Think I probably should just come up with something more creative for Vegetable Patch than a Lost City clone.
I went here with it:
is the discard this effect meant to stop it from working on the next turn? because rn it doesn'tThis is far too harsh.
Basically Snow is to the -1 Card token what Horse is to +1 Card.
Relic is non-terminal but the token does not stack. So I would think twice about creating a non-terminal Snow junker and never even consider doing a cantrip snow junker.
Snow Queen is a double anti-Lab for the opponents, plus potentially a delayed multi-Lab for the active player. That is crazy!
You're right, thank you! I understimated the power of giving Snows. I though at first glance that giving a Snow was a kind of delayed Urchin attack, but Urchin is not stackable, which makes a big difference.
There was also a issue of exploding on multiplayer games, so I'm updating it to:
- Changed cantrip part to Upgrade effect, so you can benefit from the Snows you eventually receive from opponents, even remodeling them to Snow Queens.
- Changed triggered effect to a kind of trade-off: you may choose to transform opponent Snow in a cantrip to get Council Room effect.
Previous version still would be a bit messy in multiplayer games with many Snow Queens played. So, I changed the triggered effect to make it discard Snow Queen. Now, when another player plays a Snow, you choose if you want an extra card or give Snows next turn.
UPDATE:
Feedbacks are always welcome!
This is far too harsh.
Basically Snow is to the -1 Card token what Horse is to +1 Card.
Relic is non-terminal but the token does not stack. So I would think twice about creating a non-terminal Snow junker and never even consider doing a cantrip snow junker.
Snow Queen is a double anti-Lab for the opponents, plus potentially a delayed multi-Lab for the active player. That is crazy!
You're right, thank you! I understimated the power of giving Snows. I though at first glance that giving a Snow was a kind of delayed Urchin attack, but Urchin is not stackable, which makes a big difference.
There was also a issue of exploding on multiplayer games, so I'm updating it to:
- Changed cantrip part to Upgrade effect, so you can benefit from the Snows you eventually receive from opponents, even remodeling them to Snow Queens.
- Changed triggered effect to a kind of trade-off: you may choose to transform opponent Snow in a cantrip to get Council Room effect.
Congratulations for making you set.
Vegetable Patch puts Luxury pile in Kingdom but is better without them. If you simply ignore Luxury cards, you have a Lost City at $4, which is broken.
The card itself is better without them, but is your game better without them?
This is far too harsh.
Basically Snow is to the -1 Card token what Horse is to +1 Card.
Relic is non-terminal but the token does not stack. So I would think twice about creating a non-terminal Snow junker and never even consider doing a cantrip snow junker.
Snow Queen is a double anti-Lab for the opponents, plus potentially a delayed multi-Lab for the active player. That is crazy!
Spellbook's bottom-most section (the self-cost increasing) should say "during your turns." See Peddler, Destrier, and Fisherman. Janus' bottom section would be better worded as "during your turns, if your Journey token is face down, this costsless."
Wording aside, there's a big issue with cost increasing effects like Spellbook: What happens if I play 4 Bridges and have one Spellbook in play? Do the 4 Bridges try to lower its cost to -, and then Spellbook raises its cost to
first and then the Bridges reduce its price to
Samurai is likely too good. It is Lab plus Peddler and having an (integrated) Peddler seems better than the one-shot Villager for the opponents.
I like Rebel but the Attack looks too powerful, unless you intend that the card should more or less totally shut down engine play.
UPDATED TO:
- When at the start of your turn your token and the token of the player to your right match: If you do nothing, Janus is a Smithy. If you flip the token, Janus is a Village. If you play one as a Village, the second you play could be both, Village+Smithy. The next would be only a Village or only a Smithy again.
- When at the start of your turn tokens don't match: If you do nothing, its a Ruined Library, but there's no reason to do nothing, as you may flip the token over for it be a Village+Smithy. The next you play would be only a Village or only a Smithy.
The combined effect of each two Janus played when the first of them is not played as Smithy, is 2 Villages + Smithy or Village + 2 Smithies. If first is played as Smithy, there's no way to activate both effects in the next playing, so combined effect would be 2 Smithies or Village + Smithy.
The best situation at the start of the turn is when tokens don't match, so you can change the satus of your token at the end of your turn to make tokens match and leave to your opponent the worst situation for them. On the other hand, if you have reasons to believe the player to your right won't play Janus on their turn, it's better for you to make tokens unmatch.
Feedbacks are always welcome!
Does the wording make it clear that the part after the "Then,.." applies anyway and not only when you turn the token over?
Yes, it does.
QuoteCabal
$4 Action
You may turn your Journey token over (it starts face up). Then, if it's face up, +1 Card, +1 Action, and +$2.
-
While this is in play, if your Journey token is face up, when you buy a card, gain a Copper, and you may not buy Victory cards.
A conspirator variant. You don't want to play just one in a turn. The more, the better.
I've always disliked the idea of cards that reward the journey token for being down. The fact that it only matters for a few interactions can't be a reason to do it. (It's dumb but it'll only occasionally matter so it's fine?) It doesn't fit with the concept; the idea of the journey token is that you have to get a weaker thing first to get a stronger thing later.
The problem is not the power level of the compensation but that the effect is far too good to be counterweights by anything. Just imagine Heiress in a Kingdom with Mountebank. Alice plays Heiress as Double Mountebank, Bob gains 2 Curses, 2 Coppers and a Mountebank.
Would this version work?
It should say costing less than this, so that you cannot play a Mountebank twice if you played Highway before Heiress. I don’t think giving your opponents a copy of the card adequately compensates for the fact that this is still way better than Band of Misfits at the same cost. For example, you could play a card like Moneylender twice and if your opponents already have one in their deck it is actually to your benefit if they gain another copy.
The problem is not the power level of the compensation but that the effect is far too good to be counterweights by anything. Just imagine Heiress in a Kingdom with Mountebank. Alice plays Heiress as Double Mountebank, Bob gains 2 Curses, 2 Coppers and a Mountebank.
Heiress is too good. Double BoM/Overlord without any cost restriction is extremely powerful and not compensated by the Exiling. A TR that first drew a card would be very strong at $5 and this TR draws a virtual card that is whatever you wish it to be.
