Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Fangz]

IMO it's still too weak and useless. The lab effect simply means drawing this + an estate = having neither of those cards in your deck in the first place. And if you haven't drawn those two cards together, you've basically just cursed yourself by buying this card. Using this to gain estates instead of some other card would be useful in a very slim set of circumstances, since usually an estate in deck is about as bad as a curse. I would never ever buy this except as an odd combo with Baron and even then I'd probably prefer Crossroads.

Personally I think the Duchy gain isn't as overpowered as you think. Compare Tunnel, which gains a much better card (gold) and Transmute which offers you the powerful option of gaining Gold as well.

[popsofctown]

I think it's testable.  Having an estate in hand means you made both a card worth 1 VP and a card with reaction utility (that may even have been used this turn) invisible.  People pay 3$ for a Great Hall.  This is a Great Hall that fizzles sometimes but has other utility.  You won't always have an estate in hand of course and that balances out its versatility.

I think it's probably still slightly weak, but I wouldn't call it useless.  And I think testing is necessary to ascertain which of the abilities needs a buff to get it where it needs to be.  Probably just a +buy tacked in somewhere.  This card becomes even cuter with +buy, then it comboes with itself during an estate rush.

I have to agree that Duchy gain is not a good idea.  There's a crucial difference between Tunnel and a Duchy gainer - Golds massive Gold gain doesn't 3-pile and gain VP at the same time.

Though I think it should be tested as-is first, one change I would suggest is switching from Trader wording to Watchtower wording. That allows it to three pile faster by trashing curses, and lets it get along with Ironworks well (Donald ruled that Trader wording does not allow Ironworks to bestow any extra benefits at all ever   ).


Using this card in conjunction with Witches to make your opponent gain all 10 curses is probably rather fun and effective though, so definitely test it as is first. 

[ChaosRed]

I think a +buy might be nice for it. I was thinking that, now it's just a matter of finding the real estate on the card itself.

[popsofctown]

As I was checking to see where there was room for the +Buy, I realized you've got a bigger space issue - the wall to wall lab description needs an "If you do" on the estate discard

[ChaosRed]

Well I could not fit the "if you do" on the card, (but I'll house rule it for now)...



I think this is a decent card now when you want to 3-pile and makes a nice companion to a Gardens deck.

[Tydude]

I think it's probably fairly balanced now, but it still feels so disjointed. There doesn't seem to be an overall theme to the card, it just feels like a bunch of effects. I suppose the estate gaining and +buy help 3 pile, but then why does it let you trash? I think you need to somehow streamline it a bit.

[ChaosRed]

It lets you trash the Estates, if in the situation you've inherited too much green, too quickly. In a lot of cases, you just want to deplete the pile, you don't actually want the +1 the Estate gives you. It sounds odd, but it is sometimes a way you can win. The idea, thematically, is the "architect" builds an alternate victory path.

[plasticbrain]

It lets you trash the Estates, if in the situation you've inherited too much green, too quickly. In a lot of cases, you just want to deplete the pile, you don't actually want the +1 the Estate gives you. It sounds odd, but it is sometimes a way you can win. The idea, thematically, is the "architect" builds an alternate victory path.

but it goes against the flavor of the card. an architect is someone who lays plans to build structures, like estates. saying that he 'builds' a path to victory is malarky. practically every card in Dominion does that. it seems to me you're using that inverted reasoning to justify putting everything on this card. and that would be my one strong and abiding criticism of all your designs: too much on one card. such cards are actually not fun to play with because 1) they're confusing to know how to use, 2) their complexity usually makes them too narrow ironically, and 3) they're complicated rule text kills any flavor you were going for.
needed to be said. simplify.

[dondon151]

Architects also tear down stuff to build new stuff.

[popsofctown]

Noisy cards with lots of choices are uninviting for new players and bad if poorly designed.  I can't agree that they're inferior - X Command cycle in MtG made its standard format way too fun for me to agree with that.

I do agree that the card is going too many directions at once, though, and the choices need to work well together.  The trash ability doesn't go along with the rest of the card.  If you have an estate in your hand you want to cycle it with the lab ability.  If you're trashing estates, turning curses into estates doesn't matter, you just would have trashed the do-nothing card either way so you're better off with a Trade Route.

And trashing in general doesn't go well with three piling.  It makes green cards a larger proportion of your deck.

[ChaosRed]

 The trash ability works well, in cases where you only buy it as a defense against Curse attacks, it makes sense. You can trash what you just gained instead and then replace the traced card with something from your deck, making the Architect a neutral card in that situation.

It goes really well in 3-piling schemes where the VP are coming from other sources and the piling of Estates is there to just to end the game faster. In situations where the VP situation is close, you can elect to discard the Estate for a victory token.

It's not a great card, it's just a card that can help in certain situations. I like it now, and I will be ready to test it.

I'll move on to other cards with a new report shortly.

[Tydude]

Are you still doing this?