the problem possession has. for me it's nothing > self possession >>>> possession
You make several good points, especially with your Menagerie example. Maybe it is too powerful after all.
QuoteAnd at least as a thought experiment, regular Possession is actually quite interesting, with all kinds of interactions with other cards. It can feel stupid when you get burned by one of these interactions, but there is almost always something you can do to stop it.
it's stupid because it punishes good decks. yes, it's one of the most skill dependend cards in the game, but i dont care! degrading your own deck so that your opponent cant use it just isn't fun, and from what i've heard i'm not the only one who doesn't like it. I make a comment about possessino being an awful card in almost every game i play with it, and most of the times my opponent agrees.
self-possession doesn't have this problem, good decks get rewarded again. I actually don't think it's that great of a concept, because outpost already does it, but it does solve the problem possession has. for me it's nothing > self possession >>>> possession
What do people think of a variant of Spy that's slightly weaker, but in turn less time-consuming to resolve?That seems longer to resolve. You still have to reveal and know what the top card is in order to resolve the effect properly, but in addition there might also be AP associated with stuff like "It'd be great if he discards a Bazaar, but what if he discards his ruins?" And then there's the situation where one opposing player has a Copper left on his or her deck and another and another has an Estate on top. Do you name Treasure or Victory card? At least with the original spy, you can be all like "just leave your top cards there everyone" after playing a chain of them.
Spy
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $4
+1 Card. +1 Action. Look at the top card of your deck. You may discard it. Name a card type (Victory, Action, etc.). Each other player reveals the top card of his deck and discards it if it doesn't have the named type.
Too complex? I wanted to keep the combo with Thief, etc.
That seems longer to resolve. You still have to reveal and know what the top card is in order to resolve the effect properly, but in addition there might also be AP associated with stuff like "It'd be great if he discards a Bazaar, but what if he discards his ruins?" And then there's the situation where one opposing player has a Copper left on his or her deck and another and another has an Estate on top. Do you name Treasure or Victory card? At least with the original spy, you can be all like "just leave your top cards there everyone" after playing a chain of them.
Edit: Okay, you can name "Pokemon card" and leave all junk on top. There's still the issue of not knowing stuff like whether a Nobles, a Harem, or an Estate is on top of a player's deck, and then agonizing over it, while considering that you don't want the other players to discard their Coppers.
yea, I don't reallly see how that version takes considerably less time either
It takes a tiny bit longer in 2 player games but it's faster with more players. With the original Spy, you have to make one decision for each other player based on the card they reveal. With this version, you make one single decision and then everybody can resolve it simultaneously.
That said, I think it weakens it too much for a minor gain that is still unreliable (I think it makes the card faster in general, but there is more potential AP when you have to choose before seeing the flipped cards).
the problem i have with spy isn't so much that it takes a lot of time to resolve, but rather that it's super weak. compare it to ironmonger, both have the self-spy effect, but ironmonger is also either a village, a peddler, or a lab, which is 3$, 4$, and 5$ worth respectively. spy on others is worth... dunno, but 2$ at most.
the problem i have with spy isn't so much that it takes a lot of time to resolve, but rather that it's super weak. compare it to ironmonger, both have the self-spy effect, but ironmonger is also either a village, a peddler, or a lab, which is 3$, 4$, and 5$ worth respectively. spy on others is worth... dunno, but 2$ at most.Edge case: You hit a Curse. Both cards can discard it, which is often almost as good as Lab, but Spy also attacks.
Adventurer should be pretty easy to "fix".
Adventurer - $6
Action
Name a Treasure card.
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 2 Treasure cards that are not the named card. Put those Treasure cards into your hand and discard the other revealed cards.
This just adds the "Rebuild" clause, making it possible to skip Coppers. From 2 Silvers onward, this is then guaranteed to provide at least $4 of spending power (if they're not already in your hand). But it's still a terminal with its terminal issues.
Adventurer - $6
Action
Name a Treasure card.
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 2 Treasure cards that are not the named card. Put those Treasure cards into your hand and discard the other revealed cards.
Maybe Adventurer-BM would be way stronger compared to regular BM, but against engines, I don't think it's particularly strong.Adventurer - $6
Action
Name a Treasure card.
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 2 Treasure cards that are not the named card. Put those Treasure cards into your hand and discard the other revealed cards.
Wouldn't this make Adventurer-BM too strong? It would make Adventurer a terminal +$4 or better pretty reliably. The increased cycling could be bad because after one or two plays you will be greening already, but still, +$4 in a deck full of Treasures pretty realiably gets you a Province.
Rather than "Name a Treasure card", it's almost certainly cleaner to just say "other than Copper". It's pretty rare that you'd want to name other cards.
Rather than "Name a Treasure card", it's almost certainly cleaner to just say "other than Copper". It's pretty rare that you'd want to name other cards.
If your deck (excluding what's in your hand) has no non-Copper treasures, or its only non-Copper treasure card is a Silver or something no better than a Silver, or if you have no Copper and multiple treasures that are better than your worst treasure, you would not want to name Copper.
Idea: dig for a third Treasure card if both revealed Treasures were Copper.
The cycle-junk-to-top aspect of Spy already got some fixed versions: Rabble, Fortune Teller. The only cool thing that Spy does that they don't is to combo with deck-trashing cards. Here's an attempt at a fix: make Spy terminal and change the effect to "each player reveals the top 5 cards of his deck and puts them back in an order you choose". That makes Spy useless for cycling junk to the top, and in a game without deck attacks it will rarely be bought, but it has some pretty killer combos with Swindler/Knights/etc. Maybe give it +$2 also, so it's then:the problem i have with spy isn't so much that it takes a lot of time to resolve, but rather that it's super weak. compare it to ironmonger, both have the self-spy effect, but ironmonger is also either a village, a peddler, or a lab, which is 3$, 4$, and 5$ worth respectively. spy on others is worth... dunno, but 2$ at most.
Spy definitely seems weak. The problem is that its effects are almost invisible. I think Spy would be passable $4 card if it didn't take forever to resolve. Not a powerful $4 card, but a passable one.
Really, Spy should just be taken out of the Base Set and replaced with some other $4 cantrip that doesn't attack.
Rather than "Name a Treasure card", it's almost certainly cleaner to just say "other than Copper". It's pretty rare that you'd want to name other cards.Well, possibly, but I wanted to keep it flexible.
...or Dig for three treasuresand keep two.
Infiltrator - $4
Action - Attack
+$2
Each player (including you) reveals the top 5 cards of his deck and puts them back in an order you choose.
hey, the images don't work anymore. I just wanted to reference this thread, and now they're gone. tsts.
I saw that change to rebuild, and I didn't even get it until I read that it was the previous card that would have been in the set if it weren't for Rebuild. But that's not a fix, it's a different card.
How about making transmute non-terminal, and making adventurer dig for 3 cards? I mean, you can't think that Adventurer is fine and thief isn't.
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. If they revealed any Treasure cards, they trash one of them that you choose. You may gain any or all of these trashed cards. They discard the other revealed cards.
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck, trashes a revealed Treasure you choose, and discards the rest. You may gain any number of the trashed cards.
I have made my feelings about Transmute known many times, even in this very thread. Transmute is fine—even good—as long as there are other Potion-cost cards on the board. And since I always play with 2 sets at once, there always are!well I get that. But if you're making the changes, then you're offering it to the community, right? So, it's not about how you play, because most people just play all random, because goko pretty much forces you to. And if you do play all random, then it is weak, because you never buy it. that's what weak means.
Mostly I feel that Rebuild is unsalvageable. The entire concept is turning Victory cards into better Victory cards. That makes you want to spend most of your $5 buys on Duchies, which sucks. It could be a better card instead.Well it wouldn't be a fun card. But if we start replacing cards with largely unrelated cards, then there are immediately a dozen other cards that could be replaced. Wasn't the point to just tweak them a little bit?
All P3$ cards: make them 1$ cheaper
I don't like that one bit.why? I mean, I get why you could think it isn't necessary, but not how you can think it's bad. Why do you think it's bad?
In addition to needing a boost, Thief's wording could really be more concise and clearer.QuoteEach other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. If they revealed any Treasure cards, they trash one of them that you choose. You may gain any or all of these trashed cards. They discard the other revealed cards.QuoteEach other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck, trashes a revealed Treasure you choose, and discards the rest. Gain any number of the trashed cards.
QuoteI have made my feelings about Transmute known many times, even in this very thread. Transmute is fine—even good—as long as there are other Potion-cost cards on the board. And since I always play with 2 sets at once, there always are!well I get that. But if you're making the changes, then you're offering it to the community, right? So, it's not about how you play, because most people just play all random, because goko pretty much forces you to. And if you do play all random, then it is weak, because you never buy it. that's what weak means.QuoteMostly I feel that Rebuild is unsalvageable. The entire concept is turning Victory cards into better Victory cards. That makes you want to spend most of your $5 buys on Duchies, which sucks. It could be a better card instead.Well it wouldn't be a fun card. But if we start replacing cards with largely unrelated cards, then there are immediately a dozen other cards that could be replaced. Wasn't the point to just tweak them a little bit?
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck, trashes a revealed Treasure you choose, and discards the rest. Gain any number of the trashed cards.
Perhaps "and discards the rest" should be "then discards the rest".
Also, isn't it pretty standard Dominion wording to say "You may" when 0/not doing something is a choice? "Gain any number of the trashed cards" reads too much like it is forcing you to gain at least one of the trashed cards.
why? I mean, I get why you could think it isn't necessary, but not how you can think it's bad. Why do you think it's bad?
Can me selfish
And it is completely false that you lose the game immediately if you fail to get $3P on the first shuffle, because Familiars tend to miss shuffles and luck may even out, and Alchemists may always find a Potion to be topdecked, or never, so you can also have a swing of luck. Minimizing luck is good when you can do it without altering other variables. Making Familiar super-powerful because you can buy it everytime the Potion comes up would reduce the variety of the game, and consequently, the fun.
but really this thread was more, "This is stuff I'm thinking of doing; it's here for you if you want it."oh, you do say it in the op. if that's what it was meant to be, than that's what it is, you're of course not obligated to do anything. I just thought this was more targeted towards the community.
If you want, I can even mock up some images for you.well Showdown is already doing cards for me, and I think he's pretty amazing at it (and he said he doesn't need more than a few min for a card if he has the image) so I wouldn't ask you for that. but thanks for the offer :)
It would make Alchemist an autobuy almost all the time and Familiar almost all the time.It wouldn't. I mean, there is no point arguing about these kinds of things, but come on. Scrying pool and Apothecary aren't stronger because they are cheaper, they're stronger because of what they do.
Also, isn't it pretty standard Dominion wording to say "You may" when 0/not doing something is a choice? "Gain any number of the trashed cards" reads too much like it is forcing you to gain at least one of the trashed cards.
Also, isn't it pretty standard Dominion wording to say "You may" when 0/not doing something is a choice? "Gain any number of the trashed cards" reads too much like it is forcing you to gain at least one of the trashed cards.
Actual Thief does say "you may gain any or all", but most Dominion cards actually don't say "you may" when 0 is a choice: cf. Cellar, Forge, Chapel, etc.
I think missing $3P on your first shuffle is a level of magnitude worse than one (or more) of your Familiars missing a shuffle. The reason is that usually your $2P hand is an utter dud. But again, this problem can be solved by playing with more than one Potion-cost card at once, rather than lowering Familiar's cost.
I think missing $3P on your first shuffle is a level of magnitude worse than one (or more) of your Familiars missing a shuffle. The reason is that usually your $2P hand is an utter dud. But again, this problem can be solved by playing with more than one Potion-cost card at once, rather than lowering Familiar's cost.
Yes, but not everyone abides by this recommendation, and when going full random online, I don't think this option exists at all.
Eh maybe, but it's terminal, so it won't happen much more than once per turn. I can't see it overall being much worse AP-wise than cards like Cartographer and Apothecary. Although, to be fair, those cards are pretty heavy on AP if you want to play fully optimally.Infiltrator - $4
Action - Attack
+$2
Each player (including you) reveals the top 5 cards of his deck and puts them back in an order you choose.
This looks like an insane amount of AP.
FeastThis would let you open $5/Feast. That might still be okay.
Action - $4
Trash a card that you have in play. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.
Not a huge change, but makes the card much more interesting.
Alternatively, leave Feast as is and have it cost $2. I can't think of any $5 cards that make opening Feast/Feast too powerful, it would be a big deal on boards with +buys and it would be handy in a slog.
Feast
Action - $4
Trash a card that you have in play. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.
Feast
Action - $4
Trash a card that you have in play. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.
This is a cool idea, but it causes tracking issues with Durations. I guess you could leave the Feast itself in play to remind you of the Duration.
FeastBut this would suck with Procession.
Action - $4
Trash a card that you have in play. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.
Not a huge change, but makes the card much more interesting.
Feast
Action - $4
Trash a card that you have in play. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.
This is a cool idea, but it causes tracking issues with Durations. I guess you could leave the Feast itself in play to remind you of the Duration.
It also has infinite-loop potential.
Feast
Action - $4
Trash a card that you have in play. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.
This is a cool idea, but it causes tracking issues with Durations. I guess you could leave the Feast itself in play to remind you of the Duration.
It also has infinite-loop potential. You could do a scheme-like wording and have the trash and gain happen on discard-from-play of the chosen card.
I think that Harem is often underrated and pricing it at 5$ would basically make it a Duchy substitute, i.e. the tricky decision between Gold-Harem and later Harem-Duchy becomes less tricky and more trivial.
The non-trashing clause on Possession makes the card easier to understand but at the cost of making all trash-for-benefit cards quasi-defenses against Possession.
I like your Harvest buff, it is not too much and it now nicely interacts with cards like Vassal or Chariot Race.
Scrying Pool can I think preserve the self-Spy aspect of it - removing the attack part is all you need to speed it up, and in decks where you can't thin it becomes just that much swingier and less reliable. But it's not like it's now unusable.
Possession's fox is interesting and probably works. I probably still prefer a variant of Donald's fix, but that gets rid of a lot of issues and makes TFB decks a viable counter.
What if your version of Scrying Pool had a +1 card on it? It would be slightly stronger than self-spying, but not buy much, and far less words than self-spying.
If the top card of your deck is an action, then you would have drawn it with old Scrying Pool or +1 card Scrying Pool, so it makes no difference at all.
If the top card of your deck isn't an action, then with old Scrying Pool would would have discarded it; with +1 card Scrying Pool you draw it instead. Good if it's a treasure.
I'm rambling, but the point I'm trying to make is that this Gold vs. Manor/Harem vs. Duchy thing is just a total non-issue. The actual issue is whether Manor is too strong at $5 compared to other Kingdom cards. And man, I just really doubt that it is.I think that if you were only playing with Base and Intrigue Harem would be totally fine but from a retrospective all-expansions perspective you are totally right: engines have become more frequent, making a Treasure-Victory card a bit worse, and 5s are often situationally better than Gold anyway.
What if your version of Scrying Pool had a +1 card on it? It would be slightly stronger than self-spying, but not buy much, and far less words than self-spying.
If the top card of your deck is an action, then you would have drawn it with old Scrying Pool or +1 card Scrying Pool, so it makes no difference at all.
If the top card of your deck isn't an action, then with old Scrying Pool would would have discarded it; with +1 card Scrying Pool you draw it instead. Good if it's a treasure.
I think that would make it crazy. I mean at that point it's always a Laboratory, and quite often better.
What if your version of Scrying Pool had a +1 card on it? It would be slightly stronger than self-spying, but not buy much, and far less words than self-spying.
If the top card of your deck is an action, then you would have drawn it with old Scrying Pool or +1 card Scrying Pool, so it makes no difference at all.
If the top card of your deck isn't an action, then with old Scrying Pool would would have discarded it; with +1 card Scrying Pool you draw it instead. Good if it's a treasure.
I think that would make it crazy. I mean at that point it's always a Laboratory, and quite often better.
I feel like it's rare for regular Scrying Pool to not always be a Laboratory, and quite often better... if the +1 card version draws a card more than regular Pool, it's only if that extra card is a non-action, which is generally a junk card in a Scrying Pool deck anyway.
I prefer the revised base/intrigue approach to fixing cards; new card that isn't quite the same but fills the niche in a different way.Hmm, I think it depends on the card. I'd much rather have Bandit than a slightly-tweaked Thief. But now that I've played with Patrol a bunch, I think I'd rather have Scout with +$1 than Patrol. Scout was perfectly unique and it was better at interacting with e.g. Mill and Nobles than Patrol is. It just needed a boost.
I like your version of Harvest, but I think it would be more interesting as a $3 card that turns up 3 cards (keeping the "put back" clause).I think that would be too weak to even cost $2. I mean both the coin-generating and sifting properties are significantly weaker with that change; so much weaker that I would very rarely want to waste a terminal action on it. It would be another Chancellor, I think.
$5 Harem would probably be better if either the VP or Treasure were more complex/conditionalHere is the perfect example of "slight tweak" being better than "complete overhaul". The concept is fine, and simplicity is good. I'm not eager to make it more complex for no gain.
Manor: Treasure-Victory, $5
When you play this, it's worth $1 per copy of the card you have the most copies of in play.
2 VP
Yeah, I think Harem/Manor is fine at (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6f/Coin6.png/16px-Coin6.png). It still gets bought enough.
I'm also amused that it took you 4 years to mock up Manor, though.
I agree. In this spirit, I've also been thinking of tweaking some of the removed cards slightly to make them more playable:$5 Harem would probably be better if either the VP or Treasure were more complex/conditionalHere is the perfect example of "slight tweak" being better than "complete overhaul". The concept is fine, and simplicity is good. I'm not eager to make it more complex for no gain.
These are interesting revisions. But LastFootnote, could you re-insert your older revisions (Scout etc.) to your first post? I haven't saved them, and I may still want to try them out in the future...
I agree. In this spirit, I've also been thinking of tweaking some of the removed cards slightly to make them more playable:$5 Harem would probably be better if either the VP or Treasure were more complex/conditionalHere is the perfect example of "slight tweak" being better than "complete overhaul". The concept is fine, and simplicity is good. I'm not eager to make it more complex for no gain.
Adventurer would probably work with just a reduced cost; I think I'd try it at $4 (or even $3); this might make it a reasonable BM card (in engines, it's still usually worse than Moat).
Feast could certainly afford a price decrease to $3 as well (making the TR/Feast opening possible again :) ), but it would probably still be weakish then. However, what about:
Feast: Action, $3
Gain a card costing up to $6.
I think this would still not be overpowered. This change would allow you to always gain a Gold on your second shuffle, but you often prefer an early $5 Action over Gold anyway. It would be very strong with a $6 Action like Goons on the board, but I think that's okay.
I think Adventurer should cost $2, no joke. It takes a lot of work to make it good, like Poor House. Arguably it takes even more work than Poor House, though the upper bound on its power is also higher. Anyway, yeah, $2. That's my unofficial official recommendation.I totally agree. At first it sounds crazy that a formerly-existing 6 would be balanced at 2. But Adventurer has a simple problem: it is a terminal payload card that is only good if you have decent Treasures in your deck. If you play BM you could also just draw those Treasures with terminal draw. If you play an engine you either don't wanna clog your deck with Treasures or, e.g. if you get them on the way via something like Soothsayer, you don't wanna waste terminal space on a terminal payload card as the Gold in your deck already does the trick.
Harem is also essentially replaced by Conquest, which is almost-but-not-quite strictly better. (if you want a 6$ silver, you're probably happy to get two, so the only real case for Harem is needing a Victory-Treasure card for some reason)
Since Druid had such exceptional variety, and some cards aren't very interesting
Tragic Hero:
Action/Fate - $5
Receive the set-aside Boon, then +3 Cards
If you have 8 or more cards in hand, trash this and gain a Treasure.
---
Setup: Set aside a Boon that doesn't give +$1, face up
Tormentor:
Action/Attack/Doom - $5
+$2
If you have an Imp in play, each other player receives the set-aside Hex. Otherwise, gain an Imp from its pile.
---
Setup: Set aside a Hex other than Delusion or Misery
Bard:
Action/Fate - $4
+1 Action
+$1
Receive one of the set aside Boons
---
Setup: Set aside 2 Boons face up
Many of the Hexes cannot work as Attack cards, so this version of Tormentor doesn’t work. Imagine having Deluded every turn. Enjoy that game!
Because of the "vanilla" nature of +Cards?
Tragic Hero:
Action/Fate - $5
Receive the set-aside Boon, then +3 Cards
If you have 8 or more cards in hand, trash this and gain a Treasure.
---
Setup: Set aside a Boon that doesn't give +$1, face up
Many of the Hexes cannot work as Attack cards, so this version of Tormentor doesn’t work. Imagine having Deluded every turn. Enjoy that game!
It does say instead of Deluded or Misery, but I do agree with you. Druid is cool and all, but we don't 3 different Druid variants or a Hex-Druid. It just becomes "If the Boon/Hex is good, this card is good and if they aren't then they aren't." Which to me is much less interesting than the printed cards.Because of the "vanilla" nature of +Cards?
Werewolf plays much closer to a "Vanilla Smithy" than Tragic Hero.
one of my play group is pushing me to sharpie "The Mountain's Gift" to "you MAY gain a silver".
Actually, Swamp's Gift doesn't have a "may" for the Wisp gain either. How come no one complains about that?
Actually, Swamp's Gift doesn't have a "may" for the Wisp gain either. How come no one complains about that?
Silver is bad for engines but cantrips that sometimes become Laboratories are pretty much always good.
Tragic Hero:
Action/Fate - $5
Receive the set-aside Boon, then +3 Cards
If you have 8 or more cards in hand, trash this and gain a Treasure.
---
Setup: Set aside a Boon that doesn't give +$1, face up
Why would you need this edited Tragic Hero to exclude Field and Forest's Gift? If Druid allows it, why can't this allow it?
Also I don't see how setting aside a Boon adds to the card. I know that Druid has a ton of variety and that's what you're trying to go for, but wouldn't "receive a Boon" be simpler?
EDIT: Oh yeah, and Donald said that drawing cards + receiving Boons = super slow turns. Especially with this card always giving you a Boon and drawing cards every time you play it. Yes, it can fairly easily get trashed, but that doesn't save it from Thrones.
Tragic Hero- I don't think Tragic hero needs a buff, +3 cards and a buy isn't bad for 5.
Tormentor- Cute rework, I would also remove Envy for this effect. Repeating Locusts and War can be triggering.
Bard- This looks to make bard extremely strong.
Set aside- Do these reworks share the set-aside cards? Can Bard use druid's set aside cards for example? Also if Bard, Druid, and Tragic Hero are in play it cuts the boon deck in half.
It just becomes "If the Boon/Hex is good, this card is good and if they aren't then they aren't." Which to me is much less interesting than the printed cards.
It just becomes "If the Boon/Hex is good, this card is good and if they aren't then they aren't." Which to me is much less interesting than the printed cards.
Which of the Boons would be bad on a Smithy? Will-o-wisps do risk being drawn dead, but can be very powerful when they aren't "bonus" cards, and you can use it to help activate the self trashing.
Quote
Tragic Hero- I don't think Tragic hero needs a buff, +3 cards and a buy isn't bad for 5.
It's a slight buff, but that's not what it's about. It's about being more interesting/varied. The current version seems like Margrave except it attacks you instead of your opponents.
If I had a Silver for every time people badmouth treasures, I'd be a rich man.
Buying Silver is often bad, but free Silver? Woohoo! Like seriously if you're building an engine that's shaky enough that adding 1 Silver is bad then you should just not buy any Fate cards or build a better deck.
Before Miserable was revealed, I wouldn't have been surprised by a Doom card that sets aside two Hexes at setup, letting players choose which one hits them Torturer style.
I guess I could work that into an Event or a card with Miserable banned or something.
If I had a Silver for every time people badmouth treasures, I'd be a rich man.
Does Copper count to that?
And I think when people think "Treasure" they think about how it clogs your engines (i.e. Silver), even though there are Treasures that work great in engines (i.e. Fortune and Crown).
If I had a Silver for every time people badmouth treasures
If I had a Silver for every time people badmouth treasures
You wouldn't be able to draw your deck.
Before Miserable was revealed, I wouldn't have been surprised by a Doom card that sets aside two Hexes at setup, letting players choose which one hits them Torturer style.
I guess I could work that into an Event or a card with Miserable banned or something.
I think it could work even with Miserable included. -4 points is fairly relevant, and card-shaped things need not always be awesome. :)
I would be more concerned about having two indefinitely stackable attacks out (War, Locusts, Greed), or Deluded plus an indefinitely stackable attack.
Making it impossible for Transmute to gain a Transmute seems like "killing the darling" :/ I don't care whether it can gain a Gold or a Duchy, but gaining itself at least some of the time is the meme.
Experiment is a card which would work fine as an event (Gain 2 Horses)
Every card that could be an event should be one IMO. You lose a bit by not being able to gain the card, but the space it saves can make room for more cards. Cache, Masterpiece, IGG should all be events (replace IGG's on play with being a Silver and Copper, and buff the other 2)
Small disagree with IGG - using it as TfB fodder is like, my favorite part of the card.
Making it impossible for Transmute to gain a Transmute seems like "killing the darling" :/ I don't care whether it can gain a Gold or a Duchy, but gaining itself at least some of the time is the meme.
Mine (Action, $5)
+1 Coffers
You may trash a Treasure from your hand. Gain a Treasure costing at most $3 more than it into your hand
Harem (Treasure/Victory, $6)
$2
+2 buys
-
2 VP
In games using this, when you gain a Gold, you may exchange it for a Harem
Cursed Village (Action, $5)
+2 Actions
Draw until you have six cards in hand.
-
When you gain this, take "Cursed entry"
Cursed entry (state)
At the start of your turn, discard down to 3 cards in hand and return this.
Stash (Treasure, $5)
$2
If you have played at least 2 Actions this turn, you may put your deck into your discard pile.
-
When shuffling this, you may look through your remaining deck, and may put this anywhere in the shuffled cards.
Mine (Action, $5)
+1 Coffers
You may trash a Treasure from your hand. Gain a Treasure costing at most $3 more than it into your hand
Harem (Treasure/Victory, $6)
$2
+2 buys
-
2 VP
In games using this, when you gain a Gold, you may exchange it for a Harem
Cursed Village (Action, $5)
+2 Actions
Draw until you have six cards in hand.
-
When you gain this, take "Cursed entry"
Cursed entry (state)
At the start of your turn, discard down to 3 cards in hand and return this.
Stash (Treasure, $5)
$2
If you have played at least 2 Actions this turn, you may put your deck into your discard pile.
-
When shuffling this, you may look through your remaining deck, and may put this anywhere in the shuffled cards.
Aaaaand done with Transmute. Turn that Potion into a Horse! This is untested and I don't expect it to become a power card, but I bet it's worth pick up more often now.Seems like all those Experiments have finally paid off!
(http://i.imgur.com/yiztqH9.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/CDQjSit.png)Should definitely be a Command card and say "play one of the discarded non-Command cards". Compared to Tribute, I'm not sure it should be an Attack.
I'm very interested in feedback on this one especially. My intuition is that it's very weak early, and maybe too weak overall.
That Pirate Ship bears no resemblance to the official card? Like it's a cool fan card but I have little to no understanding of calling it a revised official card.
(https://i.imgur.com/CDQjSit.png)Should definitely be a Command card and say "play one of the discarded non-Command cards". Compared to Tribute, I'm not sure it should be an Attack.
I'm very interested in feedback on this one especially. My intuition is that it's very weak early, and maybe too weak overall.
I think this version maintains Pirate Ship's issue of scaling very strongly with player count. Also, it should probably cost $2.
(https://i.imgur.com/CDQjSit.png)Should definitely be a Command card and say "play one of the discarded non-Command cards". Compared to Tribute, I'm not sure it should be an Attack.
I'm very interested in feedback on this one especially. My intuition is that it's very weak early, and maybe too weak overall.
I think this version maintains Pirate Ship's issue of scaling very strongly with player count. Also, it should probably cost $2.
Hmmm ... would interact interestingly with Village Green. If you play this card and I discard Village Green, I can choose the reaction. Then, since it's no longer in my discard pile, I believe the Stop-Moving Rule would apply, and you wouldn't be able to play it?
I think this is confusion against the old "lose track rule". The old "lose track" rule would make it whiff, right?
This stuff is tricky.
(https://i.imgur.com/CDQjSit.png)Should definitely be a Command card and say "play one of the discarded non-Command cards". Compared to Tribute, I'm not sure it should be an Attack.
I'm very interested in feedback on this one especially. My intuition is that it's very weak early, and maybe too weak overall.
I think this version maintains Pirate Ship's issue of scaling very strongly with player count. Also, it should probably cost $2.
Hmmm ... would interact interestingly with Village Green. If you play this card and I discard Village Green, I can choose the reaction. Then, since it's no longer in my discard pile, I believe the Stop-Moving Rule would apply, and you wouldn't be able to play it?
No, that doesn't work... Stop-Moving rule never prevents you from playing a card. You would just fail to move it into play, which wouldn't even matter if you're "playing it, leaving it there". And as we now see from the most recent ruling; you could even play it if it's completely impossible to find because it's been shuffled into your deck!
(https://i.imgur.com/CDQjSit.png)Should definitely be a Command card and say "play one of the discarded non-Command cards". Compared to Tribute, I'm not sure it should be an Attack.
I'm very interested in feedback on this one especially. My intuition is that it's very weak early, and maybe too weak overall.
I think this version maintains Pirate Ship's issue of scaling very strongly with player count. Also, it should probably cost $2.
Hmmm ... would interact interestingly with Village Green. If you play this card and I discard Village Green, I can choose the reaction. Then, since it's no longer in my discard pile, I believe the Stop-Moving Rule would apply, and you wouldn't be able to play it?
No, that doesn't work... Stop-Moving rule never prevents you from playing a card. You would just fail to move it into play, which wouldn't even matter if you're "playing it, leaving it there". And as we now see from the most recent ruling; you could even play it if it's completely impossible to find because it's been shuffled into your deck!
So, then, you would have a card that's being played by two different people?
I'm not sure it should be an Attack.It is a weak Attack, but after one or several plays the Attack effect can be like that of Fortune Teller.
Tracking would be a nightmare on that version of Pirate Ship. I think it would be good for at least 1 attack in the game to trash Copper (to make players think twice about over-thinning theor deck in games with good trashers), it should just compensate players for the way it helps in most games.Well, this is way too strong. It's a nonterminal Knight for $3.
Pirate Ship
Action/Attack - $3
+1 Action
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of their deck, trashes a revealed Action or Treasure, then discards the rest. +1 Coffers if any Treasures were trashed, +3 cards if any Coppers were trashed.
How about:
Pirate Ship
Action/Attack - $4
+1 Action
Each each player reveals the top 2 cards of their deck, trashes a revealed Treasure and discards the rest. If all cards trashed this way are Coppers, +$3.
I think Donald has stated that he'd like to change IGG's above-line text to +$2, but this also works.
Research's setting aside and missing shuffles makes it not all that fun.
IMO
Research
Action - $4
+1 Action
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a Horse per $1 it costs.
The horses could be top decked but without the duration type and setting aside it's a big buff.
Border Guard
$2 Action
+1 Action.
Look at a number of cards from your deck equal to the number of Border Guards you have in play. Put one in your hand and discard the rest.
-
If you have any unspent coin at the end of your buy phase, you may put this on top of your deck. If you do, discard all other Border Guards you have in play.
I don't really see how that version is going to accomplish the version of leaving IGG near its current power level but disincentivizing rushes, which I would assume is the goal.
You could just excise the Artifact abilities out of Border Village entirely. That's how it originally was. "+1 Card. +1 Action. Look at the top 2 cards of your deck. Put one into your hand and discard the other." It no longer activates Patron, for what that matters. (It mattered a lot to me at the time, since there were precious few ways to activate Patron in Renaissance.)That's funny. The reason I don't like most artifacts, but don't mind Lost in the Woods is that I think the minigame of stealing powerful artifacts from each other is very annoying. But Lost in the Woods isn't particularly strong. If you don't have it, it means you can play Fool for a strong effect, so you don't miss it when it gets stolen. (Treasure chest isn't that strong either, but I just think it seems tacked on and Swashbuckler doesn't need it. Same for the Key and Treasurer actually.)
EDIT: I enjoy Artifacts in real-life games, except Lost in the Woods! Lost in the Woods just makes Fool way too complex. I'd be interested in testing Fool as a one-shot and maybe moving Lucky Coin to Bard.
On Artifacts, since each Artifact only corresponds to one card, room could have been saved by making the Artifact the randomiser, with something like this.
(https://i.imgur.com/FXa99u5.jpg)
That's funny. The reason I don't like most artifacts, but don't mind Lost in the Woods is that I think the minigame of stealing powerful artifacts from each other is very annoying. But Lost in the Woods isn't particularly strong. If you don't have it, it means you can play Fool for a strong effect, so you don't miss it when it gets stolen. (Treasure chest isn't that strong either, but I just think it seems tacked on and Swashbuckler doesn't need it. Same for the Key and Treasurer actually.)
I like Jungle Explorer better than Swashbuckler. The coin token mechanic with Swashbuckler seems arbitrary to me (same with the discount on Fisherman), but Jungle Explorer earns her coffers and villagers. What is this card from?
(http://i.imgur.com/G30m6J2.png)I find your Duchess boring. Here's my Duchess:
DuchessIf this seems strong for a freebie, I'd just make it more specific "You may discard a Duchy for +1 Action."
$2 - Action
+$2.
You may discard a card costing at least $3. If you do, +1 Action.
-
In games using this, when you buy a Duchy, you may gain a Duchess.
Donald X is on record as saying he wouldn't do Hexes in hindsight, so thinking about the official Doom cards (I posted something like this a few years ago in a different thread).
Werewolf
Action/Night - $5
If it's your Night phase, gain a Silver. Otherwise, +3 cards
Not a bad consolation prize for drawing it dead, and sometimes you'd intentionally play it at night.
_________________________________________________
Vampire
Night - $5
Gain a card costing up to $5 that isn't a Vampire, then exchange this for a Bat
Bat
Night - $2*
Trash up to 2 cards from your hand. If you trashed any, exchange this for a Night card.
Vampire doesn't need a buff to make up for losing the hexing, but just to be fair I changed Bat slightly so it can transform into an Exorcist or a Raider or a Den of Sin (might need an awkward "exchanging isn't gaining" clarification in the FAQ however for the "gain to hand" night cards)
________________________________________________
Skulk
Action - $4
+1 Buy
---
When you gain or trash this, gain a Gold
Skulk is on my veto list on Dominion Online so I'm not sure how strong it is, but my impression was the card would be fine without the Hexing. When trash bonuses are fun though.
______________________________
Leprechaun
Action - $3
Gain a Gold. If you have exactly 7 cards in play, gain a Wish. Otherwise gain a Copper onto your deck.
Envious (as a "while this is in play" effect) is probably a better fit, but this is nice and simple.
______________________________
Cursed Village
Action - $5
+2 Actions
Draw until you have 6 cards in your hand
---
When you gain this, put a card from your hand onto your deck.
Just like with official Cursed Village, it might hurt, it might not. This version can also be helpful.
_________________________________
Tormentor
Action/Attack - $5
+$2
If you have an Imp in play, each other player gains a Curse. Otherwise, gain an Imp.
Incorporates another good idea from the forums regarding Imps (not sure who had it first - maybe it was LastFootnote?). May not need the Cursing but I like the idea that the little Imps are helping the Tormentor do mean things.
Deluded is way too strong for a realiable attack, and the best counter play is Big Money.I mean, have it be something like "you may discard an action card; if you do, each other player takes Deluded. If you don't, each other player with 5+ cards in hand discards an Action or Treasure card (or reveals they can't)." (fear, iirc)
I like Envious and with Leprechaun it creates interesting situations where you have to decide whether you want to play it or not, but I imagine it being too easy to work around.
Skulk
Action - $4
+1 Buy
---
When you gain or trash this, gain a Gold
Skulk is on my veto list on Dominion Online so I'm not sure how strong it is, but my impression was the card would be fine without the Hexing. When trash bonuses are fun though.
Each other player with 5 or fewer cards in hand gains a Copper to their hand.
Each other player may reveal a Copper from their hand; if they don't, they gain one to their hand.
Ultimately, Skulk provides access to Gold at a significant discountWell, yeah, but buying Skulk also adds two stop cards to your deck. Without the Hexing the card would be far too weak as Ruined Market plus Gold is identical to Woodcutter plus Copper.
Ultimately, Skulk provides access to Gold at a significant discountWell, yeah, but buying Skulk also adds two stop cards to your deck. Without the Hexing the card would be far too weak as Ruined Market plus Gold is identical to Woodcutter plus Copper.
Ruined Market + Gold is arguably significantly worse than Woodcutter + Copper, as the need for +Buys is strongly correlated to having lots of money, and any hand with a Ruined Market has one space fewer for payload. That's why I tend to get Skulk (even in it's current version) with the intention of trashing it, either with the intent to trash it using a TfB card I am intending to buy anyway (Sacrifice, Upgrade, etc.), or because I have very good trashing (Cathedral). If my plan for Skulk is not to play it, then I don't really care that much about it's on-play effect.
On the other hand, as I mentioned before, +Buy is something that is not infrequently absent from boards. It is also something that can be very needed in a deck. Ergo, I have, on very rare occasions, bought (or intentionally gained) Ruined Market in games where I was desperate for +Buy and nothing else was available (especially where the nature of the Kingdom made turns very swingy, getting more than $13 in some turns and less than $5 in others, e.g. in games with Minion). There is a non-zero set of circumstances where buying a Ruined Market at $4 might be a strategically reasonable choice, albeit not nearly enough to justify that card existing.
Ultimately, Skulk provides access to Gold at a significant discountWell, yeah, but buying Skulk also adds two stop cards to your deck. Without the Hexing the card would be far too weak as Ruined Market plus Gold is identical to Woodcutter plus Copper.
Ruined Market + Gold is arguably significantly worse than Woodcutter + Copper, as the need for +Buys is strongly correlated to having lots of money, and any hand with a Ruined Market has one space fewer for payload. That's why I tend to get Skulk (even in it's current version) with the intention of trashing it, either with the intent to trash it using a TfB card I am intending to buy anyway (Sacrifice, Upgrade, etc.), or because I have very good trashing (Cathedral). If my plan for Skulk is not to play it, then I don't really care that much about it's on-play effect.
On the other hand, as I mentioned before, +Buy is something that is not infrequently absent from boards. It is also something that can be very needed in a deck. Ergo, I have, on very rare occasions, bought (or intentionally gained) Ruined Market in games where I was desperate for +Buy and nothing else was available (especially where the nature of the Kingdom made turns very swingy, getting more than $13 in some turns and less than $5 in others, e.g. in games with Minion). There is a non-zero set of circumstances where buying a Ruined Market at $4 might be a strategically reasonable choice, albeit not nearly enough to justify that card existing.
The principle that a good turn plus a bad turn is usually better than two mediocre turns would argue that Gold + Ruined Market is better.
Annex
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/d/d4/Debt8.png/18px-Debt8.png) - Event
During clean-up this turn, after discarding and before drawing your next hand:
Look through your discard pile. Shuffle all but up to 5 cards from it into your deck. Gain a Duchy.
Research's setting aside and missing shuffles makes it not all that fun.
IMO
Research
Action - $4
+1 Action
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a Horse per $1 it costs.
The horses could be top decked but without the duration type and setting aside it's a big buff.
Adventurer would probably work with just a reduced cost; I think I'd try it at $4 (or even $3); this might make it a reasonable BM card (in engines, it's still usually worse than Moat).I think Adventurer should cost $2, no joke. It takes a lot of work to make it good, like Poor House. Arguably it takes even more work than Poor House, though the upper bound on its power is also higher. Anyway, yeah, $2. That's my unofficial official recommendation.
Sea Chart is another brand new card that interacts with the 2nd from the top card of your deck. I would revise to:
Sea Chart
Action - $3
+1 Action
Reveal the top card of your deck and put it in your hand. If it's a copy of a card you have in play, +1 Card
Adventurer would probably work with just a reduced cost; I think I'd try it at $4 (or even $3); this might make it a reasonable BM card (in engines, it's still usually worse than Moat).I think Adventurer should cost $2, no joke. It takes a lot of work to make it good, like Poor House. Arguably it takes even more work than Poor House, though the upper bound on its power is also higher. Anyway, yeah, $2. That's my unofficial official recommendation.
I've finally tried to estimate Adventurer's strength if it cost $2, playing with it in a few IRL solo games. The result was that $2-Adventurer BM takes 13 turns to get 4 Provinces on average, and 15 turns to get 5 Provinces.
(In those games, it wouldn't have mattered if it cost $3 instead, since I never happened to have a $2 turn.)
This is better than Smithy-BM, which averages 14 turns to 4 Provinces according to the Wiki. Does someone know how many turns stronger (non-Attack) BM cards need to get 4 or 5 Provinces?
I've also tried a few solo games of $2 Adventurer+Spice Merchant BM, since I expected SM to be one of the best supporting Action cards for Adventurer. But surprisingly, this strategy took slightly longer to get to 4 resp. 5 Provinces than $2 Adventurer-BM alone...
Sea Chart is another brand new card that interacts with the 2nd from the top card of your deck. I would revise to:
Sea Chart
Action - $3
+1 Action
Reveal the top card of your deck and put it in your hand. If it's a copy of a card you have in play, +1 Card
I think that might have been tested? I'm not certain.
I don’t perceive the need to buff Patrol which is already one of the strongest $5 Smithies.Sea Chart is another brand new card that interacts with the 2nd from the top card of your deck. I would revise to:
Sea Chart
Action - $3
+1 Action
Reveal the top card of your deck and put it in your hand. If it's a copy of a card you have in play, +1 Card
I think that might have been tested? I'm not certain.
I just thought that Donald X had finally noticed that the "cantrip checkers" are more fun when they interact with the top card rather than the 2nd top card (with Sorceress).
On that note.
Patrol
Action - $5
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed curses and Victory cards into your hand, then put the rest back in any order.
Afterwards, +3 Cards.
This is so that Patrol is always at least a "best 3 of 4" drawer even if the Scout effect did nothing.
Adventurer would probably work with just a reduced cost; I think I'd try it at $4 (or even $3); this might make it a reasonable BM card (in engines, it's still usually worse than Moat).I think Adventurer should cost $2, no joke. It takes a lot of work to make it good, like Poor House. Arguably it takes even more work than Poor House, though the upper bound on its power is also higher. Anyway, yeah, $2. That's my unofficial official recommendation.
I've finally tried to estimate Adventurer's strength if it cost $2, playing with it in a few IRL solo games. The result was that $2-Adventurer BM takes 13 turns to get 4 Provinces on average, and 15 turns to get 5 Provinces.
(In those games, it wouldn't have mattered if it cost $3 instead, since I never happened to have a $2 turn.)
This is better than Smithy-BM, which averages 14 turns to 4 Provinces according to the Wiki. Does someone know how many turns stronger (non-Attack) BM cards need to get 4 or 5 Provinces?
I've also tried a few solo games of $2 Adventurer+Spice Merchant BM, since I expected SM to be one of the best supporting Action cards for Adventurer. But surprisingly, this strategy took slightly longer to get to 4 resp. 5 Provinces than $2 Adventurer-BM alone...
Huh, that's interesting! Stronger than I expected, but maybe not crazy? Or maybe it needs to cost $4. Of course probably it just shouldn't exist at any cost, since it seems to really only work in money decks.
Circle of Witches
At start of Clean-up, you may spend 3 Favors to have each other player gain a Curse. Repeat as desired.
Elder (Action, $5)
+1 Action
$2
Take an Elder token. (when you are instructed to choose between abilities (using the word "Choose"), you may spend an Elder token to take an extra (different) option)
Collection
Treasure - $5
+$2
+1 Buy
This turn, when you gain an Action card, if it's the first time you gained a copy of it this turn +1VP
Thematic with the name and removes the broken interactions with horse gainers.
Figurine 2
$5 - Treasure
+2 Cards
+1 Buy.
You may discard up to 3 Actions for +$1 each.
Figurine 3
$5 - Treasure
+2 Cards
+1 Buy.
You may put a card from your hand onto your deck.
You may discard an Action for +$1.
Figurine 4
$5 - Treasure
+2 Cards
You may discard an Action for +$1 and +1 Buy.
You may play an Action card from your hand.
Figurine might not be the best non terminal draw but it does not need to be buffed. After all it is the only Lab variant besides fully developed City that provides conditional extra Buys. That is pretty huge, you get one engine component that does two essential jobs.
Well, you don’t play Figurine in decks with a high Action density to begin with and actually Figurine is hyper-non-terminal as it can convert dead Actions into Pouches.Figurine might not be the best non terminal draw but it does not need to be buffed. After all it is the only Lab variant besides fully developed City that provides conditional extra Buys. That is pretty huge, you get one engine component that does two essential jobs.
It's hard for me to consider Figurine "non-terminal" when you (usually) can't play Actions afterwards.
I thought there was some sort of mistake with Figurine and Longship being $5s. Figurine has proven itself as a solid $5 to me, and it's retroactively made me see Scepter and Capitalism as a lot stronger.
Jury's still out on Longship for me.
I'm not against the whole idea of a Treasure that draws, but Figurine seems awkward and usually really weak to me. Hopefully this change makes it more useful but not OP.QuoteFigurine 2
$5 - Treasure
+2 Cards
+1 Buy.
You may discard up to 3 Actions for +$1 each.
Another possibility with a less drastic change:QuoteFigurine 3
$5 - Treasure
+2 Cards
+1 Buy.
You may put a card from your hand onto your deck.
You may discard an Action for +$1.
or a more drastic change:QuoteFigurine 4
$5 - Treasure
+2 Cards
You may discard an Action for +$1 and +1 Buy.
You may play an Action card from your hand.
Which do you think is best?
Figurine 5
$5 - Treasure
+2 Cards
You may discard an Action for +1 Buy and +$1.
You may put a card from your hand onto your deck.
Tide PoolsI totally disagree that Tide Pools is a dud or even weak. Vanilla-wise it is a Forum spread over two turns and while handsize attacks kill it in its tracks, it is a fine sifter otherwise.
Action/Duration - $4
+1 Action
Choose one: +1 Card; or +3 Cards and discard 2 cards at the start of your next turn.
IMO it's not always clear whether the Tide Pools effect is better than a cantrip, and thats a more interesting decision to make with plays than simply not playing/gaining the card (which is clearly a dud without specific combos, much like many removed 1E cards).
Also it's a teacher card for "Durations only stay in play if they have something left to do"
Silver Mine (Treasure, $5)
Gain a Treasure costing less than this to your hand. When you gain a Province this turn, trash this to gain a Gold Mine.
Gold Mine (Treasure, $8)
Gain a Treasure costing less than this to your hand.
(this is not in the supply)
Silver Mine (Treasure, $5*)
Gain a Treasure costing less than this to your hand.
-
During your turns, this costs $1 more per card you gained this turn.
Silver Mine (Treasure - Duration, $5)
Choose one: Gain a Treasure costing less than this to your hand, or put this into your hand at the start of next turn.
Idea 2QuoteSilver Mine (Treasure, $5*)
Gain a Treasure costing less than this to your hand.
-
During your turns, this costs $1 more per card you gained this turn.
Capital (Action, $5)
+1 Card
+1 Action
+$6
At the start of Clean-up, take 6D, and then you may pay off D.
Is the Buy removal intentional? I hope not because this is a pretty serious nerf; that Buy is far stronger than an extra card.
Moat
$2 - Action - Reaction
+2 Cards.
Until the end of your turn, you are unaffected by attacks.
-
When another player plays an attack, you may play this from your hand.
This only makes a difference with Black Cat.
This only makes a difference with Black Cat.
No, the change makes Moat nonterminal (i.e. a Lab) whenever an opponent plays an attack. It's a lot stronger than the original card, often better than Guard Dog...
Moat
$2 - Action - Reaction
If it's not your turn, +1 Card. Otherwise, +2 Cards.
Until the end of your turn, you are unaffected by attacks.
-
When another player plays an attack, you may play this from your hand.
Treasure Map (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Treasure_Map)
Version-A Version-B
(https://i.imgur.com/jdspErz.png) (https://i.imgur.com/YNHvaDE.png)
The idea behind Version-A is to enable some use instead of being a dead card most times. The idea behind Version-B is that you may get an odd quantity to get them to collide and this provides some use from a single.
Still not sure what to do with Spy or Pearl Diver (suggestions welcome).
It has track problem: as the official rule, 'If you play a card on someone else's turn, you discard it in that turn's Clean-up, unless it is a Duration card with things left to do.'Just have to add the duration type then. easy fix.
<modded Crypt>I like the idea, but I'd suggest making it a cantrip instead of +2 Cards. That makes its effect more similar to the original version, but still a significant buff.
Silver Mine (Treasure, $5)
Gain a card costing less than this to your hand.
I got another idea for Silver Mine
Idea 4QuoteSilver Mine (Treasure, $5)
Gain a card costing less than this to your hand.
With this, it can also serve as an expansive nonterminal Workshop if there are no interesting Treasures to gain. And of course, it gets quite nuts with stuff like Villa.
I'm hoping if there's a Guilds 3rd edition (with or without other expansions mixed in), it will have events.
As a pure space saver:
"Masterpiece"
Event - $3+
Gain a Copper and set it aside. Put it into your hand at end of turn.
_____________
Overpay: Gain a Silver per $1 overpaid
I'm not personally a fan of Doctor - way too luck based early game and the overpay is clunky. But I like the premise of overpay for deck filtering.
"Doctor"
Event - $3+
Gain a card costing up to $5. Each other player gets +1 Coffers
_______
Overpay: Reveal a card from the top of your deck per $1 overpaid. Trash or discard any number of them.
I'm curious what a proper price for a 'regular-sized' turnip would be.
That is:
Turnip
+1 coffers
+1$ per coffers you have.
It would then be a strictly better silver, so probably $5?
Maybe even $6.
Working on a Dark Ages 2nd edition for my own amusement. I didn't get rid of Rats but I changed it subtly, and now it has a normal 10 card supply pile (freeing up some space). Now there's a way to trash Rats even in a game without any other trashers (thematically, the Rats starve and die once there's nothing for them to eat). The returning to pile means the Rats are always there.
(https://i.imgur.com/ZclO6gl.png)
Graverobber first half ($4, Action - Reaction)
Gain a non-Victory card from the trash onto your deck.
-
After playing a non-Duration Action card, you may trash that card and discard this from your hand for +3 Cards.
Graverobber second half ($5, Action)
Trash a non-Victory card from your hand. Gain a card costing up to $3 more.
This card is very wordy and its abilities get rarely used in tandem.Gotta disagree. Whenever I go for Graverobber, I use both abilities.