Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Fragasnap

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15
1
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: January 18, 2020, 09:05:05 am »
Quote
Provisioner
Types: Action
Cost: $5
You may gain a Silver. For each card in your hand, the player to your left puts a card from your discard pile into your hand.
Doubles your hand from the worst cards in your discard pile (or all of them if you don't have that many).  It also lets you gain a Silver for the cases when you don't have a discard pile or want to slog your deck.

This seems like a card that should be purchased with some debt.  And more expensive maybe?  Maybe 3$ and $3debt?

Can't say why.  Just a feel that it is OP at $5.
Without villages and labs, it's worse than Envoy, and degrading quickly while greening. I would value it $4

You make a convincing case there.  I think you are right.  In one sense, a guaranteed 10 cards is better than.  But I would easily prefer 5 cards of cycling progression to five cards without it.

$4 is right.  But a pretty good card at that price if TFB cards and a village is present.

But not as good as Envoy.
Provisioner's draw becomes big and decent if you have a source of +actions and a way to ensure you have a larger number of cards in hand than useless cards in your discard pile (especially trash Estates, gain mid-turn, and discard productively).  When this occurs, Provisioner's draw is often non-trivial, so the length of its resolution becomes an important consideration in its design.  The draw effect on its own is likely a $4 effect due to how much needs to appear to make it valuable, but I want Provisioner to be a $5 card to reduce the number of times it is gained and played in a game.  In order to make Provisioner's draw worthwhile, I put one of the things it needs onto it: A mid-turn gain.  The form of that mid-turn gain needs to be something that does not add significantly to its resolution speed (Workshop or The Sky's Gift would take too long), so it optionally gains a Silver.  With that gain, its plays become more like Explorer (can't gain Gold) or Sculptor (can't gain non-Silver, doesn't give Villagers), so $5 looks like a fair enough cost─though definitely in the weaker half of $5 cards.

Quote
Summer House - Action Shelter, $1
You may play a non-Duration, non-Shelter Action card from your hand twice. If you do, trash this.
Quote
Taverna - Night Shelter, $1
Choose a card you have in play that you've gained a copy of this turn. If you do, trash this to gain another copy of it.
Quote
Asylum - Action Shelter, $1
Discard 2 Shelters. If you do, +1 Card per card in your hand.
Edit: reworked Summer House so it can't be trashed in the opening. Replaced Wagon with the cleaner Taverna, which also can't be trashed in the opening.
You can still trash Taverna in the opening by turning it into a Copper.  Not sure if that's good or not, but I would just ask to "choose an Action you have in play..." to avoid the issue altogether.
Asylum looks super weak.  I get that the idea is that you have to hold onto Taverna and Summer House so you can get a powerful draw, but fact is that if you can manage to draw all 3 junk Shelters in any kind of consistent way, the not-even-doubling your hand (your hand is reduced by 3 before you get to draw anything) will be a paltry benefit that only clinches a deck that was already going to draw itself anyway.  I cannot imagine a deck that could stomach 3 extra dead-weight cards that it could otherwise trash just for the hope of this benefit.

Quote
Harlequin
Types: Action
Cost: $4
You may play a card from your hand three times. If you did, trash it.
Note that it specifies card, not just action, meaning it can be used on any playable card.
This is strictly better than Moneylender (as in, using it on a copper is the same as Moneylender, and this adds additional functionality) and should probably cost more as a result
Seconded.  I'd say it would still be strong at $5 but unhealthy at $6 (as swinging into a strong tempo-trasher on turn 3\4 is typically too luck-based).
I'm also not sure that the rules inherently imply that you can't "play" a Curse or Victory card, it just doesn't have any generic function to do so nor a definition of what would happen if you did.  I think this does need to specify Action or Treasure.  It also should either trash the card when it is discarded or else follow Procession's lead by excluding Duration cards to avoid tracking issues.

Quote
Vista $5 Action - Victory - Duration
Set a Victory card aside under this, face up.
(This stays in play)
If the card set aside in this way cost $5 or more, cards cost <1> more during your turn.
-
This is worth VP equal to the set-aside card.

This is a riff on an old card from the Throne Room contest, spiralstaircase's Eyre, with the difference being this always works (and sometimes hurts you after the fact) instead of having to try to time it.
Needs to be optional for when it gets played with no Victory cards in your hand.
I was playing around with a similar idea, but the problem is that its power budget gets completely eaten up by setting aside Provinces and then it ends up feeling so similar to a less interesting Island anyway.  The really meaningful difference here is that it makes cards more expensive, but that only occurs so close to the end of the game (other than the fact that it drags out the game's ending more because adding another whole ~36VP to the game is pretty silly) and doing virtually anything else with it seems like such a waste of a one-shot $5 card.

Promenade (Action, $6).

You may play an Action card from your hand twice.
You may return one of your Villagers. If you did, play it a third time.
---
When you gain this, +1 Villager.

A Throne Room variant that lets you upgrade to King's Court if you have a Villager to hand.
...
Yeah. This is just a more-expensive Throne Room that has a stronger effect than Throne Room. I dunno if it's weak at or not, but it seemed weird to use the term "dead" when that generally refers to something like Stables in a hand with no treasure; or when people make fan cards that do almost nothing unless there's an attack available, etc. Even if the card were just literally Throne Room but costing , I wouldn't think to use the term "dead".

Would this work better as a $5? I wasn't sure initially if it should cost $5 or $6; eventually I erred on the side of caution.

I think $6 is an appropriate cost. I'd generally advise against using busted cards like King's Court as a benchmark to balance other cards and comparing this to the $5 Throne variants it seems clearly much stronger than those to me.
A King's Court once that becomes a Throne Room is much stronger than a Throne Room that never misses (Royal Carriage)?  Crown and Scepter are definitely a very marginal benefit on top of Throne Room, but having a one-time upgrade is also not much of one.  I would not vote a $5 price as overwhelming, merely that the way it plays is dully familiar.
I'd personally prefer its playing be limited in some other way and it generate Villagers in some circumstance.  It would make it feel more different than Throne Room and the other Villager cards.

Siege Tower
Types: Action, Attack, Duration
Cost: $4
You may play an Attack card from your hand. If you do, at the start of your next turn, play it again. Otherwise, each other player puts their -1 Card token on their deck.
Setup: Add 2 extra Attack Kingdom card piles to the Supply.
I've played with "Play a non-Duration Action from your hand. If it is still in play, at the start of your next turn: Play it again." Even with no limiters it is such a weak effect that it is often best ignored at a cost of $2, because the costs of aligning it with a worthwhile Action and that inherent -1 Card on the first turn is not nearly compensated by the strength of start-of-turn draw.  Siege Tower however is significantly more limited than that.  It should probably Throne Room the Attack now and play it again next turn.
Playing an Attack Duration in an Attack Duration sounds like a tracking headache, and it seems doubly frustrating that Siege Tower is so bad in Siege Tower.  I'd much rather its Attack be something that can stack.  Maybe "+$1 and each other player with at least 4 cards in hand puts a card from their hand on top of their deck"?
I continue to dislike the idea of anything that throws more piles into the Supply simply because that is a design path that doesn't seem to have any meaningful end: We're just going to keep getting bigger and bigger Kingdoms.  That is completely to taste, though, so don't mind me.

2
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: January 16, 2020, 08:27:15 am »

Quote
Provisioner
Types: Action
Cost: $5
You may gain a Silver. For each card in your hand, the player to your left puts a card from your discard pile into your hand.
Doubles your hand from the worst cards in your discard pile (or all of them if you don't have that many).  It also lets you gain a Silver for the cases when you don't have a discard pile or want to slog your deck.

3
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: January 12, 2020, 08:15:02 am »

Quote
Nouveau Riche
Types: Action
Cost: $5
You may remove a token from your Villager mat to play an Action from your hand three times. Otherwise, you may play an Action from your hand of which you have no copies in play two times for +1 Villager.

HISTORY:
Changed from "You may reveal an Action from your hand. If you have no copies of it in play, +1 Villager. Either way, play it twice, and then you may remove a token from your Villager mat to play it a third time." Realized that's virtually never going to generate Villagers since you'd only keep one so you could consume it with a different play. Now it's a King's Court by eating a Villager or an Impish Throne Room that generates a Villager.

4
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: December 27, 2019, 11:36:14 pm »

Quote
Pioneer
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action, +$1. Move your +1 Card token to an Action Supply pile. (When you play a card from that pile, you first get +1 Card.) At the start of Clean-Up, remove it from the Supply.

5
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: December 23, 2019, 10:07:01 pm »
Quote
Gift Exchange
$3 - Action
Starting with the player to your left, each player trashes a card from their hand or a Gold from the supply.
Starting with you, each player may gain a card from the trash.
Question:
The way I want this to work when the Gold pile is empty is: players can still choose the Gold option, and if they do they trash nothing. Is that how you understood it? If not, how can I tweak the wording?
Your wording is correct according to the similar behavior of Tournament.  I've always disliked the wording and would prefer something such as
Code: [Select]
Starting with the player to your left, each player may trash a card from their hand. If they don't, they trash a Gold from the Supply.I don't know how much I like the card, just because it reads to me like a more troublesome Bishop.  The way it provides trashing to all players way will make it similarly irrelevant whenever it appears without other trashers.  When other trashers─and especially trashing Attacks─appear it goes on to be a weak Gold gainer with an uneven gaining power that is strongly bound by turn order.  Bishop at least can be relevant in any end-game by providing a decent trash-for-benefit effect.

Magic Workshop
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Gain a card costing up to $5. Choose a card in the Supply costing at least $3; each other player may gain a copy of it.
the goodwill-to-all aspect breaks in Potions games because no one is going to want to get junked with potions.
You might want to revise the order of these to make it more ... charitable - something like
Quote
Choose a card in the Supply costing at least $3; each other player may gain a copy of it. If anyone does, gain a card costing up to $5; otherwise, +1 Action
which keeps it from being a totally dead card in a game with an opponent who is refusing your help.
I could change Magic Workshop to "choose an Action card costing at least $3." That would solve both the Silver and Potion problems, though it would remove the ability to distribute useless alt-VP like Duke and Feodum (which I thought was cool), but that's also probably for the better.

I think anordinaryman spineflu's suggestion is too political and also far too weak; I'd never take a $3 if it meant my opponent got a $5, and the Ruined Village aspect doesn't really help. (At least make it a cantrip, though it could be interesting to make it a Peddler or Lab or something your opponent might want to accept the gift to deny you, but that's still very political in multiplayer.)
Magic Workshop is inherently incredibly political because Player A gets to choose the card that Players B and C can gain.  Helpful cards for each of those players would be different in many circumstances.  Regardless of politics, the ability for other players to gain a Silver in response to me gaining a $5 card does little to nothing to counterbalance the strength of that effect, let alone that there will often be worse options than Silver (like Duchy in the early game).  Frankly, this may as well just read "Gain a card costing up to $5."
While "Choose an Action card in the Supply..." would go a long way to improving the effect, I think that spineflu is ultimately correct to say that the card ought to be throttled by requiring one to select cards other players want.  I would try to make Magic Workshop an unconditional cantrip that then only gives you its powerful Workshop effect when you choose a card another player actually wants.

Quote
Christmas - Event $4
Choose to gain a Grinch; or both a Gift and a card costing up to $4. Each other player that has Naughty gains a Lump of Coal; if they don't have Naughty, they gain a Gift.
Quote
Naughty - State
When you play an Attack card, take Naughty.
Quote
Gift - Action - $4*
+1 Action. Return this to the Gift pile, if you did, gain a card costing up to $4.
(This is not in the Supply.)
Quote
Lump of Coal - Action - $0*
Return this to the Lump of Coal pile.
(This is not in the Supply.)
Quote
Grinch - Action Attack - $6*
+2 Cards, +1 Action. Each other player with at least 5 cards in hand discards a Gift or reveals a hand with no Gifts. Then, each other player discards down to 4 cards in hand.
(This is not in the Supply.)
All theme aside, Lump of Coal likely renders Attacks automatically impossible to play in Christmas games.  In 2-player games, playing an Attack means that the other player can buy a super-cheap Ball-ish that junks you for the rest of the game.  In multiplayer games, playing an Attack means that players can bury you in Lump of Coal cards for the rest of the game.
There probably needs to be something to prevent Lump of Coal from becoming so oppressive.

6
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: December 16, 2019, 08:31:49 pm »
Christmas Feast
Event -  $5
-
Look at cards from the Christmas Feast deck equal to the number of players. Gain one of these cards onto your deck. Each other player may gain one of the remaining cards at random, putting it onto their deck.
-
Setup: Make a Christmas Feast deck out of different unused Kingdom cards.

(You look at the cards privately and do not reveal them. After picking a card for yourself, you hold the remaining cards out face-down and have other players randomly pick one.)
This is fun. Couple of questions:
1. What happens to the cards players do not gain (as the gaining is optional)?
2. What happens if I gain an Ill-Gotten Gains (either as the buyer who sees it or a player who doesn't)? You might prefer to avoid the key-word "gain" so it doesn't trigger on-gain effects.
3. Do you think it's okay that super weak Victory cards can be part of the Christmas Feast deck? I think there are plenty of cards that would be bad to randomly shove into a deck without having Silk Road be one of them.

Snow Hill
Action - $5
+1 Card, +1 Action
You may play any number of Sleighs from your hand.
Each player including you gains a Sleigh.

Sleigh
Action - $0*
+3 Cards
Return this to its pile.
*This is not in the supply. There is a separate pile of 5 Sleighs per player.
I don't like that Sleigh is terminal without Snow Hill. It creates a possibly degenerate effect of every player needing to gain Snow Hills or else get buried in Sleighs.

Midnight Ride, Night, $3
Choose a non-Victory card. Starting with the player on your left, each player (including you) gains a copy of that card, putting it on top of their deck.

Even though you're the last to receive a card, you're still the first to get to use it, which I figure is reasonable given you're spending a buy to probably help everyone, which is really bad for tempo.
I think you are mistaken here.  I don't get to use it first, I just get it into my hand during Clean-Up.  Each other player need only play a cantrip to draw the card and use it before I get to.
Workshop+ to the top of my deck and everyone else gains to their discard pile would probably still be pretty weak.

Santa's Workshop
$3
Action
+1 Buy
Gain a card costing up to $4.
-------
When you gain this, each other player gains a Gift.

Gift
$0*
Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
+$1
(This is not in the Supply.)

Setup instructions for Gift: Use as many of them as you would Curses (haha). 50 provided.
The name is as thematic as I could get, hopefully it works.
So basically, it's a Workshop+ that gives a little present to the other players. How nice. I think the +Buy will be useful in Gardens games, and if you're making an engine, this could help you gain 3 cheap components in a single turn. Just be careful how many Gifts you give.
The benefit on top of Workshop is so marginal to make giving other players a free Peddler. I can see it being bought in some games when a +Buy is desperately needed, but that it will rot in the same hole as Woodcutter for that reason.  The card is also simply very component hungry, which I think is an unspoken issue on this forum.  I'd never want to print 50 Gift cards to work with one weak card.  I'd recommend that Gift be a one-shot Peddler (could even be optional like "may return this to its pile for +$1") so having 10 of them would be reasonable, and then balancing the other card around that.

7
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: December 14, 2019, 12:26:49 pm »

Quote
Oversee
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Trash the top card of your deck and gain a card costing up to $3 more than it, putting it on top of your deck. Each other player looks at the top 3 cards of their deck, discards any number of them, and puts the rest back in any order.
An unprepared Oversee Expands a random card from the top of your deck straight back to the deck, and gives each other player the ability to mill the top of their deck, possibly prepping their own Oversee.  Follow in each other's footsteps and all that.

HISTORY
Theme update. Now it's King Wenceslas.

8
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: December 06, 2019, 07:50:45 pm »
I'm skeptical that the optimal play will simply be Censure>0-4$ cards until the stack is empty since a sifter-lab is going to synergize with a dense nugget of money. I think you squeeze a terminal silver or silver in there, probably.

I will point out though that this is a 3$ version of 4$ "+2 Cards +1 Action Discard a card" which reportedly flunked beta testing according to DXV's secret history.  Censure's weakness is that people might buy Censure, which is a self-referential weakness that reinforces the idea that it will be very strong and hard to skip, it can't be any hard to skip than the flunked beta card. 
Since just 1 copy of Censure in the player-to-the-left's hand can neutralize numerous Censures, maybe Censure doesn't consume as many purchases as the flunked card, but it's still really brushing elbows with the flunked card. 
I did intend Censure to be a variation of the $4.5 cost small-Forum.  Because Censure doesn't increase your handsize, you need stuff to actually sift to, so Censure>0-4$ cards is a little silly to suggest.  Blocking it being wholly reliant upon Censure might make it too much of a degenerate gamble though.  What other cards do you suppose could non-trivially block it?  Censure, Silver, or Gold?  Century or a Victory card?

9
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: December 06, 2019, 05:22:54 pm »

Quote
Censure
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card, +1 Action. The player to your left may reveal a Censure or Victory card from their hand. If they don't, +1 Card and then discard a card.

HISTORY
Previously only blocked with a revealed Censure, then a revealed Censure or Province.  I decided something to hold it down early and late made more sense.

10
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: December 04, 2019, 01:37:06 pm »
To be a bit more constructive, I would suggest having Story cards be worth a static amount of SP, and limit the initial History gamble to something like 3 instead of 6 so that known quantities can more easily insure against the hidden variance. (The hidden variance will remain relevant since it will still be detrimental to excessively focus SP.)
Typically, Interpreter is worth 4SP and Magic Beans is worth 4SP, but they imply more construction than just buying them. It is mostly to give players some recourse to increase their SP (or shortchange a lagging player's SP by ending the game before they're ready) if only one Story card appears in a Kingdom.  I want it to be hard for players to end up in a situation where they definitively have the fewest SP and cannot win, but the game isn't over (unlike VP, where there is usually a chance, however slim, of a comeback).  Without slightly scaling SP, the situation would be much more common due to how often there will be only 1 Story card (Superstitious Village might be too much scaling, I admit.  The whole concept is untested.  I will change Superstitious Village).  Really, if I were to change this function, a basic Story card would be necessary to act counterpoint to Provinces, but that risks rendering Story Points much more similar to Victory Points, which was not my ideal.  I want players to think about Story Points on turn 0 and Victory Points on turn 9, where a 10SP "Epic" card added to the Supply alongside Provinces would make players think about both styles of points at the same time in the game instead of balancing their consideration.

To further elaborate on this History card setup, they were added because ties are friendly.  Due to the fact that 2-way ties for least result in no elimination, 3-way ties with 0SP each would be much more common if players weren't encouraged to buy into the system before the game even begins (mind you, I don't mind if 3-way ties for 0SP do happen, I only want to discourage them without complicating the rules for ties-for-least (ties-for-least eliminating multiple players would need a caveat to not eliminate all players, and further makes it more likely for players to have the definitively least SP as well as making the concept work overall poorly with Landmarks)).

As far as the History card count: You normally start with 3 junk cards.  You would virtually always swap all your Estates with History cards (barring cards that incentivize having or trashing Estates like Shepherd or Sacrifice), so having extras on top of that is what makes it interesting.  Not to mention that your opening tells other players the History cards you could have: If you open $3/$3, you can have at most 4 History cards, where -/$3 has 7 unaccounted cards, and Alms is tortuous.  Damaging your opening for extra SP from History cards may often be a bad idea, but I'd test with a few too many History cards than too few─and even then the first change I would likely make is reducing the SP value of History cards to 3SP.  I want to make holding onto your starting junk more tempting though, and 4SP seemed a reasonable way to do it.



Simultaneously doesn't exist in Dominion. Things happen one at a time, always.
Not true. Masquerade occurs "at once," so anything that happens simultaneously should be described that way (Each player discards a card at once)

11
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: November 29, 2019, 07:11:01 pm »
Here's a silly idea I had after spiralstaircase posted Fairytale cards which begot Story Points.  I hadn't fully designed or even really tested the idea, but here's how it goes:

Introducing Story cards (Stories).  There are 12 cards in each Story pile, just like Victory cards.  They grant to their owner Story points (SP).  The player with the fewest Story Points loses the game, regardless of their Victory Point total, and then the remaining player with the most VP wins.  Ties are friendly, so if multiple players each have the fewest Story Points, none of them are eliminated.

Quote
Dominion: Fantasy, Setup
In games using any cards or Landmarks from Dominion: Fantasy, each player begins by secretly building their 10 card deck out of the normal starting cards and up to 6 History cards (4 with 5 or more players). Remove the other cards from the game without looking at them.
At the end of the game, the player with the fewest SP loses the game regardless of VP. If this is a tie, no one loses.
Quote
History: 24
Types: Story
Cost: $2
4SP
Players begin games with Dominion: Fantasy cards by building their own deck out of the usual cards and History cards.  It is secret, so you won't necessarily know how many History cards a player has (though their opening plays will give you a hint).  There are 24 History cards total.  History cards are not added to the Supply: You can only get them at setup.  You are allowed to replace Shelters and Heirlooms from your starting deck with History cards.  Your deck must be comprised of exactly 10 cards.  Players shuffle and draw their starting hands after building their decks.
Dominion: Fantasy as a set has 24 History cards, 20 Kingdom card piles (each of which is a Story card), and 16 Landmarks that provide SP.

Find below some sample cards:
   
 
Quote
Interpreter
Types: Victory, Story
Cost: $3
Worth 1VP for every 2 History cards in your deck (round down).
Worth 1SP for each differently named Victory card in your deck.
Keep 4 History cards for a cheap 2VP+SP card.  Keep 2 History cards and this is at least an Estate+SP.  Maybe don't keep 6 History cards, but I won't tell you how to live your life.
Quote
Superstitious Village
Types: Action, Story
Cost: $4
+1 Card, +3 Actions. Discard a card.
2SP
A sifting double-Village with a fixed SP counterpoint. Too many of these and you'll be discarding your whole hand.
Quote
Magic Beans
Types: Treasure, Story
Cost: $5
$2. When you play this, trash a card from your hand and if it isn't a Treasure, gain a Treasure costing up to $3 more than it.
Worth 1SP per differently named Treasure in your deck.
A mandatory trashing Treasure that Mines non-Treasures into Treasures if you want.  Too many of these and you won't have anything to trash.
Quote
Faerie Circle
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 3SP per differently named card you have after the first 5.
Like Museum, but with a threshold.  It matches Museum at 15 differently named cards for 30SP to a typical maximum of 18 names for 39SP.
Quote
Shangri-La
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 3SP per copy you have of the least common Victory card among your cards (if its a tie, count either).
Similar to Triumphal Arch, but makes you need to have an equal number of each Victory card you put into your deck.  Maybe the 1 Duchy you'd buy will cost you the Story Points that allowed you to compete?

Even scaling cards have largely fixed SP caps to make it easier to track other players' SP potential.  If I know you have 2 Magic Beans cards, then I know you can have 2*(Unique Treasures)+4*History Story Points, but I can't necessarily be completely sure of how many History cards you have (from 0 to 6).
Strategically, you want to have 1SP more than the player who has the fewest SP, but any SP over that is useless.

HISTORY
Superstitious Village originally gave 1SP per 2 differently named Actions in your deck, and is now worth 2SP so that tracking players' SP is easier.
Magic Beans originally optionally Remodeled anything to Treasures, and now trashes Treasures or Mines non-Treasures so you can't trash anything to Copper on your last turn for Magic Beans' SP value.

12
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: November 26, 2019, 08:30:23 am »
Gang
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+3 Cards. You may play an Initiate card from your hand.
Setup: Choose a different random Action Supply pile. Cards from that pile are Initiate cards.
A Smithy that can be a DoubleLab is too strong. I suggest: Discard a card. If it is an Initiate card, play it.
I've been thinking about this, and I don't think I agree, largely on the grounds that "You play a specific card from your hand" is much weaker than "+1 Action."  Sometimes you will get some spammable <$4 Action chosen, but a lot of time you're going to hit payloads, trashers, or even other draw which makes it significantly less effective.  +3 Cards is already a weak effect at $5, and so making the play of Gang weaker would likely render it functionally useless if it doesn't pick a stronger Initiate.  If I were to make a change, I would likely aim towards making the way it plays with Initiate different, either
1) Violent Gang: You may play an Initiate from your hand twice, and then trash it.  Which would allow it to utilize payload and draw more dramatically.
2) Rich Gang: Choose a different random Action Supply pile costing at least $5.  Which would simply ensure Gang and the card it plays are at competing a price point.
3) Exclusive Gang: Cards from it are Initiate cards and you can't buy them without Coppers in Play.  Which would make acquiring good initiate cards more difficult at the cost of making weaker Initiates even worse.
Ultimately though, I'm not sure any of these are worth the added complexity.  Looking at some random games, it looks like there will typically be 1 busted target for Gang, 2-3 decent targets, and the rest are middling (Remodel) to bad (Chapel).  Do its play patterns really become so consistently one-note when it gets paired with a Village Initiate?



Warlock
Types: Action, Attack, Doom
Cost: $5
+1 Card, +1 Action. Choose one: each other player receives one of the set aside face-up Hexes, then flip it face-down; or flip one of the set-aside face-down Hexes face up and +$1. (You may look at the face-down Hexes at any time)
Setup: place 3 Hexes face up, set aside.
You say you want to avoid Deluded every turn, but you put this on a cantrip.  Playing 2 Warlocks each turn to proc Delusion will be pretty easy.
If you want it to be non-terminal, consuming all the Hexes first and then flipping them automatically would go a long way to preventing a single abusive Hex from being played (though it would scale even more strangely than it already does).  I would say it would work better simply being terminal, though.

Sleepwalker
Types: Action
Cost: $2
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Dream card. Discard the other revealed cards, then play the Dream card.
Setup: Choose 3 random non-Attack Action Supply piles other than Sleepwalker. Action cards from those piles are Dream cards.
The existing digging cards all have awkwardness to them in the form of other cards upon which they trip.  Sleepwalker will inevitably be much too strong by virtually always playing the targeted Action card (so long as you have a Dream that isn't in your hand or play area) because you have no obligation to add an undesirable Dream Action to your deck (as opposed to if it played the first Action it found, which would be more inhibiting).  It also risks making the game run very long, because players will consistently dig through their deck when there is a good Dream target.
It might be worth giving it the ability to trip on something else (even if it is a raw cap to the number revealed) to hold back the game length when it becomes relevant.

Crusade
Types: Victory
Cost: $4
Worth 1VP per 3 Attack cards you have.
Setup: Choose three additional non-Attack Action piles to add to the Kingdom; one costing $2, one costing $3 and one costing $4. Cards from these piles gain the Attack type and the following additional text at the end of the card: 'Each other player discards down to 4 cards unless they can reveal a copy of this card. If any player does, trash both copies of the card.'
I like the idea of turning other cards into marginal Attacks that can be blocked to justify a Victory card for Attacks.  I have a few problems:
1) This adds 3 Actions to the Supply. That is a massive number of cards. I'd rather it just target a card or two in the fashion of Obelisk.
2) It trashes the cards when used to block.  Because the Attack is so small, the function of this is to deny players the ability to even play those Attack cards, which undercuts the idea of a Victory card giving points for Attacks when you are no longer allowed to field them.
3) The Victory point Ratio is bad without adding said ridiculous number of cards.  With only 1 guaranteed Attack a ratio of 1VP/2 cards would probably do fine.  Even if that proved too much, another relevant $5-cost Victory card might be more fun to have than another seldom-used $4-cost.

Treasure Cove
Types: Treasure, Victory
Cost: $?
+$1 per differently named Treasure in play.
Worth 1VP for every differently named Victory card in your deck.
This costs $1 per differently named Treasure / Victory card in the Supply.
It will cost $7 providing up to $4 and 4VP typically, which sounds pretty bonkers and gets even stronger if any other Victory cards show up.  Even if you were able to reel it back in some reasonable fashion, I think back to those rare games where Harem is relevant in which crossing your fingers for good draws in Harem-infested decks is frustrating.  I can't imaging Treasure Cove would end up playing a whole lot differently, merely more commonly dominating the game due to the strength of its Victory points.

Travelling Players
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Refer to the noted results. For each time you rolled a... 1, +1 Card;  2, +1 Action;  3, +$1;  4, +1 Buy;  5, +1 VP;  6, You may trash a card from your hand.
Setup: Roll three six-sided dice and note the results.
You get Laboratory every 3/216 (1.39%) games.
77/216 (35.65%) are too strong, especially any combination with +2VP or more. 29/216 (13.43%) would still be strong if it cost $5.
53/216 (24.54%) are very weak, as in less than $3 weak.
86/216 (39.81%) are largely uninteresting, but balanced.  You could possibly normalize its power in a variety of ways (I'd start with making it necessarily non-terminal), but I'm not sure it saves the concept.  It reminds me of 504.  It is interesting in theory, but in practice is just bland.

13
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: November 22, 2019, 10:32:58 am »

Quote
Gang
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+3 Cards. You may play an Initiate card from your hand.
Setup: Choose a different random Action Supply pile. Cards from that pile are Initiate cards.
Notes: Gang can't choose itself. If it is the only Action Supply pile, it fails to choose one.

Conditional super Laboratory variant. Compare to Stables, which has you discard a much more common Treasure card, this lets you chain into a specific card.  It's only "non-terminal" if it chooses a non-terminal card, though.  When it chooses a cheap card you can possibly rely on it.  If it chooses a big $5+ card, it will be harder to proc, so maybe would be better at +2 Cards costed $3.  I don't know that I like how much +2 Cards tastes like Cultist.  What do you think?

14
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: November 13, 2019, 06:03:17 am »
I spent some time working on a fan expansion with custom Curses called Dominion: Accursed.  A problem with Curses is that there is no way to determine if existing cards that refer to "Curses" are referring to the Type "Curse" or the card named "Curse."  Dominion: Accursed sidesteps the issue by instead replacing the cards called Curse in name and type as follows:
In games using any cards from Dominion: Accursed, replace half of the Curse pile with Jinxes and the other half with one of Curios, Heretics, or Wastelands. These cards are both part of the same pile and can be gained or bought in any order.
Jinxes, Curios, Heretics, and Wastelands are as follows:

Quote
Jinx
Types: Curse, Reaction
Cost: $0
-1VP
When you gain a Curse, you may discard this. If you do, +2 Cards.
Quote
Curio
Types: Treasure, Curse
Cost: $2
$1, +1 Buy.
-2VP
Quote
Heretic
Types: Action, Curse
Cost: $0
+2 Actions
-2VP
Quote
Wasteland
Types: Curse
Cost: $0
-2VP
When you gain this, gain a card costing up to $4 that isn't a Curse or Victory card.
The idea is two-fold.
1) By replacing the Curse pile with two different kinds of cards with different functions, players can respond more flexibly to cards that might give them Curses.  Cursing cards are usually very high priority, but slower Cursers might be less valuable due to the Curses themselves not being nearly as detrimental.
2) By having two types of Curses, we can design cards that care about and use Curses in different ways. While not every card in the set needs to explicitly reference Curses, we can have more cards that function around them because the behavior of Curses is both less punishing to general deck composition and overall less one-note.
For example, here are some cards from Dominion: Accursed

Quote
Sepulcher
Types: Victory
Cost: $3
3VP
When you gain this, gain a Curse. If you do, set this aside. Return it to your deck at the end of the game.
Sepulcher functionally gives fewer VP than is printed in order to gain one of the functions of the alternate Curses for positive VP. Additionally you can trash the Curse and maintain the Victory points of Sepulcher.
Quote
Hedgewitch
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $4
+2 Cards. Each other player gains a Jinx. If no-one does, trash this.
When you gain or trash this, you may return a Curse from your hand to the Supply.
Hedgewitch is a weaker Curser. It can only deal half as many Curses to other players because it refers specifically to the always-present Jinx cards.  Hedgewitch goes on to be a response to the Cursing itself, where trashing it (via its on-play effect or otherwise) or gaining it can be used to reload other Hedgewitches.
Quote
Succubus
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $5
+1 Action, +$3. Gain a Curse, putting it into your hand. You may trash a non-Curse card from your hand.
Succubus offers a possibly large source of payload with tempo-trashing at the cost of gaining Curses. You might leverage a Curse like Curio once in order to make Succubus +$4 and +1 Buy, or Heretic for +2 Actions and +$3.  Other times you might fashion a deck that can trash the Curse as you gain it.

15
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: November 04, 2019, 05:54:45 pm »

Quote
Belfry
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Action. Reveal the top 2 cards of your deck. You may trash this or a card from your hand. Put the revealed cards sharing a type with the trashed card into your hand and the rest back in any order.

16
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: November 01, 2019, 08:33:00 pm »
Gild
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a Gold.
Heirloom: Ingot
Quote
Ingot
Types: Treasure, Heirloom
Cost: $0
$1. When you play this, if you have a Gold, Silver and Copper in play, you may trash this, to move your +$1 token to an Action Supply pile. (When you play a card from that pile, you first get +$1.)
I like Ingot a lot. I mostly worry that Gild will speed the game up too often that the +$1 token won't matter. I might take notes from Altar and make Gild cost $6.  It would be a weaker $6 for sure, but I worry it would be domineering as a $5 in how it doesn't increase your stop-density.  ...  I think it is unique enough, but plays largely against Ingot.  I'm not sure how I'd feel better about it without complicating Gild's pure simplicity.
Thanks for kicking up the discussion! I thought about Altar and the $6 cost and I think it would lead to frustrating one-sided games more often and so the gameplay would be worse than a $5 cost. ...
Would it lead to frustrating one-sided games any more often than Altar does?  My point really was that a cost of $6 would mean that you need to make the choice between a Gold-flooding tempo-trasher and buying the Gold outright to trigger your Ingot, and, as a point of comparison, I think Altar, a tempo-trashing Workshop+, is stronger than Gild at the same price point.

Picture Taker
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Action. You may discard a treasure, if you do gain a copy of that card.
Heirloom: Micro SD Card
Quote
Micro SD Card
Types: Treasure
Cost: $1
Look through your discard pile and put a treasure from it in your hand.
Card types should be capitalized (Treasure on both Picture Taker and Micro SD Card).  Micro SD Card needs the Heirloom type.  Micro SD Card doesn't need to give permission to look through the discard pile per 2019 errata.  Theme is incredibly anachronistic: How about Painter \ Palette?
The only time I might ever buy Picture Taker is in an Ill-Gotten Gains rush.  I just don't have enough time to discard my payload treasure in order to duplicate it.  Mint is only decent because it trashes your Treasures when you buy it.  Picture Taker would be better by playing the Treasure instead of discarding it.
Micro SD Card introduces a lot of problems to the opening. When you get it on the bottom of your opening, you get $3/$5 or $4/$4 by buying a Silver, but if you get it on top of your shuffle you're shafted, let alone anything weird that might happen around alternate Treasures.  Opening with Counterfeit and playing it on turn 2 is unlikely, but insane, I'm sure.  Your feeling regarding $5 Treasures aside, Micro SD Card would be more stable if it gave $1 if you didn't have a discard pile.

Musician
Types: Action, Duration, Looter
Cost: $2
+2 Actions. Put up to 3 tokens on this. (When you play an Action card, remove a token for +$1.) While any remain, at the start of each of your turns, gain a Ruins.
Heirloom: Lute
Quote
Lute
Types: Treasure, Heirloom
Cost: $4
When you play this, +$3 per empty Supply pile.
You've written Musician as though you expect players to use it to gain Ruins as a benefit so you can get +$1 (or +$2, or $3, depending on the number of Musicians preceding it) added onto it, but you could just build a deck without Musician and then put Musician into it for that ridiculously strong benefit.  I've played extensively with a card that pays out coins as you play other Actions, and the coins that it gives are fairly reliable as you simply put the card into your deck when your deck can consistently proc them.  Because players can just build around the effect it comes with a different drawback (it limits your first buy).  If you want to maintain Musician in its current idea, then its drawback needs to be harder to ignore.
Otherwise, I'd recommend changing Musician to be some sort of Supply trasher to help Lute go off.  Really though, I think a Kingdom card that makes Lute realistic in Kingdoms where it might not otherwise be possible to empty Supply piles will end up having major Supply problems in multiplayer.
I concur that an Heirloom that depresses the opening is a problem.

Clergy
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action, +$2. Reveal your hand. The player on your left chooses a revealed card. Trash up to 3 cards from your hand other than that card.
Heirloom: Teachings
Quote
Teachings
Types: Treasure, Reaction
Cost: $2*
$1.
When you trash a card from your hand, you may discard this from your hand. If you did, +1 Villager per $1 in the card's cost, or if the card costs $0, +1 Villager.
Teachings needs the Heirloom type.  Heirlooms don't have * in their cost.  The Reaction should be separated by a horizontal rule. "Discard" is implied to be from hand without context, so the "from your hand" on Teachings is redundant (Market Square still has it, probably to avoid confusion that you can't discard it from play).
Silver-with-a-bonus is somewhat of a "no-no" at $4, and +1 Action and +$2 is largely the same as a Silver (worse as you can draw it dead, but better because you can get it out of your hand for a variety of benefits).  I'd recommend Clergy either be terminal or require that you trash 1 to 3 cards.
Teachings's trigger is weird.  I would just crib Market Square's wording.  The times you can trash cards outside your hand are fairly rare, and being able to respond to Swindler\Knight type Attacks doesn't seem ridiculous to me.

Plough
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+2 Cards. If you have an odd number of cards in hand (after drawing), +2 Actions.
Heirloom: Savings
Quote
Savings
Types: Treasure, Heirloom, Duration
Cost: $2
$1. When you play this, you may set aside a card from your hand face down. At the start of your next turn, put it into your hand.
Plough compares far too well to Diplomat.  To get Diplomat to work you have to repeatedly reduce your hand, but Plough can chain as though it were Laboratory with any +Actions or some hand-size changes, let alone the fact that you can make it even better with anything else that can change your hand.  Unlike Diplomat it is guaranteed to have a trigger in every game in the form of Savings.  It would compare poorly to Lost City at $5, though.  I might go for a bigger bonus with its odd number trigger so it can cost $5.
I think a turn 2 Savings versus a turn 1 Savings is a big deal as it pseudo-trashes itself and either a Victory card or a Copper from your deck for that so-important second shuffle.

17
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 29, 2019, 05:45:59 pm »
Tinker
Types: Night
Cost: $5
Exchange a card from your hand for a card from the Supply costing up to $2 more than it.
Heirloom: Tin Snips
Quote
Tin Snips
Types: Treasure, Reaction, Heirloom
Cost: $3
$1
When you return a card to the Supply, you may discard this from your hand for +3 Coffers.
I do agree that Tinker needs to cost $5 (which you changed in the image but not the text): Remodel is very nearly too strong for $4, let alone Remodel-with-a-benefit (and being non-terminal is a huge benefit, even if it has to trigger during the Night phase).
Tin Snips is this huge source of +Coffers, but has so little to play with it except Tinker.  +3 Coffers is way too big for how frustrating it will be to align in the early game.  I'd much rather Tin Snips trigger off trashing for it to play nicer with more Kingdom cards.  Then it can give a more reasonable number of Coffers, and Tinker could trash instead of Exchange.
I mean if I did that I'd basically be making cards that already exist. The exchange-instead-of-trashing is The Whole Point of the card.
I did change Tin Snips to +2 Coffers tho, because +3 is too much - you hit that and a Swashbuckler? You've got your treasure chest in one go. Too much. But in the interest of having a game where you ignore Tinker and still use Tin Snips, I changed it to be a Silver instead of a Copper (and bumped the price up by one so we don't have to have Yet Another "Strictly Better" thread derailment on this board).
There isn't currently a non-terminal Remodel, nor a Remodel that ties into an Heirloom.  Exchanging is a fine idea for a Remodel variant, but it is not as though exchanging is the only unique part of Tinker.  It seems to just make Tin Snips virtually only proc on Tinker instead of having a host of triggers.  That reads odd to me, because I would think that Heirlooms should be designed to interact meaningfully with their Kingdom cards without being strictly defined by it.
Reducing Coffers to +2 is a major improvement to Tin Snips, especially with it giving +$2 on play: It massively reduces the frustration of missing as it goes from better $2 to worse $2.  I'm not sure I like the effect it has on the opening, as $5/$3 is probably pretty silly on most boards compared to $4/$4.

Gild
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a Gold.
Heirloom: Ingot
Quote
Ingot
Types: Treasure, Heirloom
Cost: $3
$1. When you play this, if you have a Gold, Silver and Copper in play, you may trash this, to move your +$1 token to an Action Supply pile. (When you play a card from that pile, you first get +$1.)
I like Ingot a lot. I mostly worry that Gild will speed the game up too often that the +$1 token won't matter. I might take notes from Altar and make Gild cost $6.  It would be a weaker $6 for sure, but I worry it would be domineering as a $5 in how it doesn't increase your stop-density.  Comparisons to Mine are not warranted as this turns Coppers and even Estates into Gold, which is wildly better. Comparisons to Dismantle might make more sense, but not quite because Dismantle actually floods your deck when you're trashing Estates, so this remains wildly better than that official card too.  I think it is unique enough, but plays largely against Ingot.  I'm not sure how I'd feel better about it without complicating Gild's pure simplicity.

Foundation
Types: Action, Duration
Cost: $7
At the start of each of your turns for the rest of the game: you may trash a card from your hand, to gain a card to your hand costing exactly $1 more than it.
Heirloom: Safe
Quote
Safe
Types: Treasure, Heirloom
Cost: $1
+1 Coffers. When you play this, you may put a card from your hand onto your deck.
I think Foundation should cost $8 mostly because being able to trash Golds for Foundations is probably too good in 2-player when you can also trash Foundations for Provinces.  Even without that ability, having multiple Foundations would give you a lot of pile control, which is why I would go up to $8 instead of down to $6.

Fur Trader
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: $4
Gain a Silver ot your hand. Put a card from your hand onto your deck.
When you would gain a card, you may reveal this from your hand. Discard any number of cards to instead gain a card costing up to $1 more per card discarded.
Heirloom: Pelt
Quote
Pelt
Types: Treasure, Heirloom
Cost: $2
$1. You may trash a Silver from your hand to gain a card costing up to $4.
This version of your submission is much better overall.  You are probably underselling Fur Trader's ability to discard your hand for a $5 gain early in the game.  Most Kingdoms I buy Fur Trader would probably be for that Reaction.  The key interaction between the two is probably using Pelt to trash a Silver and Fur trader to gain a $5 (functionally out of $4 in the form of Silver being trashed and a Fur Trader being discarded).  It still costs a Buy most of the time, so I wouldn't call it overpowered.  Fur Trader -> Workshop+ around draw is a fine idea, but playing Fur Trader is probably really bad. 
I recommend a slight buff by having Fur Trader "gain a card costing exactly $1 more per card discarded" so you can typically block Curses by discarding 1 card.  I might make Fur Trader gain 2 Silvers with no hand shenanigans so you can more easily align Pelt.

18
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 26, 2019, 07:40:08 am »
Doesn't seem to me it should have to be a Treasure.
I'm keeping the rule, for these reasons:
1. All official Heirlooms are Treasures
2. It's replacing a Copper
3. Treasures usually have less (immediately) dramatic effects than other types of cards. It's more interesting if you have to gain cards with dramatic effects instead of having them in your deck right away.
3 is hardly true.  Cursed Gold and Goat are immediately dramatic and each have huge implications on the whole strategy space of the game.  If you mean Treasures don't matter as much generally, I think you are underestimating Ill-Gotten Gains rushes and the sheer power of Spices and I see more than my fair share of players undersell the Gold flood of Hoard and Treasure Trove in the heat of a game.  It just seems odd to inherently limit the Heirloom to a Treasure simply because the others are Treasures.  I'm not so bothered either way.

First Born
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action. Reveal your hand. If the revealed cards all have different names, +1 Action, +1 Buy and +$2. Otherwise, +2 Cards and discard a card from your hand.
Heirloom: Father's Sword
Quote
Father's Sword
Types: Treasure, Heirloom
Cost: $5
$1*. Worth an additional $1 per differently named Action you have in play.
For clarity, I'd recommend combining the benefits as much as possible: Reading +1 Action and +1 Action separately looks weird.
I agree with segura that both cards (Festival or Fugitive) this can be make this too good for $4.  If you put "discard a card" at the top, making it into Fugitive or Festival+Discard, and otherwise left everything the same it would look okay.
Thematically it is a little weird because your deck is going to have a bunch of First Borns in it for the +Actions: It needs the +Actions, but the theme remains odd.

Tinker
Types: Night
Cost: $5
Exchange a card from your hand for a card from the Supply costing up to $2 more than it.
Heirloom: Tin Snips
Quote
Tin Snips
Types: Treasure, Reaction, Heirloom
Cost: $3
$1
When you return a card to the Supply, you may discard this from your hand for +3 Coffers.
I do agree that Tinker needs to cost $5 (which you changed in the image but not the text): Remodel is very nearly too strong for $4, let alone Remodel-with-a-benefit (and being non-terminal is a huge benefit, even if it has to trigger during the Night phase).
Tin Snips is this huge source of +Coffers, but has so little to play with it except Tinker.  +3 Coffers is way too big for how frustrating it will be to align in the early game.  I'd much rather Tin Snips trigger off trashing for it to play nicer with more Kingdom cards.  Then it can give a more reasonable number of Coffers, and Tinker could trash instead of Exchange.

Strategist
Types: Action, Victory
Cost $3
Choose one : +1 Action or +$1. Choose one : trash a card, gain a Strategic Map; or trash a Treasure and a Victory, gain a Strategic Conquest, or a card costing up to $4, If theese two card are double type or more, gain a card costing up to $7.
Worth 1VP per 2 Strategist in your deck (rounded up!)
Heirloom: Strategic Money
Quote
Strategic Money
Types: Treasure, Heirloom
+1 Buy. When you play this, if you have only different cards in play, + $ equal to half of the number of theese cards, rounded down. (You are not allowed to play other treasures after this)
Quote
Strategic Map
Types: Treasure, Victory
Cost: $1*
$1, +1 Buy.
1VP
(This is not in the Supply.)
Quote
Strategic Conquest
Types: Treasure, Victory
Cost: $4*
Count the cards in play that contain Strategi/c/st in their name. This is worth: $1 if this number is 1; $2 if this number is 2 or 3; $3 if this number is 4+.
Worth 1VP per 4 cards Strategi/c/st in your deck (rounded down)
(This is not in the Supply.)
This is a lot of cards with a lot of words that is ultimately very self-centered.  They mostly care about themselves and each other.  It is difficult to evaluate it for that reason.  Strategic Money could give you +$3 pretty easily, using Strategist to trash your duplicate Coppers and gain Strategic Maps and Strategic Conquests, but 1 Gold at the cost of the ability to play any duplicates is not good.  If you buy the entire Strategist pile, you get 32VP (which is not a lot), but then you're never getting any value from Strategic Money, so you should trash that for $7-gains if you can.  Strategic Conquests are then worth ~2VP, so they remain very weak as far as VP is concerned, but gives lots of $.
Really, the biggest problem is that none of these cards play nice with anything else.  They dominate 100% of your strategic focus if you want to use each of their elements and look pretty slow, unreliable, and weak.  Ultimately, if I bought these at all, I'd probably buy 2 Strategists to turn Copper\Estate into weak Strategic Conquests which I can then trash for $7 gains, which means there is a lot of design chaff hanging off of these cards.
The idea of Strategic Money is okay (it does reduce your opening by $1 because Strategic Money is worth $0 at that time), but Strategist\Strategic Map\Strategic Conquest are overly complicated.  Pare this down a lot.

Senator
Types: Action, Duration
Cost: $3
+1 Card, +1 Action. At the start of your next turn, if you have 4 or less cards in hand, +2 Cards.
Heirloom: Bonds
Quote
Bonds
Types: Treasure, Heirloom
$2. When you play this, put your -1 Card token onto your deck.
I'm not sure how much I like Bonds, considering I don't like messing with the opening so much.  However, Senator I really like conceptually.  A pseudo-defense Duration with a way to leverage it yourself in Bonds is super clever.  I would probably like Senator better if it gave some sort of benefit on its up-turn instead of being a cantrip: Maybe a $4 Peddler?  The Duration effect is quite nearly a draw-back, as there is not currently a way to reduce your hand-size at the start of your turn.

Novelist
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+3 Cards. If you have a treasure in play, +$1 and +1 Buy.
Heirloom: Book
Quote
Book
Types: Treasure, Heirloom
Cost: $4
$1. You may choose one: Play an action card from your hand; or gain a Manuscript.
Quote
Manuscript: 16
Types: Treasure
Cost: $2*
$1. You may play an Action card from your hand.
(This is not in the Supply.)
I'd recommend Novelist state "if you have any Treasures in play" or "at least 1 Treasure in play" for clarity.  +$1 and +1 Buy should be swapped for standard bonus order.  Card types should be capitalized (Treasure on Novelist, Action on Book and Manuscript).  Book needs to specify that Manuscript comes "from its pile" or else you can't gain it unless Manuscript appears in the Supply.
I like this set.  Offering a way to increase the effect of the Heirloom by gaining Manuscripts is nice, though card intensive.
I think Novelist should cost $6, though.  Its benefit is a bit sideways, but +3 Cards and +1 Buy and +$1 is very strong--especially when the card necessitates a way to activate it is present in the Kingdom.

Galley
Types: Action
Cost: $4+
+2 Villagers. You may spend any number of Villagers for +1 Card each.
When you buy this, you may overpay for it. For each $1 you have overpaid, +1 Villager.
Heirloom: Coffee
Quote
Coffee
Types: Treasure, Heirloom
Cost: $2
$1, +1 Villager
Coffee is fun, but I don't like Galley very much.  Another way to spend Villagers makes enough sense, but the benefit is so unpredictable that I suspect it will be frustrating.  More pressingly, it offers a way to easily accumulate large numbers of Villagers.  I think the fact that there isn't a very easy way to accumulate Villagers is an important design aspect in Renaissance (Recruiter requires you to trash valuable cards, Patron is a terminal Silver if you don't spend its single Villager immediately, and the rest are all on-gain and on-trash abilities.  Coffee plays nicely into the concept because it's a Copper and you can only have one of them.).

Wizard
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $4
+2 Cards. You may spend two Spell tokens. If you do, each other player gains a Curse.
Heirloom: Grimoire
Quote
Grimoire
Types: Treasure, Heirloom
Cost: $4
$1. When you play this, take a Spell token.
Having played with a Treasure that provides a limited resource, the fact that Grimoire is the only 1-card source of Spell tokens feels frustrating.  If your Grimoire ends up on the bottom of your shuffle, you will fall wildly behind in Spell tokens and you have no recourse to improve your status.
I also agree with DEGwer that it is pretty slow.  Having another way to accelerate your Spell tokens is probably desirable, either through some additional ability on Wizard or Grimoire, or via making Wizard into a split pile--though putting together three cards might be a little much.

19
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 25, 2019, 07:06:08 am »
Doesn't seem to me it should have to be a Treasure.


Quote
Farrier
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Action, +$3. You may play a Treasure from your hand. Either way, spend all your $ and gain a card other than a Farrier costing up to the amount you paid.
Heirloom: Horseshoe
Quote
Horseshoe
Types: Treasure, Heirloom
Cost: $0
When you play this, cards cost $1 less this turn.
Per #5 in the 2019 errata, Horseshoe doesn't need to mention that cards can't cost less than $0. Take it up with Donald X., not me.

Farrier is a non-terminal Workshop variant that you pay to make better.  Normally you can lose a Copper to make it into a normal Workshop.  Dropping a Silver turns it into a $5 gainer.  Other coins coming from Peddlers and the like also power it up.  If you're overdrawing, you can use Farriers as mid-turn "buys."  It spends all $ so you don't have to track it, and also because a Gold for $3 would be silly, even if you had to gain a Copper for it.
Horseshoe reduces the cost of cards.  You can double-dip between Farrier and your Buy phase--or multiple Farriers, I suppose.  When Farrier isn't relevant, you can use Horseshoe with +Buys anyway.  Horseshoe is worded so you can Crown or Counterfeit it.

HISTORY:
Originally Farrier could gain Farriers.  Farrier->Farrier\Silver\Estate into Farrier+Silver->Duchy seemed dangerous on sight.  Now you have to actually buy the Farriers which makes the described rush much slower.

20
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 22, 2019, 09:06:07 pm »
Assembly
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $5
You may play a non-Command Action card from your hand. Then, if you did, play a non-Command Action card from the Supply costing up to the cost of that Action card, leaving it there.
If you play a $5 card from your hand with Assembly, your Assembly is a Band of Misfits played without spending an +action.  If you only have $4 Actions to play with it, you can only Band of Misfits $3 Actions.
I think you're misunderstanding the card, in the context of Dominion up to $X includes $X. So if you play a $5 with Assembly you can play any card in the Supply costing $5 or less, including another copy of the card you played.
Quite right, I don't misunderstand the concept of "up to": I misread the card (funnily enough considering I transcribed it correctly).  I stand by the non-Command from hand being unnecessary (from Supply is needed), especially because Assembly->Assembly would need to have a third Action in hand to be able to chain.  It just seems like a feel-bad mechanism that I wouldn't want to have on a $5 Throne Room variant. 

Zealot
Types: Action, Duration, Attack, Command
Cost: $4
At the start of your next turn, +1 Card, +1 Action, and +$1. Until your next turn, the first time each other player plays a card on their turn that would be unaffected by a Zealot, they ignore its effect and may play a cheaper non-Command card from the Supply sharing a type with it.
This card might be too brutal against cheap Action cards, but it looks neat otherwise. My brain broke trying understand the part in italics though. What would cause something to be "affected" by Zealot besides being hit by the Attack?
Oh, the intent of that wording was to make the attack stack (so if you play two Zealots it downgrades your opponent's first two cards), primarily to give it a sufficiently different design space from Enchantress.
This is not preferable from a design sense.  A Zealot chain can shut out the game (which would be a huge first-player advantage and could be exacerbated in multiplayer (though they have to get through the other players' Zealots first)), especially because it hits any kind of card you play, even cancelling Coppers altogether.  I think it is sufficiently different than Enchantress regardless.  Enchantress is an independently strong card that increases the value of low-cost Actions, while Zealot will be much more Kingdom-dependent in reducing the value of low-cost cards.  It giving +1 Action next turn might be trouble, though, as players might buy it just for the actions.

The big rules problem this has is how it is supposed to interact with Enchantress when I play an Action while under both effects.
I'd guess I get +1 Card and +1 Action and then also play a cheaper non-Command card sharing a type with it (Enchantress nullifies the effects of the Action and gives me the cantrip bonus, and then Zealot steps in and nullifies the nothing that the card did and tells me to play a cheaper non-Command card in the Supply, or the other way around because I choose the order): An anti-synergy.

21
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 18, 2019, 06:13:40 pm »
General
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $4
Choose one: Trash this to play a non-Command non-Duration Action from the Supply, leaving it there; or play up to 2 differently named Actions you played this turn before you played this that are still in play.
General with +1 Card token will produce very simple infinite loop with Lurker.
Considering this is a minimum 3-card combo (General\Lurker\Teacher (you can get there with Pathfinding, but then you need more elements to make it do anything) with drawn deck (or Watchtower) to ensure the +1 Card draws the Lurked General), I'd hardly call it simple.  Once you have Teacher really, you can put the +1 Card and +1 Action onto the two piles and make Graverobber and Rogue work for this loop, too (though in Graverobber's case you need Priest, Tomb, Training, or Seaway also).
Corrected regardless.  General now trashes the card you target with it in addition to itself, so the described loop would empty the Lurker pile.
         
Delegate
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $3
Each other player reveals their hand. Play a revealed non-Command, non-Duration Action, leaving it there. If you couldn't, +2 Cards.
The old "play Actions from another player's hand" trick doesn't work very well because you stop if from working by not buying Actions, so the question is how you general combat a largely Treasure-centered strategy in the design of the card.
Gubump's Delegate instead turns into a Moat instead of the best Action in any other player's hand.  Hitting anyone's any card means that this scales poorly into multiplayer.  The save of Moat is probably even worse than Falconer's cantrip, so I would likely still run good money against Delegate.
I recommend the catch for not having an Action to play be better than the Action play, honestly.  Me revealing an Action to your Command-card should make your Command card worse.
I think that people will still buy Action cards just as much as normal even with Delegate/Falconer in the Kingdom (and my experience playtesting Delegate shows that this is true). A key thing that I don't think you're taking into account is that in order to play an opponent's Action with Delegate, you have to have a Delegate in hand while your opponent also has that Action in hand, whereas to play that same Action card, your opponent just needs to have it in hand. So overall, having the actual Action itself is still better than having a Delegate, and thus having Action cards is still well worth doing.
This is totally fair.  I don't think Delegate would push weak Treasure strategies to the front (I'm not going to run Smithy\BM simply because Delegate is present).  It runs the risk of making stronger money strategies more dominant when the failsafe of Delegate makes Delegate such a weak card.  A part of the problem I think comes in the players' headspace: Players tend to feel bad when other players piggyback off of them.  Based on this assistance aversion, the card would read healthier if copying other players' cards, strong as it may be, was blocking something that was stronger still.
For example, I had initially considered a design as follows:
Quote
The player to your left reveals their hand. If they reveal any non-Command, non-Duration Actions, you may play one of them, leaving it there. Otherwise, you may play a non-Command, non-Duration Action from the Supply, leaving it there.
*TODO: Buy restriction to reduce opening with this*
So that players would want to have Actions to stop it from being its best version.  It wouldn't even need such a stark contrast between its stronger and weaker versions: If Delegate missing was a Laboratory then it would be totally reasonable in the opening and players would feel good when they "block" it with a <$4-cost Action.  It is probably fine regardless.  Don't mind me.

Assembly
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $5
You may play a non-Command Action card from your hand. Then, if you did, play a non-Command Action card from the Supply costing up to the cost of that Action card, leaving it there.
Does this really need the Command limitation for the play from hand?  Assembly->Assembly doesn't sound crazy.  In most cases, this is +2 Actions attached to a mildly worse Band of Misfits.  If you play a $5 card from your hand with Assembly, your Assembly is a Band of Misfits played without spending an +action.  If you only have $4 Actions to play with it, you can only Band of Misfits $3 Actions.

Lieutenant
Types: Action, Commander
Cost: $6
Choose a non-Command Action card in the Supply costing up to $4. Play it twice, leaving it there.
I think Lieutenant is significantly stronger than Captain, even ignoring that it can play Duration cards. We can argue regarding the strength of 2 plays now versus 1 play at the start of your turn, but Captain misses the shuffle where Lieutenant doesn't.

22
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 17, 2019, 08:38:06 am »
Quote
General
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $4
Choose one: Trash this and a non-Command, non-Duration Action from the Supply to play that card, leaving it in the trash; or replay up to 2 differently named Actions you played this turn before you played this that are still in play.
One-shot anything, or double-up on the cards you already played (in the way Scepter does, but in the Action phase).  One-shot Forge is probably silly, but everyone can open with it. Can't immediately think of another Action that would be broken as a one-shot in the opening.
Cascading Generals are noted: General 2 can play General 1 and another card, then General 1 plays two Actions you played before it.  Is that too strong do you suppose?  It seems immediately to me that a deck that can consistently rely on that deserves it and it would be really fun regardless of strength, but perhaps I'm underestimating how quickly it will build up and overestimating how much fun it would be.  It's not like a General-centric strategy wouldn't involve other Actions.

History:
Trashes the card it plays in the Supply. It's more thematically violent and reduces the chance of infinites.



Falconer
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $3
The player to your left reveals a non-Command Action card from their hand (or reveals they can't). Choose one: +1 Card and +1 Action; or play the revealed card, leaving it there.
Delegate
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $3
Each other player reveals their hand. Play a revealed non-Command, non-Duration Action, leaving it there. If you couldn't, +2 Cards.
The old "play Actions from another player's hand" trick doesn't work very well because you stop if from working by not buying Actions, so the question is how you general combat a largely Treasure-centered strategy in the design of the card.
4est's Falconer gets around it by making it a cantrip instead of the worst Action in the player to your left's hand.  I think the limitation is huge.  If you play Falconer terminally they can reveal a terminal card the you can't play.  If you play Falconer non-terminally, they reveal a minimally useful non-terminal, again making Falconer of only marginal use.  I think a strong money-centric Strategy will make Falconer a waste of time.
Gubump's Delegate instead turns into a Moat instead of the best Action in any other player's hand.  Hitting anyone's any card means that this scales poorly into multiplayer.  The save of Moat is probably even worse than Falconer's cantrip, so I would likely still run good money against Delegate.
I recommend the catch for not having an Action to play be better than the Action play, honestly.  Me revealing an Action to your Command-card should make your Command card worse.

Scholasticus
Types: Action, Command, Reserve
Cost: $4
Choose one: Place this and an Action card from your hand onto your Tavern mat; or play an Action card that is on your Tavern mat, leaving it there.
You may call this when you play another Scholasticus.
You ought to put a "non-Reserve non-Command" clause on both the "Action card" phrases, or the loop majiponi presents exists.
The fact that the call is only to bring back Scholasticus is weird, on top of the pseudo-trashing being really slow. Way slower than Necromancer. I'd rather the calling it be what plays a Tavern Action and then the playing always puts it on your Tavern mat. It would make it much faster to both trash and play a card (after the first one).

Charity
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $4
Trash a card from your hand. Play a non-Command Action card from the Supply costing up to $3 more than the trashed card, leaving it there.
I love trash-for-benefits.  This can trash Estates to play $5 cards which is nice.  Its ability to trash Coppers is strongly dependent on the quality of $3 Actions that appear: Is that limitation intentional?

23
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: modded Wild Hunt
« on: October 15, 2019, 10:10:08 am »
PS: Anyone know if there was a particular reason why there were no Night cards that gave boons in Nocturne?
Emphasis added
Guardian: Early on the set had a village that went into your next hand. I just told you about that. It was great so I thought I should try a second card like that, and the obvious concept was a Moat. At first it was a pure Reaction that was set aside for your next hand when you got it, and came with a Gold; then the Gold idea went on Skulk, and Guardian changed to be a Night card that gave you a Boon next turn, and went to your hand when gained. The Boon was too slow (since playing Guardian doesn't use up an Action), so now it just gives you +$1.
If you make a Fate Night card, you should ensure that it has some other effect that disincentivizes playing multiple of them.
Your Wild Hunt might be fine because it costs $5 and you'd rather draw 3 cards than receive a Boon.  I like the original Wild Hunt more though.  It is both semantically simpler and more compelling for its unique effect.

(Considering the above quote though, I don't know how Fool made it through testing if a weak Night card that gave 1 Boon didn't make it.)

24
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 15, 2019, 09:23:44 am »
Quote
Warfare
Types: Event
Cost: $3
Take the Holy Land. Trash a Victory card with the lowest cost in coins from the Supply.
Quote
Holy Land
Types: Artifact

When you gain a Victory card, each other player may trash a card costing at least $3 from their hand. If they don't they gain a Curse.
Holy Land, man that's a stupid powerful curser.
I don't think so. I posted, and since played a bit, Parade here, a $4 Project which curses when you gain green. It is good but not overpowered. Holy Land is significantly weaker as you gotta fight for it and as you have an out-option.
I did think about linking to Parade shortly after I posted Warfare\HolyLand.  I was not very interested in Parade because it seemed like players would typically buy it and then largely forget about it.  That the major consideration of Parade is "How do I deal with the inevitable Curses?", a problem common to any Curser, but this one less interesting because me gaining a (non-Action) Victory card and each other player gaining a Curse is of functionally equal value in terms of tempo and consistency.  Holy Land, being an Artifact controlled by Warfare, is something with which players have to continually interact.

I feel that, but I still think it's too powerful. Parade is *way* underpriced for my taste, and also is kinda apples-to-oranges - the cursing goes both ways there, where everyone can buy it. With Warfare/Holy Land, if it's a no-plus-buys game, someone's gotta make the call on whether to Warfare or work on their Actual Deck, and meanwhile the Holy Land player gets to curse them and/or break their components. The first person to get there in a no-plus-buys game is in a way better position to hand out punishment.
I don't follow your argument here though.  In a 1-buy game, someone can make the call on whether to Warfare or work on their deck, but the Holy Land player is the player who already decided to Warfare.  In a 1-buy game, the Holy Land could give out 2 or 3 Curses if you have a bunch of extra gains, but the other players only need $3 to take the Holy Land from the player who has it and then they'll have to buy it again.  Typically you won't be able to trigger it on the same turn if you have only 1-buy, so other players would have to functionally give you permission to do the Cursing thing.  And that's why Warfare has the Victory-card trashing thing: To ensure stand-offs like that end.

Speaking of outs: There's not much junk in the $3+ range (Potions after the potion cards have run out/you have enough of them? Swindler in midgame? Silvers in a Colony game after you've started to get Platina? Masterpiece?), so your out is to trash a component or economy, and that's likely going to hurt more than a Curse will; meanwhile going for green is something you want to do anyways, so while there may be some hubris going for it too early, it's more of a rich-get-richer vibe that I'm getting from it (same rationale DXV used when he said he'd change Margrave to lose the +Buy).
One of my favorite comments in this regard was in the 2019 Qvist list regarding Soothsayer.
Sometimes there is a huge difference in utility between Gold and Curse and sometimes there isnt.
So trashing a $3+ card is very rarely good, but it can be better than gaining a Curse.  That's the point: Trashing a $3+ card from hand is not a get-out-of-jail free card, but the bail might sometimes be cheaper than gaining a Curse.  The fact that players don't just trash a $3+ card, but trash it from hand does make it very expensive. I will add a "draw a card" clause to the trashing even though I don't like how small it makes the text.  I think it is better attached to only the trashing.  Players will probably fight over the Holy Land less often if it also gave card draw with its Cursing.
Original post updated.

Quote
Holy Land
Types: Artifact
When you gain a Victory card, each other player may trash a card costing at least $3 from their hand. If they do, they draw a card. Otherwise, they gain a Curse.



Quote
Liturgy
Types: Event
Cost: $3
+2 Buys. Take the Confessional
Quote
Confessional
Types: Artifact

When you gain a card, you may trash a card from your hand
Uh, turn 1 $3 Buy Confessional to turn 2 Estates into Coppers sounds pretty busted to me.

Quote
Land Surveying
Types: Event
Cost: $4
If you do not have the Map, take it and finish your Buy phase. If you have the Map, gain a Victory.
Quote
Map
Types: Artifact

At the start of Clean-up, put -1 Card token on your deck.
In a game without Colonies, gaining a Province is every bit as strong as gaining a Colony. Probably stronger, in fact, because without Colonies it's the only pile that can end the game on its own.

Think about how this card would actually play out in a game. Imagine that you're the only one who's buying this. You're then guaranteed a Province every time you hit $4, which is trivial even with a 4-card hand. You'd need no deck-building beyond buying Silvers and maybe a trasher. If you absolutely have to buy a card to have even a hope of winning, that's a sign that it's too strong.
I don't agree that gaining a Province for $4 is stronger than gaining a Colony for $4, but it is too strong either way.
The big problem Land Surveying will have is that you cannot allow someone to have it because $12 and 3-Buys turns into 3 Provinces, but buying it doesn't help the game end, so it will be a back-and-forth forever.

Quote
Infusion
Types: Event
Cost: $P
+1 Buy. Trash a card you have in play for +$1 per $2 it costs (round down). If it costs $4 or more, take the Cauldron. Play any number of treasures.
Quote
Cauldron

Types: Artifact
During your turns, Potions are  "Choose one: +1 Potion or +$3."
Infusion turns Potions into a worse Forager-alike with the Cauldron as its weird bonus.  You can buy Potions to Infuse Coppers out of your deck and then Infuse a Potion (or other $4+ card) to take the Cauldron and repurpose your Potions into cheap Golds.  Worse case scenario, this becomes a Strategy in itself, where you buy a bunch of Potions to use as cheap Golds.  In such a case, all you can really do if continually Infusion whenever anyone takes the Cauldron from you, in order to keep playing your Potions as Gold.  This is possibly a losing battle because you have to trash $4+ cards, so I imagine this is particularly weak in the average case.



I thought I had clearly articulated that before, but I guess not. Perhaps we disagree on this -- do you like to add many different concepts onto a card at once? If so, I'll definitely stop providing you feedback to pare your cards down to one focused concept.
I appreciate feedback, whether or not I agree with it.  I highlighted the particular text because you were continuously suggesting cards with built-in hiccups have those hiccups removed (like Coffee Roast's "how do I re-gain my trashed Potion?"), but you now claim to have suggested +1 Buy in spite of thinking that would make the card overpowered: So I am not sure what we're talking about now.
I agree that cards can be focused, and more often than not should be, though that is not necessarily a golden standard.  Per card we would be looking at individual particular criticisms, but I don't like flooding the replies with disagreements.  Thank you for the time you've put into your posts.

25
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: October 09, 2019, 05:49:35 pm »

Quote
Warfare
Types: Event
Cost: $3
Take the Holy Land. Trash a Victory card with the lowest cost in coins from the Supply.
Quote
Holy Land
Types: Artifact

When you gain a Victory card, each other player may trash a card costing at least $3 from their hand. If they do, they draw a card. Otherwise, they gain a Curse.

Fight over the Holy Land. Warfare trashes Victory cards from the Supply so that
1) You can buy Estates more easily to leverage the Holy Land while emptying Supply piles to threaten a 3-pile.
2) It prevents the objective of the game from ever turning into "fight over the Holy Land forever."
Other players have the option to trash a valuable card or gain a Curse so that postponing a 3-pile is possible (or other times when losing a card is better than gaining a Curse).

I don't know if I like it, but that might be my anti-expansion-mixing bias. Maybe I'm also a little upset with myself considering Holy Land was a pretty cool Artifact pubby made a bit ago. Maybe because of similarities between this and Salt the Earth. EDIT: Maybe because it feels like a modification of segura's Parade (which I realized shortly after posting).
Anyone else have any thoughts?

History:
Holy Land originally didn't draw a card when another player trashed a card.



Quote
Supervision
Types: Event
Cost: $0
+1 Buy. At the start of your Buy phase, you may discard a card with two or more types to take the Sandals.
Quote
Sandals
Types: Artifact

At the end of your Buy phase, choose one: Put 1VP here; or take the VP from this.
...
It could be too conservative but I did not want to make it too easy to just discard a Mill or whatever to grab whatever VPs are on Sandals.
This would function virtually identically and much smoother if Supervision occurred when you bought it and Sandals triggered at the start of your turn. I bet Sandals will never pop in 3-player games (without Outpost or Mission): The chance of 2 players missing in a row when Sandals has 2+VP on it (which will be around turn 7(!), unless the board is so bad it is better to lose your turn 1/2 buy on turn 3/4 to get Sandals) is just about 0%. Honestly, Sandals giving 0.5VP per turn--less really because it is uncertain--is probably too little. Even 1VP might be too little.

Quote
Surveil
Types: Event
Cost: $4
+1 Buy. Reveal the top three cards of your deck. You may trash or discard any number of them, then put the rest back in any order. If you have trashed three or more cards this turn, take the Beacon and put your deck into your discard pile.
Quote
Beacon
Types: Artifact

When you would shuffle, you may look through and trash a card from your discard pile before shuffling. Play with your deck face-up.
Beacon is really cool, though I can think of plenty of players who will mistake their deck and discard pile.
Surveil is ridiculous though. $4 trashes 4 Coppers\Estates on turn 1. Surveil should probably not trash so many cards so freely as it makes Beacon's trashing less notable.

Quote
Mining
Types: Event
Cost: $3
Trash a card from your hand or in play, then gain a card costing up to $2 more than it. If you trashed a card costing $4 or more, take the Pick.
Quote
Pick
Types: Artifact

When you trash a card, you may gain a card costing less than it.
I mean Mining is a Remodel+ whenever you want it, which means it should at least cost $4 (and probably have a drawback if it's that cheap). You could probably get away with a $5 cost if you change Pick to be non-optional.
I disagree with spineflu's argument because buying an Event is so incomparable to buying, drawing, and playing an Action.
I do agree with the sentiment though. Trashing Estates in the opening is freakishly powerful. Trashing Golds from play for Provinces is a super-powerful end-game tool as well. Mining could probably cost $6 as written and would still be pretty strong. It you want it to cost less, I'd remove the ability to trash from hand.

Quote
Subscribe
Types: Event
Cost: $5
Gain an Action costing up to $4. Move the Trophy token to its supply pile. (when it's the third time you play a card from its pile during your turns, take the Floating Trophy.)
Quote
Floating Trophy
Types: Artifact

When the game ends, +3 VP.
Assuming there is only one Trophy token (which seems to be the case, considering its wording), I don't think there is any incentive to buy the first Subscribe. I can benefit just as much from it without having to buy it.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15

Page created in 0.424 seconds with 18 queries.