Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 on: Today at 06:19:57 pm 
Started by DaveS - Last post by ephesos
I'd take a look at this wiki page:

In short, when you gain a card, you look at the list of triggers, choose an order to process them in, and then follow that order. So, at the time you gain E1, the triggers are "Exile mat: you may discard E0" and "Experiment: gain E2". Importantly, you do not add any more triggers to this list after it's determined.

Let's say you choose to resolve them in the order "you may discard E0", then "gain E2". Against better judgement, you choose to discard E0 from the Exile mat. Then, you gain E2. Once you gain E2, it triggers Gatekeeper (and nothing else, since E0 and E1 aren't on your Exile mat). So you exile E2. You already made the list of triggers for gaining E1, and at the time, E2 wasn't on your Exile mat. So you do not discard E2.

Now, why can't you add triggers after the list of triggers has been determined? Well, it would have some weird consequences. For instance, let's say you gained a regular Village with Gatekeeper in play. Gatekeeper triggers, putting it on the Exile mat. If you could keep adding triggers, you could then say "Look, a Village is on my Exile mat, and I'm gaining a Village, so let me just discard this exiled Village here." And so that's why you can't do that.

 on: Today at 06:03:30 pm 
Started by spineflu - Last post by silverspawn
Navigator is weak powerwise and sifting isn’t something that other cards don’t do.

Trash at the risk of blowing up good stuff isn’t something any other card does (well, Junk Dealer and Upgrade technically do but then you are actively gambling, having no junk in hand and only hoping to draw into junk) so Lookout is unique to some degree.

Coppersmith also did something no other card does  :(

Not really though after Bank. And Bank has a more reasonable power level, too.

 on: Today at 05:47:42 pm 
Started by 4est - Last post by X-tra
I haven't posted in these contests for a while, but this one seems right up my alley. Let's open up this thread with this idea:

This would replace Explorer. Gainers be rare in Seaside (Smugglers on top of my head and even then, it's somewhat out of your control that one). Dunno if this is balanced or not. I haven't tested it yet.

 on: Today at 05:38:24 pm 
Started by 4est - Last post by Gubump
I assume our entries should also fit in with Seaside thematically, not just mechanically?

 on: Today at 05:37:27 pm 
Started by spineflu - Last post by anordinaryman
Honestly wharf should be removed. It’s too strong and does everything. If it didn’t have the +buy it would still be super strong and worth it. It just gives too much, and if I had a time machine it’s definitely one of 7 seaside cards I’d rethink. And the second edition is kind of a time machine.

Also, I have a feeling 7 cards will be replaced and we get 2 extra— for a few reasons: seaside already has more blank cards, and if any of NV, island, or pirate ship are removed (incredibly likely that pirate ship is removed) the lack of Mats adds room for more new cards. We might even only lose 6 cards.

 on: Today at 05:32:28 pm 
Started by Honkeyfresh - Last post by Honkeyfresh
Anyone know if the site has been vaxxed?  Just wanna know how long it will be in the ICU...

 on: Today at 04:40:04 pm 
Started by 4est - Last post by 4est
WDC #141: Seaside Revisited

Hello everybody! In light of the recent news of a 2nd Edition for Dominion: Seaside, here's this week's challenge:

Design a new card that fits the theme of Seaside (and optionally, replaces a current card from Seaside)

Other rules and suggestions:
  • You may NOT use unique mechanics from other official expansions. Your card should be one that could reasonably fit in an actual Seaside Second Edition without requiring additional mechanic explanation in the Seaside expansion rulebook. So no landscapes, reserves, travellers, split piles, VP tokens, Coffers/Villagers, Debt, Exile, Horses, Night cards, etc.
  • Your card does not have to be a direct replacement for another official Seaside card, but you are welcome to design one that is (and maybe let us know what card yours is intended to replace).
  • Try to think about how your card would fit in Seaside as a whole. Does Seaside need another village or trasher or non-attack player interaction card, etc. How will replacing an old card with yours affect the expansion generally?
  • If you want to be extra fancy, consider component decisions too. Seaside already comes with some tokens and mats (each of which are utilized by only one card). Do you want to design a card that creatively eliminates the need for a certain component, or perhaps makes another use for one?
  • To that end, I will allow a unique new mechanic that creatively reuses some of the current Seaside components (such as the coin tokens for Pirate Ship), so long as your card is not introducing a "later" mechanic from another official expansion (e.g. Coffers from Guilds and Renaissance).
  • As always with my contests: Don't make me squint. Eliminate unnecessary words and complexity where possible.

Judgment Details:
  • Entries and revisions must be submitted by 5:00 PM CST (11:00 PM UTC) on Friday, February 4. I'll have results posted on Sunday, February 6.
  • Entries will be judged on ingenuity, balance, simplicity, and appropriate overall fit within a Seaside Second Edition.

I know there was a similar contest to this when the 2E Base Set and Intrigue sets were announced, but that was three years ago now, and it feels good to revisit the idea, this time with the focus strictly on Seaside.

Have fun! I'm excited to see your designs!

 on: Today at 04:33:53 pm 
Started by spineflu - Last post by Cuzz
Navigator is weak powerwise and sifting isn’t something that other cards don’t do.

Trash at the risk of blowing up good stuff isn’t something any other card does (well, Junk Dealer and Upgrade technically do but then you are actively gambling, having no junk in hand and only hoping to draw into junk) so Lookout is unique to some degree.

Coppersmith also did something no other card does  :(

 on: Today at 04:14:00 pm 
Started by emtzalex - Last post by emtzalex
Weekly Design Contest #140: Choose Three

Hey all. Sorry I totally disappeared. I was about halfway done when I got completely slammed at work. I didn't see a way to finish quickly, and I didn't want to post it half-finished, so I kept just trying to just get it done, but was not able to until just now. I should have come back sooner and told you all what happened. Again, I'm really, really sorry.

I will defer to LF's judging, but I will still post my feedback in case it helps.

Master Laborers -- $6
Place a card from your hand here under your cube. On your turns these cards are now an action card that says "Choose 3 of the following: +1 Action; +$1; +1 Buy; Gain a Curse, or Discard a Card

Master Laborers by CaptainReklaw

I'm a little unclear as to how this works. Do copies of the card loose their existing types, or are they Actions in addition to their other types? What about their existing abilities (of various types: on play, while-in-play, reactions, scoring, etc.). Do those go away, or is the Choose 3 in addition to those? The wording makes all of that unclear. I would suggest looking at Capitalism and Inheritance (both the old and new versions, and why it was changed) to help clarify the language. The fact that this can be played on any type of card (including Treasures) creates some additional problems.

More importantly for this contest, as Gubump pointed out, the choices are not really meaningful. Three are vanilla bonuses that are always considered positive, while the other two are always considered penalties. Thus, a player will almost always select +1 Action; +$1; +1 Buy.

Hack of all Smithies
$5 - Action - Attack
+3 Cards.
Turn your journey token over (it starts face up). If it's face up, choose 3 things: Trash a card from your hand, +$1, +1 Buy, discard 2 cards for +1 Card, or each other player gains a Copper.
If your journey token is face down, discard an Action or Treasure card (or reveal a hand without any).

EDIT: FAQ: Choices must be different. Do I need to add "Choices must be different" on the card? or is that the default rule?

Hack of all Smithies by LibraryAdventurer

A Smithy variant that uses the Journey token mechanic, alternating between a 1 card penalty and a choice of 3 of 5 bonuses, all of which are strong compliments to the drawing: trashing (strong after drawing because of the increased likelihood of cards to trash), sifting (which can help get rid of unplayable Actions), etc. I like incorporating the junking and trashing into a single card. In a lot of cases, it might render the card self-defeating, but here, because the player may have to forgo one of the other choices, the junk is not necessarily automatic (this is especially true if they are sifting, as they don't know what their final hand will be). This would almost be too strong, but the off-play penalty balances it out.

A really strong entry that could be a lot of fun to play.

Copy editing: "+3 Cards" should not have a period at the end of it (see Also, the word "Journey" in "Journey token" is capitalized, and the first instruction after you tell it to flip over always starts "Then..." (see , List items are separated by semi-colons.

Foreman - $5
Choose 3 different things to get in the listed order: +1 Buy; +$1; +1 Coffers; the next card you gain this turn, gain it to your hand; gain a card costing up to $4; this turn, cards (everywhere) cost $1 less.

Foreman  by Xen3k

An interesting hybrid of Bridge, Inventor, and Sculptor (without the Villagers). By giving different options, it adds a degree of flexibility and potentially sets up a lot of interesting combos. At first I wasn't sure if that justified the jump to $5, as in games without some of those combos available, I don't know if it is that much better than Bridge (but it has to cost more, as it is strictly better than both Bridge and Inventor). But on second thought, I think it clearly does. Bridge is sometimes described as terminal virtual Gold, but that is only true if you buy 2 cards. This can always be terminal Gold, even if you are stretching for a single card. That makes it comparable to Legionary and Livery, and definitely worth the cost.

One concern I had is that with a +1 Action token or Champion, if you get two of these in your hand you can empty the pile. That's not necessarily a huge problem, as each subsequent play requires 2 of the 3 choices, so a player couldn't do both discounting and +Buy, and thus empty the Province pile with no other help. But they would still get 9 hits of Buy or discount (after the first discount), which could still combine for a huge payoff (6 Duchies or 3 Provinces with no additional payload). However, I think this passes the Smithy-Lost Arts test, so I won't count it against you.

Copy editing: Per the rules for , I don't think you need to say "to get in the listed order" as that is implied by the rules.

Action ($4)

Choose three: +1 Action; +$1; trash a card from your hand; gain a Horse; gain a Silver. The choices must be different.

Weaver by AJL828

A nice trasher + gainer. While it is limited in its ability to do either, the fact that it can do both, and that later in the game (once the player no longer wants trashing or Silver) it functions as a Peddler with a delayed +Card means that unlike other, stronger trashers (e.g. Chapel) it retains of function in the deck throughout the game (not unlike Steward). The choose 3 mechanic allows the a great deal of control as to the different elements. That trade off does not make it better than Chapel, but if it were, it would be way too good.

Worm Hole -- $6
Action - Attack - Doom
Choose 3: +1 Card; +$1; +1 Buy; trash a card from your hand; gain a Silver (choices may be the same).
Choose 1: Each other player gains a curse to their hand; receives the next Hex; or puts cards from his hand onto his deck until he has 4 cards in hand.

Worm Hole by mathdude

This card has 2 parts: a Choose 3 that will often function as either a smithy variant or terminal Gold, but with the option to forgo a card/coin for trashing, a buy, or gaining a Silver; and an attack that either gives a Curse, a Hex, or makes opponents topdeck down to 4 cards. This is a very strong card. The ability to be a smithy or a terminal Gold makes this a very strong engine component, allowing for drawing at first, and then if the player draws their deck (or even before), that excess +Cards can be converted into trashing, payload, +Buys, or (least likely) Silvers. The attack is also unusually strong. Unlike a standard Curser, which only works until the Curses run out, this continues to attack, and its attacks can combine to be extra nasty (making a player gain a Curse to hand and then making them topdeck an extra card, probably the Curse). While it is priced above the likes of Torturer or Werewolf, the amount stronger it gets is not reflected in the $1 increase in price.

I am partial to engine components, but I think this one is too good.

Copy editing: Wormhole is one word.

Black Spot • $4 • Treasure - Attack - Doom
Reveal the top 4 Hexes; receive 3 of them (in any order). Each other player receives the remaining Hex and if they aren't Marked, takes it.

Marked • State
At the start of your turn, return this.

Until then, you are unaffected by Hexes.

Black Spot by spineflu (with Marked)

A Gold that costs $4, but when its played gives the player 3 of 4 Hexes and gives the last one to the other players. It uses a State ("Marked") to ensure that players only get 1 Hex between their turns. The obvious comparison is to Skulk, which gives you a Gold and a junk card Hexer. 

Taking 3 of 4 Hexes of the player's choice is an odd effect. If their is a particular Hex you want to avoid (say, Miserable), you can always do so on your turns plays of Black Spot. There is also the potential to order the Hexes in such a way as to mitigate their effect. At the extreme, you could take Plague (gaining a Curse to your hand), then Haunting (topdecking the Curse), the Locust (trashing the Curse), causing the 3 Hexes to cancel each other out. This is unlikely, as it would require the player to have 4 cards in hand. In most cases, a player will play their other Treasures first, to avoid being hit by Haunting or Poverty.

This will also (potentially) cycle through the Curse pile relatively quickly. Absent other Doom cards, a player who keeps track of what was played the first 2 times after a Shuffle (or who scrolls up the log in an online game) will know what 4 Hexes are coming. This makes using the Hexes to your advantage much more feasible: setting up a Haunting - Locusts to trash Curses, Ruins, Stonemasons (if there are no Ruins), Coppers/Estates (after the Curse pile is emptied), or even Fortresses (if there's something cheaper you want). Setting up a Bad Omens - Locust or a Bad Omens + Loan.

All of this makes it feel like it would potentially make the card very swingy, as the player who happens to get the 3rd time around has (potentially) a big advantage. It is a fun and interesting concept, but I think playing it would be a bit rough.

Railway • $7 • Action
+1 Buy
Discard a card.
Choose three: Railways cost $2 less this turn; cards (everywhere) cost $1 less this turn; +2 Cards; +1 Buy and +$2; gain a card costing up to $4.

Railway by Augie279

This seems very strong. On a single play you can have $1 of discounting, gain a $5 card, and have +2 Buys and +$2 to add to your payload (less the 1 card you had to discard) to shop at a discount. In a good engine (or with Lost Arts/Teacher/Champion), it is not hard to imagine playing a string of these choosing the general discount, +2 Cards, and +1 Buy, +$2. Just 3 plays like that gives you $6, 6 Buys, and a $3 discount, which would let you buy a ton of $3, $4, and $5 engine components. If you managed 5 plays and just $2 more you could buy 4 Provinces and

There are a few important limitations. The discarding before the choice does limit its usefulness as an engine component: it has a net neutral effect on your handsize, but (unlike Fugitive) you cannot discard one of the cards drawn. And, of course, it is terminal, so they must be lined up with extra Actions to play more than one of them. The other major impediment is the high cost, $7. However, this impediment is somewhat offset by the card's ability to self-gain. When doing so, a player still gets the 1 point of general discounting, and an extra Buy, at the cost of discarding a card. With 2 Coppers and a Silver they could buy another Railway or 2 Villages.

My concern is that this could make the card very swingy. If a player happens to get 2 Silvers and 3 Coppers after their first shuffle and buys a Railway on turn 3 or 4 would be in the position to start loading their deck with additional Railways and engine components to set up an incredibly powerful chain. By contrast, another player might not get a Railway until several turns later. The disadvantage could quickly snowball, meaning a player could effectively lose on turn 3. This could be exacerbated with Cursed Gold, Baker, etc.

That being said, I do really like the card. I would suggest taking away the discount for Railway, and possibly adding another option to replace it (maybe topdecking the top card of your discard pile, which will either be the card you discarded or the card you gained).

Monastic Village
Choose three (the choices may be the same): +1 Action, or trash a card from your hand.

Another same-choice card, which allows the player to dial between trashing and gaining Actions. I like that the simplicity of the card fits the theme. I also like the fact that there will be at least some coloration between wanting more Actions (because you have Action cards to play) and wanting less trashing, or vice versa.

The fact that it maxes out at +3 Actions with no cards drawn or coins given is a bit tough, but given the strength of its trashing and the fact that there is no risk of terminal collision, I think it is pretty well balanced. While not the most exciting submission, it is a well-designed card.

The only other criticism I would have is that, from the perspective of the contests themes, the choices are fairly automatic (although not always). This is not necessarily a problem with the card generally, but it keeps the card from finishing higher in the competition.

Will • $5 • Action
Choose 3 to gain:
An Estate; or a Duchy; or a Copper; or a Silver; or an Action card costing up to $4.
The choices must be different.

Will by 4est

I really like the idea, both thematically and in terms of the concept of a gainer that gives both cards you want and some you don't. My main concern is that in a lot of Kingdoms, on the majority of plays players are going to feel like they are taking 2 cards they don't want. With a $5 card, it won't be long before a player is no longer that interested in gaining Silver. There are very few official cards that cost $5+ and gain Silver on-play, and the ones that do do it in a way that is more beneficial (e.g. gaining it to your hand). And in a lot of Kingdoms there is a limit to how many copies of cheap Action cards you can gain. I wounder if this might work better as a $4 Action.

Informant - Action - Reserve - $4

The player to your left chooses three (for you): +1 Villager; +1 Coffers; gain a Horse; put this on your Tavern mat. The choices must be different.
At the start of your buy phase, you may call this for +1 Buy.

Informant by scolapasta

This is a very interesting card design. In a sense, your opponent is choosing one thing for you NOT to receive, but it still fits the official rules, and still creates an interesting choice, giving you a delayed version of each of the vanilla bonuses. Villagers are strictly better than Actions, and Coffers are nearly strictly better than Coins (the rare exception being if the Action gets played as a result of you buying something, so you can't use them this turn). The same is true of putting this on your Tavern mat, since (unless played during your Buy phase) you can call it the same turn. However, if you want to hold it over Informant stays out of your deck. The Horse is not strictly worse than +1 Card, but it is generally so.

The choice of what to hold back can be an interesting one. I think the default would be the Coffers, although in a lot of games never giving your opponent Villagers might be the stronger choice. That is this card's one big drawback. If one of the effects is really useful in a given Kingdom (Villagers in a game with good terminal Actions, Coffers in a game with a high-cost purchase; Horses with good synergy cards), your opponent can just always withhold them. That makes the card inherently much worse at synergies and combos, which are one of the best parts of Dominion.

As to the overall power level, I do think it is a bit weak. I think the +Buy is probably the weakest choice, but even if the card automatically gave you the other 3, those compare to Supplies in a way similar to how Patron compares to Silver. But Patron only costs $1 more than Silver (and has a reaction), while this costs $2 more than Supplies (and doesn't gain the Horse onto your deck, but does give you a Coffers instead of a Coin).

You mentioned in your comments that you wanted the player to be able to give the same bonus more than once, but that didn't work with putting it on the Reserve mat, and you considered using +Buy tokens instead. I have toyed with +Buy tokens, but if that were a choice I think players would almost always just give their opponent 3 +Buy tokens, and the card would be almost useless. Instead, I would suggest a 1-shot non-Supply Treasure (like Spoils) that give +1 Buy and something else. I came up with 3 suggestions:

Secret • $0* • Treasure
+1 Buy
Return this to its pile.
(This is not in the Supply.)
Letters of Passage • $0* • Treasure
+1 Buy
This turn, cards (everywhere) cost $1 less.
Return this to its pile.
(This is not in the Supply.)
Letters of Passage • $0* • Treasure
+1 Buy
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Treasure. Discard the other cards. Play that Treasure. Return this to its pile.
(This is not in the Supply.)

I'm still not sure I love the idea of the choices being the same, but either way I think something like this is an improvement over the Reserve option, and would strengthen the card in a way that would make it better.

6 Debt

Look through your discard pile. Choose three (you may choose the same option more than once): trash a card from your hand or discard pile; exile a card from your hand or discard pile; put a card from your hand or discard pile on top of your deck.

Cleanse by xyz123

I like the use of an Event in this space. It can mitigate the potential overpowered nature of choosing 3 things from a list of different, interesting option. Cleanse is sort of a twist on Donate, with some Banish and Travelling Fair mixed in. It is nowhere close to Donate's scale in terms of the number of cards you can thin, or even what cards are eligible to be thinned. On the other hand, its scope is wider than Banish or Travelling Fair in terms of the cards you can potentially exile or topdeck.

The price point seems pretty good. It should clearly be less Donate, but more than Banish. The debt cost is a good idea. Like with Donate, it mitigates some of the swinginess of players needing to hit the cost (that's especially true here, as you generally want to but this just before you hit a shuffle to maximize your options). It gets a lot stronger in games where you need cards to collide (e.g. Treasure Map, Prince), but not more so than some other landscape (Donate, Way of the Turtle), and paying {6} to put 2 cards onto your deck and trash/Exile one more is still a fair shake.

This is a solid entry, and a really high-quality Event.

Copy editing: Option 3 should say "put a card from your hand or discard pile onto your deck." (See

Town Hall • $8 • Action - Duration
Choose two: Put two cards from your hand onto your deck; discard three cards; or gain a Copper and a Curse to your hand.
At the start of your next turn, choose three: +3 Cards; +3 Actions; +3 Buys; +$3; or trash up to three cards from your hand.
The choices must be different.

Town Hall by The Alchemist

So, based on your comments, your intention seems to be that a player can take the choices out of order (specifically, they can gain the Copper and Curse, then topdeck it). This is inconsistent with the guidance for Scrap (and the general rule that card effects are resolved top-to-bottom, left to right). I would suggest you either say "Choose two in any order" or just put the gaining first (so it does not matter).

I am always a bit weary of $8 as a price point. Outside of discounting or a Colonies game, you will generally be foregoing a Province to get one of these. That can be a tough call, even with a strong card. This is particularly strong. The obvious comparison is to Tactician, but this is much stronger. You don't need to get rid of your entire hand, so you can play this and (potentially) still buy cards or do other things. Even if you get rid of your entire hand, you can put the 2 better cards onto your deck for your next, enhanced turn. The trashing is also a really strong effect. You can topdeck junk (not just the junk you gained) and set it up to be certain to be trashed. You can also topdeck terminal Action knowing you will draw them before getting +3 Actions.

Unfortunately, all of that is premised on spending $8 on an Action card (and, frankly you would probably want 2 if you could get it). In the right Kingdom this could be an exciting part of an interesting strategy, but a lot of the time you won't be in a position to buy it.

Something still feels off about this and to me is too much like the original bishop?
Cursed Bishop • $5 • Action - Attack
Choose 3: +1 Buy; or +1VP; or Trash a card from your hand for +1VP per $2 it costs (rounded down); or trash a Silver from your hand and each other player receives the next Hex. The choices must be different

Cursed Bishop by Lackar

A twist on Bishop, which gives a Buy instead of a Coin, doesn't let other players trash, and can forgo one of its effects (the +Buy, the +VP, or the trash-for-VP) and trash a Silver from your hand to give out a Hex. There is technically an accountability issue with the Silver trashing, although I am fine with saying that revealing your hand if you say you don't have a Silver is implied. But even if that's the case, this card can still potentially give an endless Supply of VP, once all of the Silver is out of your deck. Now, a $5 card that just gives 1 VP and 1 Buy is not a super-obvious candidate for players to be doing nothing but playing it for VP tokens, but it is not impossible. I would suggest modifying the 3rd option to be something like "trash a card from your hand, and if it's a Silver, each other player receives the next Hex." This also makes the card a little better, allowing a player to trash 2 cards, and makes the choices a little more interesting.

Copy editing: The VP token symbols are incorrect (in the editor, you should use %). In recent expansions/reprints, cards now say "(round down)" instead of "(rounded down)". Also, you forgot the period after "The choices must be different"

Tres Leches
Worth 3% if you have exactly three of this (otherwise worth 0%).
When you gain this, choose three: +3 Coffers; or +3 Villagers; or Queue the top three cards of your deck; or gain three Horses; or gain three Spoils; or trash up to three cards from your hand. The choices must be different.

Tres Leches by arowdok

I really appreciate that you had some fun with this, and really ran with the theme of 3. I am intrigued by the 3VP-if-you-have-exactly-3 mechanic. I really like it on this card and what it costs. Because getting 3 Debt and 3 Coffers more-or-less cancels each other out, the card effectively costs $3. However, the added debt costs means it cannot be gained by gainers or remodelers (unless you remodel a Fortune),  and if you want to buy multiple copies each turn you have to pay $6 for all but the last one. This makes it much harder to rush 3 of them right at the end of the game.

However, while this is significantly less busted than the first version (which guaranteed 4 Golds and 3 Silvers in a player's deck by the 2nd shuffle), the on-gain abilities still make it too strong. As I mentioned, the Coffers effectively cancel out the Debt, making the real cost of this card $3 (and giving you a Coffers for each extra $ you have available). If you also take the trashing, and are able to trash at least 2 cards (which should not be hard as you only need to hit $3), you also have the net effect of thinning your deck, so there is no harm there (unless there is other strong trashing). You can also use the trashing effect to buy more than 3 of these, as long as you have one in your hand when you buy the next, and trash it (along with additional junk) so you always have exactly 3. Then, you are effectively getting one of the other bonuses (3 Spoils, 3 Horses, 3 Queued cards, or 3 Villagers) for just $3 and a Buy. That, plus the trashing, plus the Coffers for extra $, plus the 3VP the first 3 times you do it, makes this extremely strong, and all but requires players to buy it (especially as they can be locked out of the 9VP if their opponent cycles through enough times).

I would suggest taking out the trashing. That makes taking the dead card part of the calculation, and makes it harder to decide when during the game (if ever) to go for these.

Quote from: Yacht

Cost: $5

Choose Three:
Gain a card costing up to $2; +1 Card; +$1.
The choices may be the same.

Yacht by jakav

A strong, versatile card that can function as either a terminal draw, terminal gold, or a bit of both. It also has the ability to gain cards costing up to $2, which is of limited value. Nevertheless, Yacht is a disproportionately strong engine component. The ability to flex between a Smithy variant and terminal gold is reminiscent of Way of the Chameleon, but this is even better, allowing the player to only partially shift between the two, getting 2 Cards and $1 or 1 card and $2. In terminal draw + village engines, the weakness is often that in buying engine components a player forgoes payload, and ends up drawing their entire deck with extra +Cards to spare, which effectively become useless. In addition to being a strong engine component, Yacht converts that extra capacity to payload.

The gaining function will be somewhat limited in most games, depending what $2 cards are available, EXCEPT that on a player's final turn (if they know that's what it is), the spare drawing capacity that had been turned into $ can instead by turned into VP by gaining Estates. This is not necessarily a minor thing. In a 2 player game, 3 plays of Yacht can pile the Estates for an 8VP bonus. This also has the potential to trigger a 3-pile game end.

Where this really gets broken powerful is with certain combos. At the lower (non-broken) end, with the likes of Hamlet or Native Village, the first time around you could gain 3 of them. It gets even more powerful with Inheritance; if you can Inherit a $3 or $4 village, then one play of this can not only gain 3 villages (supercharging your engine building) but also 3VP. The most broken is with Lost Arts/Teacher/Champion. Making this non-terminal, with the capacity to convert the cards into coins at will (and, at the end of the game, into VP from Estates) once your deck is drawn is crazy powerful. And with the Traveller lines, this has the added bonus of being able to be converted into terminal Gold so as not to risk drawing the Traveller dead.

Scrier • $5 • Action
Turn all Spells face up. Do this three times: play a face up Spell from its pile, leaving it there. Then, turn it face down.
Advance Time • $0 • Action - Spell
+1 Card
(This card is not in the Supply.)
Draw Energies • $0 • Action - Spell
+1 Action
(This card is not in the Supply.)
See the Future • $0 • Action - Spell
Look at the top 5 cards of your deck and put them back in any order.
(This card is not in the Supply.)
Switch Timelines • $0 • Action - Spell
Discard the top 3 cards of your deck (you may look to see what you discarded).
(This card is not in the Supply.)
Undo History • $0 • Action - Spell
Look through your discard pile. You may trash a card from it.
(This card is not in the Supply.)

Scrier by exfret (with Spells)

An interesting deck-control card. It has 3 different ways to manipulate your deck: looking at and ordering the top 5 cards, discarding the top 3, or trashing a card from your discard. If you want just one of these options, it can also be a cantrip, or your can use it terminally just to make your next turn better. Since you can choose the order, and resolve one before choosing the next, your decision can be based upon what you learn. In many cases, a player would choose See the Future, and then depending on what they saw they could use 2 other Spells to do a wide variety of things, including drawing the card they put on top non-terminally, drawing it terminally and using one of the deck-control spells, or using both deck-control spell.

I do like that this gives you a huge number of choices, but it does feel a bit on the strong side. The obvious comparison is to Cartographer. While this card is not strictly better, as it cannot be a cantrip and scout and reorder and discard, the fact that it can reorder prior to drawing makes it much, much better. If only used for non-terminal drawing/deck ordering, playing 1 Scrier is basically the equivalent to playing 2 Cartographers. The fact that they are priced the same makes me think this is too good. Off the top of my head, I would suggest making the player discard a card somewhere (either at the top or with Advance Time).

Also, while this implementation is acceptable, I think cramming them onto one card (with "Choose 3 different things to play in any order") would have been preferable. While it makes the text quite small, adding the 5 different cards creates needless complexity.

A fun and interesting card, but as is I think it's a bit too strong.

Quote from: Translation
Ghost Castle

Choose three:
Trash 2 Cards from your hand; +3 Cards, put 2 cards from your hand onto your deck;
+2 Cards; +1 Card; +1 Buy; +1 Coffers.
The choices must be different.

6$  Action

The most accurate translation of the cards name would probably be "Haunted Castle", but that name is already taken by an offical card.

A strong terminal drawing card, with the added ability to trash, or to get a Buy, a Coins, or a Coffers. As with Worm Hole and Yacht, the fact fact that this is a drawer which can shift incrementally into payload makes it an extremely strong engine component. The addition of both trashing and +Buy makes it even stronger. And while it costs more than either of those, it also tops out at 4 Cards (drawing obvious parallels to Hunting Grounds), and has the capacity to give you +2 Cards, along with $2 of payload (one as a Coffers). And the +3 Cards, topdeck 2 is yet another strong engine component, as it allows you to avoid terminal collisions when you have to play this with your last Action. While you cannot turn all 3 of your draws into payload, you can turn 2 into payload and the last into a Buy. While this somewhat mitigates the card's strength, I still think it is too powerful.

Swiss Village
Action - $4
Choose three (the choices must be different):
+1 Card; +1 Action; another +1 Action; +1 Buy; trash a Copper from your hand.

Rules clarification: After you choose, the options are performed in the order that they're written (so you can trash a Copper from your hand after drawing)

Swiss Village by NoMoreFun

I like villages (I am partial to engine strategies) and I really like this concept: taking a familiar card design (here, the village) and breaking its parts into 3 list items, then offering the player other things for each of those items they forgo. Here, they can either get a +Buy or Copper trashing. Neither are particularly strong, but it makes up for that by providing a lot of flexibility. It potentially combines well with draw-to-X cards like Watchtower: a player can take +2 Actions, trash a Copper, then play a Watchtower to draw 4 cards (having started from a 5 card hand).

 on: Today at 03:51:46 pm 
Started by spineflu - Last post by brokoli
Honestly I'm excited but really worried at the same time. In my opinion, the only cards that deserve to leave are : Pirate Ship, Pearl Diver, Navigator.
I'm fine about cutting Embargo if it is replaced by a better designed card on this mechanism (for example putting the embargo token or whatever it is on-buy).

Otherwise I enjoy all the other cards, Island is one of my all-time favorites and I still haven't mourned the Coppersmith.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10

Page created in 0.109 seconds with 16 queries.