Print

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

[popsofctown]

I think OP misunderstands the principles of good game design so thoroughly that this just isn't even salvageable, and it'd take too long to explain why.

That's helpful.

Eh.  It's kind of like when someone with a terrible, innate singing voice auditions for American Idol, and the judges tell them to give up singing altogether.  It is useful to recognize when something needs tweaking and when the issue is the quality of the producer in general.

In this case, there is much more hope, as OP can learn more about game design to improve the things he drafts.  My post should be taken as encouragement to go read some of Donald's blog or rspeer's comments.

It was kind of harsh though.

[bmtrocks]

Wow I come back and didn't expect such a large amount of discussion surrounding this concept.  I want to thank everyone who has contributed to this discussion, negative or positive, discussion is about growth and that's what I'm looking for.

One thing I want to make clear is that a lot of the numbers on the cards are kind of arbitrary.  They're ideas, rather than how I want the card to be defined by.  When talking about a card like Pride, don't think of it as a card that gives you 2 VP for every Curse, just as a card that has the potential to be a card that gives you 2 VP for every Curse.  I've done so many variations of these cards, like turning Pride into a Curse version of Vineyard (amongst other things), that the numbers on them don't really hold a special meaning at the moment.  It's all very much in concept, which is basically combining the theme of the seven deadly sins with the idea that Curses can benefit you/allow you to win the game.  For the sins, this is the base concept of each:

Pride - a card that gives you Victory Points for the amount of Curses in your deck
Envy - a card that gains Curses, while gaining a Victory Point
Greed - a card that gives you an easy way to gain Treasure (such as taking them from your opponents)
Wrath - a card that gives everyone a Curse
Gluttony - a card that allows you to put aside all of your Curses, so they don't clutter up your deck.
Lust - a card that turns Curses into Treasure

You could really toy around with even the concepts for these.

I don't see what's so fundamentally wrong in game design about gaining benefits from having Curse cards.  I've read the sticky (twice in fact) which has helped me a lot in creating cards.  I've read Donald X.'s posts on BGG about game design and the secret histories of Dominion, and I've read rspeer's comments (which didn't really contribute anything).  That doesn't change my opinion on designing cards that give you benefits from Curses.  There isn't anything non-Dominion-like about it.

[Jack Rudd]

I think I like the combo Highway-Highway-Highway-Highway-Highway-Envy.

[Tydude]

I think it's an interesting idea, but the basic rules of it need some work. I would make a new card type and get rid of the infinite curses, then we'll talk.

[Diving Pikachu]

Pride - a card that gives you Victory Points for the amount of Curses in your deck

Gardens already delves somewhat into that territory, and it is a much more versatile card. It does not depend so heavily on specific cards; it just needs a source of buys or gains. Pride requires you to fundamentally change Dominion into something unrecognizable, with unlimited curses and added constraints upon the board. It would be a different story if Pride counted cards that cost 0. Perhaps you could make Pride actually cost 0, but come with curses and coppers upon gaining it? If it counted any 0-costing card, including itself, it would definitely be more self-sufficient and able to be played on non-7 Sins boards.

Envy - a card that gains Curses, while gaining a Victory Point

This card is so dependent on your other cards dominating the board that it does not interest me nor invite further analysis. It's like an appendix to a book I'll never read, or merchandise from a show I'll never watch.

Greed - a card that gives you an easy way to gain Treasure (such as taking them from your opponents)

This attack should affect each other player equally. Even Possession at least lets the victim play a proper full turn for himself, afterwards. And the presence of this card on the board would just incentive coin-generating actions or copper strategies that would thus make this card less desirable and thus never bought.

Wrath - a card that gives everyone a Curse

Even the flawed cursers--Young Witch and Sea Hag--are $4. And they're terminal actions, to boot. Please don't tell me you don't see what's wrong with cursing villages at the exact same cost of a Silver...

... But in case you don't see it, the obvious optimal opening would be Wrath/Wrath, and it will cause the game to degenerate into a horribly boring slog where players pray to the Gods of the Shuffle and Random Number Generators to come out of this buttslap fest the victor. Add trashers into the mix and you got yourself an even more egregious exercise in futility.

Gluttony - a card that allows you to put aside all of your Curses, so they don't clutter up your deck.

A card that requires Pride and/or Lust to even be glanced at. And those cards require your other cards to even be worth it.

Lust - a card that turns Curses into Treasure

Salvageable, but only if it counts everything that's neither an action or treasure. Victory cards are many degrees of magnitude more relevant to the game than Curses.

[popsofctown]

The gardens example is the most useful one.  These cards all do novel things that you can do without putting them into a box and saying "these cards are allowed to hang out with eachother".  Making Dominion organic and flexible is important.  If you deliberately include things with strong synergy with eachother, pretty much all anyone will do is play your cards the way you set them up to be played.  Hypathetically you could find a balance point, but heavy synergy tends to put things in boxes very quickly.  There's enough synergy that you find in games just from mechanics dovetailing together, like when you figure out Horse Traders is good with Duke.  They're more gratifying to judge and interact with than canned interactions included by the designer saying "X goes with Y, and if X goes with Y you get a bonus".  Which is what all these cards are meant to do.  They are all very interdependent.  Hypathetically you might could find a way to get all seven of them used, but it would probably be nigh impossible to balance it out.

If you want to mess with curses, make Kingdom cards that care about the ten curses the game comes with.  If two of them flip up at the same time, cool, you can see how well they work and how worth it they are, like Silk Road with varying amounts of Kingdom VP support. 


At the very best, you'll create an alternate form of Dominion where Provinces, Duchies, and Estates will be replaced with various curse strategies.  It probably would be quite difficult to balance.  Then once it's balanced, you'll have accomplished very little you couldn't have done with a Gardens style card.

[DStu]

Pride - a card that gives you Victory Points for the amount of Curses in your deck

Gardens already delves somewhat into that territory, and it is a much more versatile card. It does not depend so heavily on specific cards; it just needs a source of buys or gains. Pride requires you to fundamentally change Dominion into something unrecognizable, with unlimited curses and added constraints upon the board. It would be a different story if Pride counted cards that cost 0. Perhaps you could make Pride actually cost 0, but come with curses and coppers upon gaining it? If it counted any 0-costing card, including itself, it would definitely be more self-sufficient and able to be played on non-7 Sins boards.

There are some differences to Gardens, also to Vineyards. For first, there are many games where you don't have to buy Curses. And if you want to, they only cost $0, which is much easier than loading up with Actions or 10 cards or VP (for Silk Road).
And as I mentioned, I don't think you want or need infinite or also only more Curses than normal to make Pride usefull, it's just a question of the numbers. Giving you 2VP for the five Curses you already have is (as I was corrected) about Colony for $4, I'll be glad to take that. I would also take a Duchy for $4, if I hadn't the choice. If you now have 20 Curses in your deck, it will only get insane.

[rspeer]

Wow I come back and didn't expect such a large amount of discussion surrounding this concept.  I want to thank everyone who has contributed to this discussion, negative or positive, discussion is about growth and that's what I'm looking for.

One thing I want to make clear is that a lot of the numbers on the cards are kind of arbitrary.  They're ideas, rather than how I want the card to be defined by.  When talking about a card like Pride, don't think of it as a card that gives you 2 VP for every Curse, just as a card that has the potential to be a card that gives you 2 VP for every Curse.  I've done so many variations of these cards, like turning Pride into a Curse version of Vineyard (amongst other things), that the numbers on them don't really hold a special meaning at the moment.  It's all very much in concept, which is basically combining the theme of the seven deadly sins with the idea that Curses can benefit you/allow you to win the game.  For the sins, this is the base concept of each:

Pride - a card that gives you Victory Points for the amount of Curses in your deck
Envy - a card that gains Curses, while gaining a Victory Point
Greed - a card that gives you an easy way to gain Treasure (such as taking them from your opponents)
Wrath - a card that gives everyone a Curse
Gluttony - a card that allows you to put aside all of your Curses, so they don't clutter up your deck.
Lust - a card that turns Curses into Treasure

You could really toy around with even the concepts for these.

I don't see what's so fundamentally wrong in game design about gaining benefits from having Curse cards.  I've read the sticky (twice in fact) which has helped me a lot in creating cards.  I've read Donald X.'s posts on BGG about game design and the secret histories of Dominion, and I've read rspeer's comments (which didn't really contribute anything).  That doesn't change my opinion on designing cards that give you benefits from Curses.  There isn't anything non-Dominion-like about it.

If you've read the card creation guide and Donald X's posts... did you decide they were dead wrong and you wanted to prove it with an expansion that does the opposite of everything in them?

But then, you weren't even familiar with the distinction between targeted and non-targeted attacks, and you weren't very interested in having it explained to you by anyone either.

You posted here because you wanted feedback on something, right? You don't seem very interested in hearing criticism, whether it's constructive (my earlier posts and many others) or not (like, say, this post). You just keep arguing back that your expansion is a great idea and that everyone else is wrong.

[WrathOfGlod]

I agree with popsofctown that this expansion is unsalvagable but the concept of an expansion built on the 7 deadly sins is an intriguing one
For thematic appropriateness I think cards should have the following characteristics

Wrath- A powerful attack which does significant damage but also hurts yourself
Proposal: Wrath- $5 Every player gains 2 curses. Discard your hand
Analysis: This card feels like a reverse-tactician (unsure if its balanced but not obviously game-breaking)

Gluttony- A short term benefit with a long term (next turn) cost
Proposal- Sloth-$4 +2 cards +2 actions draw one less card in your cleanup phase
Analysis- Reverse caravan (first play is marginal damage later plays become more severe, excellent soft counter to militia etc.)

Envy- A card which damages you deck long term in order to hurt other players
Proposal- Envy $(4-5)? Trash a card from your hand all other players either trash a card costing at least as much as the trashed card or reveal a hand with no such cards.
Analysis-Crap as an early game trasher (Bishop w/o the vps or dollars) but late game can be extremely powerful especially if you have cards which have outlived their value (Wrath, Sea hag, etc.) Also combos well but not outstandingly with TR/KC

Greed- Quick Money at the expense of the future
Proposal- Greed-$5 Trash this card: Choose one either gain a gold or gain a card worth $4 and a card worth $3
Analysis- The second option doesn't really fit thematically (I guess you break down a decent card for parts?) However the first option alone is too strong for $4 and too weak for $5

Lust- A desire for others cards so much that you are willing to hurt yourself for the chance at it:
Proposal- Lust-$(no clue about the price feels very variant): +1 card +1 action: All other players draw a card. For each player name a card costing up to $6: They reveal the top card of the deck, if that card is the card you named you gain the card from their deck otherwise they discard the card.
Analysis- This card avoids being overpowered in the same way that wishing well avoids being overpowered (it is really hard to know the second card from the top). Has the potential to be political (which is bad) but stopping you from stealing provinces (which limits the effect). A possible fix might be to name 1 card and check against all players but that lowers the strategic impact of the card. (I like cards which care about what others are doing).

continued....

[WrathOfGlod]

Sloth- A card which slows down your game tempo, saving energy for the long game.
Proposal: Sloth-$4: +1 card +1 action +1VP discard a card
Analysis: This card has the potential to be extremely messy and possibly overpowered however the card is weak except for the infinite VP-sprawl that it feels ok (without enablers you are limited to +5 VP (similar to Bishop-Gold-Silver-Silver-Province).

Pride- A card which relies on confidence to control the game state
Proposal: Pride-$4 Action-Duration: Choose a card type (Action,Victory,Treasure).+1 buy +1 treasure, While this card is in play cards of this type cost 1 less and cards of other types cost 1 more.
Analysis:
This card is designed to attempt to lock out certain strategies: If your opponent is going for actions then you can use this to pick up cheap golds and lock him out of the good actions.
Also useful for endgame- PPR shenanigans (draw 8 treasure and use this card to push up the cost of provinces).

[Jimmmmm]

Pride- A card which relies on confidence to control the game state
Proposal: Pride-$4 Action-Duration: Choose a card type (Action,Victory,Treasure).+1 buy +1 treasure, While this card is in play cards of this type cost 1 less and cards of other types cost 1 more.

There is nothing keeping this card out at the end of your turn. If you want it to stay until next turn, it must do something next turn, since Duration cards are discarded at the end of the last turn that they do something.
Also, if a bunch of these are in play, it's going to be extremely difficult to keep track of which cards have gone up or down and by how much, especially IRL. With Bridge and Highway it's much easier because they all do the same thing and they're all right in front of you. But if you need to check the play areas of two or three other people, it's going to get real confusing, real fast, especially since there's no way to record which cards have increased the cost of which types.

[WrathOfGlod]

Pride- A card which relies on confidence to control the game state
Proposal: Pride-$4 Action-Duration: Choose a card type (Action,Victory,Treasure).+1 buy +1 treasure, While this card is in play cards of this type cost 1 less and cards of other types cost 1 more.

There is nothing keeping this card out at the end of your turn. If you want it to stay until next turn, it must do something next turn, since Duration cards are discarded at the end of the last turn that they do something.
Also, if a bunch of these are in play, it's going to be extremely difficult to keep track of which cards have gone up or down and by how much, especially IRL. With Bridge and Highway it's much easier because they all do the same thing and they're all right in front of you. But if you need to check the play areas of two or three other people, it's going to get real confusing, real fast, especially since there's no way to record which cards have increased the cost of which types.

That is a problem IRL- To fix the first problem I think you can give it +1 buy on the next turn without it being overpowered.
(Especially because the +buy on the second turn is less useful)
For the second problem you could add circles at the bottom of the card and put a marker on the type being reduced.

[WrathOfGlod]

Lust- A desire for others cards so much that you are willing to hurt yourself for the chance at it:
Proposal- Lust-$(no clue about the price feels very variant): +1 card +1 action: All other players draw a card. For each player name a card costing up to $6: They reveal the top card of the deck, if that card is the card you named you gain the card from their deck otherwise they discard the card.
Analysis- This card avoids being overpowered in the same way that wishing well avoids being overpowered (it is really hard to know the second card from the top). Has the potential to be political (which is bad) but stopping you from stealing provinces (which limits the effect). A possible fix might be to name 1 card and check against all players but that lowers the strategic impact of the card. (I like cards which care about what others are doing).

This card feels a bit too spammable unless it is costed at 6 or 7 (which I think is too late to be interesting)
Possibly it could be switched to a one time card and instead of naming a card you name a card type
Lust-$4 Trash this card: All other players draw a card. For each player name a card type: They reveal the top card of the deck, if that card is of the type you named and costs less than $6 they trash the card and you gain it from the trash otherwise they discard the card.

[rspeer]

I got a sin-inspired card idea for gaining cards from other people's decks, too. But I think it fits the name Envy better than Lust:

Envy - $5
+2 Cards
Each opponent reveals his hand. Choose a card from each hand. That opponent may choose to discard that card. If not, you gain a copy of the card.

It's kind of a Jester with more chance of getting you a good card, but putting the decision of whether you get it on the other end. And there's no need for an exception for Provinces and Colonies: if you name a victory card, your opponent will probably be perfectly okay with discarding it.

If the card you covet is Platinum or Grand Market, though, that's when it's a really tough decision for your opponent.

I gave it +2 cards to be a slightly-weaker dual to Jester's +2 coins, and also to create the potential for chaining it with a village. (Do you let an Envy-chaining opponent gain multiple copies of your favorite card, or do you keep discarding? Hmm...)

Is this too strong? Should it not have +cards at all, making it a kind of powered-up attacking version of Smugglers?

[bmtrocks]

If you've read the card creation guide and Donald X's posts... did you decide they were dead wrong and you wanted to prove it with an expansion that does the opposite of everything in them?

Cards that gain benefits from having Curses in your deck does not go against anything stated by Donald X or the card creation guide whatsoever.  Everything else is just ideas, not definite.  The Sin cards in question don't even need to be Curse cards for this to work, nor is it necessary to tune the rules to have infinite Curses (10 or 30 Curses is just fine, the cards just need to be balanced right).

But then, you weren't even familiar with the distinction between targeted and non-targeted attacks, and you weren't very interested in having it explained to you by anyone either.

This is an utterly idiotic assumption here as I never suggested I wasn't familiar with the distinction of really simple mechanics..  It doesn't take much to tell the difference between those two types of attacks.  I simply made it targeted and activated on buy because otherwise it's pretty broken.  I didn't really design the card to be playable with other cards, just a card that adapts the feeling of greed in Dominion.  Greed, as in the one I posted in the OP, is a card that will let you directly steal from a player, but becomes deadweight in your deck.  If it was a traditional Attack card that attacks everyone, it becomes essentially the most broken card in the game.

You posted here because you wanted feedback on something, right? You don't seem very interested in hearing criticism, whether it's constructive (my earlier posts and many others) or not (like, say, this post). You just keep arguing back that your expansion is a great idea and that everyone else is wrong.

The thing is that you still haven't given a clear set of reasoning why the expansion is a bad idea.  The cards are definitely a bad idea in every way possible, but the expansion concept has nothing to do with any design decisions that go against traditional Dominion play whatsoever.  Secondly I'm perfect fine with criticism.  Surfing Pikachu, which I'll respond to eventually, provided well thought out reasoning against all of my cards rather than just saying, "This won't work."  If you can't provide that type of critique, then you only have yourself to blame for that

[olneyce]

The thing is that you still haven't given a clear set of reasoning why the expansion is a bad idea.  The cards are definitely a bad idea in every way possible, but the expansion concept has nothing to do with any design decisions that go against traditional Dominion play whatsoever. 

Huh?

Maybe this would have been better if you had started out by saying: "I am 100% sure that my specific card designs are not going to be right.  Think of them as ideas to bounce around, rather than anything I'm committed to."  And then, when people identified really obvious problems, you could have said "oh, man.  I didn't think about that.  Yeah, this won't work.  But is the idea behind the card any good, or should I scrap the whole thing?"

And, you could take some incredibly reasonable advice about not calling them 'Curses' in stride.

[bmtrocks]

Huh?

Maybe this would have been better if you had started out by saying: "I am 100% sure that my specific card designs are not going to be right.  Think of them as ideas to bounce around, rather than anything I'm committed to."  And then, when people identified really obvious problems, you could have said "oh, man.  I didn't think about that.  Yeah, this won't work.  But is the idea behind the card any good, or should I scrap the whole thing?"

And, you could take some incredibly reasonable advice about not calling them 'Curses' in stride.

I've already established this, and I've already recognized the problem of the rule confusion and infinite Curses many times already.  Me not going back and making changes immediately =/= me ignoring people.  I'm highly considering right now turning all of these cards into non-Curse cards, that happen to give you negative VP, and tuning the rules (I just don't have much time at the moment).  That was actually my initial idea for some of the cards like Wrath which the original template was that it was a normal Action-Attack, and Pride was a normal Victory card.

[bmtrocks]

To reiterate my point this was my initial idea for Pride and Wrath (the later I even made when most of the Sins were Curse cards):



Though to be honest I don't think it's appropriate giving either negative VP values, which is why I switched to Curses.  However I do agree that Curse cards are best when they're still in the bounds of being utilized by Witch and others.  I still think the idea of Kingdom Curses is a fantastic idea, with or without the complication rule, but they'd have to be in the realms of being actual Curse cards rather than what these cards try to accomplish.

[Tydude]

Is Wrath supposed to make the person who played it gain a Curse also? Because currently it does do that.

[bmtrocks]

Is Wrath supposed to make the person who played it gain a Curse also? Because currently it does do that.

Yeah pretty much, it's only really useful in games centered around Pride tbh.  I'll just have to fix it with time.  Diving Pikachu makes a solid argument against it so it's one of the cards that'll probably end up getting axed.  I'm currently planning to do something like this:

- Change all the cards to non-Curse cards, but keep Kingdom Curses in mind (I'm thinking about making a complimentary set to give variety to the kind of Curses can give out that aren't just -1VP).
- Keep Pride the way it is, with some alterations that'll balance it out overtime.
- Axe Greed (the card), and rename Lust to "Greed."  This version of Greed will gain Treasure for all Victory and Curse cards in your hand.  Lust can be changed to a card, which someone mentioned, that invokes the feeling that you're lusting after opponent's cards.  Maybe a heavily altered version of the previous Greed.
- Axe Wrath, but keep the concept in mind.
- Axe Envy (too proprietary on the sins being Curses)
- Axe Gluttony (too proprietary on lots of Curses)

[Diving Pikachu]

Sounds like you're on the right track. As a writer, when something that I've worked on fails, I find myself either scrapping the whole thing altogether (if it's bad enough), or abandoning an idea or detail that I had previously thought to be fundamental to the work. I guess making Dominion fan cards also involves moments where you have to kill your own babies. But don't regret having made up bad cards and putting them out there for us to critique, since you hopefully still gained something out of this experience.

- Axe Greed (the card), and rename Lust to "Greed."  This version of Greed will gain Treasure for all Victory and Curse cards in your hand.

Do you mean that it will gain you a Treasure card(s) based on how many Victory or Curse cards in your hand? Because if it still uses the old idea of generating Coins, that is something completely different.

[bmtrocks]

Do you mean that it will gain you a Treasure card(s) based on how many Victory or Curse cards in your hand? Because if it still uses the old idea of generating Coins, that is something completely different.

Bleh I worded it wrong.  Here view the revision I made for yourself:

[bmtrocks]

Coming up with some ideas for Curses.  I'm currently working on the second revision of this concept, so don't take this as complimentary cards that go with OP, even though they're Curse cards, they're meant to be Curse cards that can be gained through other cards like Witch, etc..  Gone are the infinite Curses, all Curse games are either 10 or 30 Curses now.  Gone are the special rules for Kingdom Curses.

Don't think the Seven Sins theme is gone, I'm just thinking of cards that could be in the same set concept that share the theme of benefits from Curses, and balancing it out with Curses that are just pure nasty in non-Pride games.

The only other rule for this format is that when a Curse card is in the Kingdom, when a card says you "gain" a Curse that is played by another player, that player gets to choose what Curse card you get, unless specified otherwise.



The first one is a concept for Sloth.  Actually once I think about it the theme of the card doesn't really fit the sin of Sloth, and this card is very much in-concept rather than grounded in being a definitive, so it's very subject to change into a completely different card.  The original idea was for this to be called "Demon" so I'll probably end up making this card that and save Sloth for another type of card to keep theme consistency.



These two go hand-in-hand basically.  Some of the wording feels off, but I'll work on it with time considering there isn't really any Dominion cards quite like these.  Aside from the confusing wording, Familiar is a very basic Curse.  Priest, on the other hand, is made to combat it and any other card that allows you to gain a Curse.  Priest is based off Moat but with a more specific effect, and especially hurts Familiar (as does Watchtower).



This card actually goes pretty well with "Wrath" which I'm still tuning (concept is the same, it being a Village isn't), and ridiculous for Pride games, and a deck clutter for every other game.  It's simple, but works.

[rspeer]

If a reaction card is played when a player gains this card from an attack...

I've thought about it for an unreasonably long time, and concluded that the situation you have described never happens. I thought for a moment it was when anyone in the game reveals a Watchtower, Horse Traders, or Secret Chamber, or when an uninvolved third player reveals a Moat... but none of those cards get played.

If you change "play" to "reveal", then in 2P games it amplifies the power of a reaction card without you even having to buy/gain it, and in 3+ games it has some weird ass political effect that you clearly didn't intend. What did you actually mean?

...put this card in the attacker's discard pile instead.

This sounds like you're trying to make a card that turns an attack back on the attacker (although I'm really not clear on what it does). You have read the guides so you know well why Dominion has no such cards: it's either too weak to be worth gaining, or it's strong enough that it makes it undesirable to buy any Attacks in the kingdom, or it's "balanced" perfectly in the middle where you don't want to gain that card or attack cards.

If I understand your current rules, it's a curse because you can gain it from someone playing Witch. Then here's how the equilibrium works:

• Any rational player would gain a curse named Familiar (not to be confused with the Alchemy card named Familiar...?) in preference to a curse named Curse.
• So cards like Witch now give out 0VP curses with some sort of benefit, instead of -1VP curses. The benefit might even (in some hard to define way) cause the card to clutter your deck instead of your opponent's.
• Therefore, Witch does not have its intended effect anymore. So nobody ever buys Witch, or Sea Hag, or the other Familiar, or...

But enough of that. You've read the Secret Histories so you already know this.


When do the two effects of Sloth (the one that's a Lab on the start of the turn) happen? If they're both on the start of the turn, then (as you know) the line you put between them is incorrect. It's also unclear what order they stack in when you have two of them, and what order they stack with Duration cards. It probably triggers the "player chooses the order of simultaneous events" rule, which is hella confusing here.

Also, it refers to the order of the discard pile, which (as you know) is not a possible mechanic of Dominion. To use it, you'd have to deliberately order your discards. Every turn. Possibly multiple times per turn. Just in case a Sloth comes up in your next hand.

And... you seem to have made it cost $0. As a trashing Lab, it's got to be worth at least $7. As a trashing Lab that multiplies itself... it's probably so strong that it's uncostable. And it's somehow a Curse...?


Greed is an improvement over Lust. But you have it at the same cost as a Silver, and I think it can't beat Silver in any reasonable situation.

It only gets you more than $2 in really, really terrible hands. You basically can't buy provinces with it because it has anti-synergy with other money. If you get a card-drawing engine going, you might be able to turn it into a lame version of Bank, with all the drawbacks of Bank and less money.

We can make something of this card. Here's a drastic suggestion that might swing it the other way: put a buy and a coin on the card itself.

[DStu]

If I understand your current rules, it's a curse because you can gain it from someone playing Witch. Then here's how the equilibrium works:

• Any rational player would gain a curse named Familiar (not to be confused with the Alchemy card named Familiar...?) in preference to a curse named Curse.
• So cards like Witch now give out 0VP curses with some sort of benefit, instead of -1VP curses. The benefit might even (in some hard to define way) cause the card to clutter your deck instead of your opponent's.
• Therefore, Witch does not have its intended effect anymore. So nobody ever buys Witch, or Sea Hag, or the other Familiar, or...

I understood it that way that the attacker choses which 'Curse' the vitctim will get. So every reasonable player would chose Curse over 'Familiar', as long as there are Curses left. Only after they are gone, you might chose 'Familiar', giving your Witch additional power after Curses have run out.

I think that, if I understood this correctly, this card is not that kind of "reflection" that is to powerfull. The question if it's to weak. If there are no Cursers, it's a dead card. OK, that might be unlikely in this expension, but unless the Curses run out, why should I let someone gain this? Even if the Curses have run out, but there is the potential that my attack might be countered by a reaction, why should I choose 'Familiar' over the empty Curses, risking to give me an untrashable junkcard.

BTW: Priest and 'Familiar' is a little bit confusing. 'Familiar' says it can not be trashed, Priest say I should trash it. And I understood your comment in the way that it should really also trash 'Familiar'. And I don't see how Priest combats 'Familiar' more than say every other reaction. Because 'Familiar' itself allows you to give a 'Familiar' to the attacker, when you react somehow. Priest trashes (or whatever, at least does not give it to the opponent) the 'Familiar' and gives a copy to the attacker. So that's (maybe despite having one less 'Familiar' in the supply) exactly the same effect.