1
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Fan Mechanics Week 55: Jewelry
« on: Today at 01:56:32 am »
Winner: Witchstone
Runner Up: Circlet
Detailed judging to come
Runner Up: Circlet
Detailed judging to come
I guess Jewelry isn't getting a lot of love; not many submissions. I still think it's an interesting concept.I guess the problem is that it is pretty narrow design space. You need resources that you can still use in your Buy phase because otherwise you could implement it as Night, hence all Jewelry cards produce Coins and Buys. You also need to care about stuff that happened during the Buy phase, because otherwise you could implement it as normal Treasure.It really is sort of a different phase in between the Night phase and buying your first thing, since you can't play Treasures. I like that it uses that space.
My entry for this week is a new Treasure subtype: Jewelry:
Normally your buy phase consists of of two sub phases: First, play your treasure cards (spend coffer, pay off debt); second, buy card(s) (or event(s), or project(s))
Treasure-Jewelry cards are are cards you can play any time during your buy phase. Frequently, they will care about what or how many cards you have bought.
Examples:
I didn't get around to voting, but it's interesting how weak people are ranking Fortune Hunter.I think it is a simple matter. LastFootnote has argued that Adventurer is a $2, i.e. digging for Treasure is not better than drawing. So Fortune Hunter is similar to +2 Coins, +1 Card which is weaker than Smithy. Smithy is a strong $4, so Fortune Hunter is a weak $4.
It's very often at least a Terminal Gold and it has a few other tricks up its sleeve. It's also likely to come up in people's experiences in "extra plunder" games, giving it more Treasures to interact with. That's setting it up to be seen as very strong, and I thought Terminal Gold was already considered too good for $4. So it's very interesting that even in first impressions something similar to it in power isn't really impressing anybody.
I wonder how strong a Terminal Gold actually is.
That sounds like something I would say, but Fortune Hunter is different from Adventurer in a lot of important ways. Adventurer's base value is +$2, and you have to work pretty hard to make it reliably better. Fortune Hunter's base value is +$3. It can whiff more easily than Adventurer, but it's still not likely to in the kind of deck where you want it. But perhaps equally important, Fortune Hunter puts the other cards back instead of discarding them. So it's effectively pulling a Copper out of your next hand (or next draw if you didn't play it at the end of your Action phase). That's usually a pretty nice side benefit. Also, Fortune Hunter sometimes lets you choose between different Treasures, and you can smooth out your money a bit that way. You can even opt not to play any of the Treasures! With Adventurer you're stuck with whatever you get.
I wonder how strong a Terminal Gold actually is.Well, strictly worse than Treasurer, so it couldn't be priced at $5 or higher. Could well be in the sour spot where it's too strong at $4 and too weak at $5.
Donald X: Don't make silver+ power level cards costing 4$ or less, they're too good.
Community: k
Donald X: here's Patron lol
Community: oh yeahlook at what we got
Why do people always name Patron as the first official Silver+ for $4. Conclave came first.
Reinforcements - $5
Action - Duration - Attack
+$2
Each other player discards down to 3 cards in hand.
The next time anyone plays an Attack, draw until you have 6 cards in hand afterwards.
Might be ok at $4, the way that both Witch and Sea Witch are worth $5 despite the latter doing more, because it will miss reshuffles. Reinforcements might end up sitting around for a while.
I considered $4. It's tricky to judge because if you're able to play multiple copies on a turn, only one is stuck in play, and copies beyond the first provide both draw and virtual coin, a rare and powerful combination. I also kind of want to avoid $4, because then it's more accessible and useful in the opening, but it gives a huge advantage to the player that happens to play it first. At $5 it competes with so many other cards that are better for the early game, so you really have to think about when the best time to get it is.
QuoteReinforcements - $5
Action - Duration - Attack
+$2
Each other player discards down to 3 cards in hand.
The next time anyone plays an Attack, draw until you have 6 cards in hand afterwards.
Town council. Set it up, and the next copy rewards you for the amount of cards you played in between. Synergizes with duration cards, forever-in-play cards, and engines that can reliably play a lot of cards in between villages. Price could be changed idk if $4 is balanced.
Shaman + Swindler can sometimes end up helping your opponent, depending on what cards it trashes, since they can get the trashed card back on their next turn
It's especially bad in a game with Feodum. Trash a Feodum, your opponent gets 3 Silvers plus a $4, and then they get their Feodum right back, so you're basically just increasing the value of your opponent's Feoda
Mine would perhaps work at $4 or if it were non-terminal, or both. Does being able to Mine Actions really push it from $4/$5 into $6 territory? I seriously doubt it, that is an edge case.
I would try this at $4 and $5.