Print

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

[Trogdor the Burninator]

I thought of a card just now that would be interesting.
Mill
Discard a card, gain a card costing up to $4
Discard a card, gain a card costing $4, putting it
on top of your deck.
$4 Action
Would this be broken? Is it priced too low at $4?
Your thoughts?

[LastFootnote]

The way it's written, you must discard a card, then gain a card, then discard another card, then gain another card. Why not just discard the 2 cards up front?

If the discards are meant to be optional and then you only get the gains if you discarded a card for each, that's better, but the card still seems…disjointed. Sometimes you can cobble two cards together and come up with something that feels coherent, but I don't understand the central idea behind Mill.

I'm…guessing it's too powerful? On any board where there are $4 components to load up on, anyway. Without other $4 cards, it's a weak Workshop.

[Awaclus]

I discard two cards, gain and topdeck a Mill and gain a Gardens.

Probably too powerful.

[LastFootnote]

I discard two cards, gain and topdeck a Mill and gain a Gardens.

Probably too powerful.

Well, combos are combos. A combo has to come up somewhat often AND really make the game not fun in order to be worth weeding out.

But yeah, this card might swing too much in the "bad on some boards and super awesome on others" direction.

[ipofanes]

I tend to think that Procession is another card Mill would be enhanced with. Let's see:

Procession, Mill:
Discard, gain Procession.
Discard, gain Mill on top of deck.
Discard, gain Mill or another Procession.
Watch empty hands.
Trash Mill for your favourite $5 card in Kingdom.

Net gain: Procession, another $4 card, a $5 card. Not too bad for one turn, yet not broken.

[meandering mercury]

I discard two cards, gain and topdeck a Mill and gain a Gardens.

Probably too powerful.

Open Mill/Silver in T1-T2

Say you draw the Mill on T3. Topdeck a Mill, gain to discard a Gardens or SR, and buy an Estate (or Copper if you can't afford it)

Repeat T4-T10, empty all Gardens or SR.

T11 and T12, empty the Mills, and finish off grabbing the last Estates too.

12 turns to gain 8 Gardens/SR, 8 estates, 10 mills. It will be quite hard to find an engine to beat that.

In a mirror match, the game could be over in 8 turns!

[Awaclus]

I discard two cards, gain and topdeck a Mill and gain a Gardens.

Probably too powerful.

Open Mill/Silver in T1-T2

Say you draw the Mill on T3. Topdeck a Mill, gain to discard a Gardens or SR, and buy an Estate (or Copper if you can't afford it)

Repeat T4-T10, empty all Gardens or SR.

T11 and T12, empty the Mills, and finish off grabbing the last Estates too.

12 turns to gain 8 Gardens/SR, 8 estates, 10 mills. It will be quite hard to find an engine to beat that.

In a mirror match, the game could be over in 8 turns!

Plus your turn 9 can be double Gardens or SR. You can even do it with Tunnel or Island instead of Gardens or Silk Roads and it's still pretty difficult to beat.

[Trogdor the Burninator]

Are there any wording change ideas that you could think of to make this card still have its gaining ability, but not be as powerful?
How about:
"Discard a card from your hand, +1 Card.
Trash a card from your hand, gain a card costing up to $4, putting it on top of your deck"
Would it still be worth $4? The change from gaining a card to drawing a card makes it more of a Hamlet-style card, with the tfb text making it a tfb Workshop variant.

[Trogdor the Burninator]

The way it's written, you must discard a card, then gain a card, then discard another card, then gain another card. Why not just discard the 2 cards up front?

If the discards are meant to be optional and then you only get the gains if you discarded a card for each, that's better, but the card still seems…disjointed. Sometimes you can cobble two cards together and come up with something that feels coherent, but I don't understand the central idea behind Mill.

I'm…guessing it's too powerful? On any board where there are $4 components to load up on, anyway. Without other $4 cards, it's a weak Workshop.

The discards would be mandatory, if they were optional, it would say "you may discard a card..."

[LastFootnote]

The discards would be mandatory, if they were optional, it would say "you may discard a card..."

Then why doesn't it just say, "Discard 2 Cards"? Much more concise.

Anyhow, to elaborate on how the card seems disjointed to me. The two gains seem to have nothing to do with one another. One is for a card costing up to $4 that goes into your discard pile. The other must cost exactly $4 and goes on your deck. I'm just struggling to find the reasoning behind why the card is the way it is. Same with the new one:

Are there any wording change ideas that you could think of to make this card still have its gaining ability, but not be as powerful?
How about:
"Discard a card from your hand, +1 Card.
Trash a card from your hand, gain a card costing up to $4, putting it on top of your deck"
Would it still be worth $4? The change from gaining a card to drawing a card makes it more of a Hamlet-style card, with the tfb text making it a tfb Workshop variant.

Why does it cycle a card? That's a really small effect that sometimes helps and sometimes hurts, but doesn't seem to tie in with the trashing or the gaining. You're asking for wording ideas, but I still don't understand the core concept of the card.

[Trogdor the Burninator]

The core concept of the card is to be a combo/variant of BOTH Hamlet AND Workshop.

[LastFootnote]

The core concept of the card is to be a combo/variant of BOTH Hamlet AND Workshop.

Yeah, but why? There doesn't seem to be any natural synergy there.

[Trogdor the Burninator]

It was just something I thought of that seemed like an interesting concept for a card.

[LastFootnote]

It was just something I thought of that seemed like an interesting concept for a card.

Sorry, I wasn't trying to be a jerk. I'm just trying to understand your thought process. In general I think I should be able to look at a card and figure out pretty quickly why all the parts are the way they are. Even when cards seem like parts tacked together, there's usually a reason. Storeroom is a Cellar and a Secret Chamber tacked together with +1 Buy, but there's natural synergy there. All the parts interact with each other in a useful way. Jack of All Trades seems like a mess of effects, but all four of its effects are working toward the goal of fighting Attacks.

"Gain a card costing up to $4, putting it onto your deck" is Armory. Adding "trash a card from your hand" makes it more like a smaller Altar. "Discard a card, +1 Card" seems like a weird thing to just tack onto that. It helps to differentiate it from those other two cards, but it makes the card look like it came out of some sort of Random Card Generator.

I think "Trash a card from your hand; Gain a card costing up to $4, putting it on top of your deck" is more compelling without the extra card cycling. That being said, it seems pretty powerful either way. Perhaps if you could only gain a card costing up to $3?

[Trogdor the Burninator]

No offense was taken, by the way. I don't have Dark Ages, so I guess I just forgot that my card was pretty close to Armory. I do like your idea of changing it to "Trash a card from your hand; Gain a card costing up to $4, putting it on top of your deck." I also think that dropping it up to "gain a card costing up to $3, putting it on top of your deck" would be a good idea as well.

[silverspawn]

No offense was taken, by the way. I don't have Dark Ages, so I guess I just forgot that my card was pretty close to Armory. I do like your idea of changing it to "Trash a card from your hand; Gain a card costing up to $4, putting it on top of your deck." I also think that dropping it up to "gain a card costing up to $3, putting it on top of your deck" would be a good idea as well.

that's still way too strong for $4. compare it to altar, altar trashes a card and you gain a card costing up to $5. now granted, 5$ and $4 is a big difference, but still altar is $6 and it's also one of the strongest $6 in the game. changing it to 3$ would make a big difference, because all the spammable action cards are $4+

[LastFootnote]

No offense was taken, by the way. I don't have Dark Ages, so I guess I just forgot that my card was pretty close to Armory. I do like your idea of changing it to "Trash a card from your hand; Gain a card costing up to $4, putting it on top of your deck." I also think that dropping it up to "gain a card costing up to $3, putting it on top of your deck" would be a good idea as well.

that's still way too strong for $4. compare it to altar, altar trashes a card and you gain a card costing up to $5. now granted, 5$ and $4 is a big difference, but still altar is $6 and it's also one of the strongest $6 in the game. changing it to 3$ would make a big difference, because all the spammable action cards are $4+

Well, not all of them. Fishing Village, Wishing Well, Scheme, and heck even Silver are at $3. That's just to name a few. But in general I think it's worth trying it this way.

[silverspawn]

No offense was taken, by the way. I don't have Dark Ages, so I guess I just forgot that my card was pretty close to Armory. I do like your idea of changing it to "Trash a card from your hand; Gain a card costing up to $4, putting it on top of your deck." I also think that dropping it up to "gain a card costing up to $3, putting it on top of your deck" would be a good idea as well.

that's still way too strong for $4. compare it to altar, altar trashes a card and you gain a card costing up to $5. now granted, 5$ and $4 is a big difference, but still altar is $6 and it's also one of the strongest $6 in the game. changing it to 3$ would make a big difference, because all the spammable action cards are $4+

Well, not all of them. Fishing Village, Wishing Well, Scheme, and heck even Silver are at $3. That's just to name a few. But in general I think it's worth trying it this way.

well, fishing village and sheme dont do anything on their own, and wishing well is fairly weak. i mostly meant ironmonger, cavaran, tournament and advisor. cantrip actions that you want as many of as possible that boost your deck.

that said, i still don't think the card would be very intersting if you reduce $4 to $3, because it'd be too similar to hermit.
hermit is: look through your discard pile. you may trash a card from your hand or your discard pile that's not a treasure. gain card costing up to $3... well and it has the madman part, but still. that's nothing new.

[LastFootnote]

No offense was taken, by the way. I don't have Dark Ages, so I guess I just forgot that my card was pretty close to Armory. I do like your idea of changing it to "Trash a card from your hand; Gain a card costing up to $4, putting it on top of your deck." I also think that dropping it up to "gain a card costing up to $3, putting it on top of your deck" would be a good idea as well.

that's still way too strong for $4. compare it to altar, altar trashes a card and you gain a card costing up to $5. now granted, 5$ and $4 is a big difference, but still altar is $6 and it's also one of the strongest $6 in the game. changing it to 3$ would make a big difference, because all the spammable action cards are $4+

Well, not all of them. Fishing Village, Wishing Well, Scheme, and heck even Silver are at $3. That's just to name a few. But in general I think it's worth trying it this way.

well, fishing village and sheme dont do anything on their own, and wishing well is fairly weak. i mostly meant ironmonger, cavaran, tournament and advisor. cantrip actions that you want as many of as possible that boost your deck.

that said, i still don't think the card would be very intersting if you reduce $4 to $3, because it'd be too similar to hermit.
hermit is: look through your discard pile. you may trash a card from your hand or your discard pile that's not a treasure. gain card costing up to $3... well and it has the madman part, but still. that's nothing new.

Hmm, the Hermit comparison is a good call, but I think this might be sufficiently different. It can only trash cards from hand and it topdecks the gained card. On the other hand, that doesn't usually change how your turn plays out. Tough to say.

[Trogdor the Burninator]

No offense was taken, by the way. I don't have Dark Ages, so I guess I just forgot that my card was pretty close to Armory. I do like your idea of changing it to "Trash a card from your hand; Gain a card costing up to $4, putting it on top of your deck." I also think that dropping it up to "gain a card costing up to $3, putting it on top of your deck" would be a good idea as well.

that's still way too strong for $4. compare it to altar, altar trashes a card and you gain a card costing up to $5. now granted, 5$ and $4 is a big difference, but still altar is $6 and it's also one of the strongest $6 in the game. changing it to 3$ would make a big difference, because all the spammable action cards are $4+

Well, not all of them. Fishing Village, Wishing Well, Scheme, and heck even Silver are at $3. That's just to name a few. But in general I think it's worth trying it this way.

well, fishing village and sheme dont do anything on their own, and wishing well is fairly weak. i mostly meant ironmonger, cavaran, tournament and advisor. cantrip actions that you want as many of as possible that boost your deck.

that said, i still don't think the card would be very intersting if you reduce $4 to $3, because it'd be too similar to hermit.
hermit is: look through your discard pile. you may trash a card from your hand or your discard pile that's not a treasure. gain card costing up to $3... well and it has the madman part, but still. that's nothing new.

Hmm, the Hermit comparison is a good call, but I think this might be sufficiently different. It can only trash cards from hand and it topdecks the gained card. On the other hand, that doesn't usually change how your turn plays out. Tough to say.

So would you recommend a change to either: "gain a card costing $3, putting it on top of your deck," or just "gain a card costing up to $4" and NOT putting it on top of your deck? Thoughts, anyone?

[ipofanes]

When reading the original version, I thought it was a bit thematic as the card was self-perpetuating and creating something in the process. Felt a bit like Innovation's Watermill.

That cycle action seems tacked on, but with a bit of a stretch you can think of M:tG's Millstone.