Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion (Alpha)  (Read 8103 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion (Alpha)
« on: December 02, 2011, 06:00:03 pm »
+1

I finally decided to take a crack at designing some Dominion fan cards. This makes me a huge hypocrite, since I generally avoid fan cards like the plague. Anyhow, I got a bit carried away and designed an entire small (150 card) expansion. Unfortunately, I have not yet had the opportunity to playtest any of these, so I apologize in advance. I mostly just want the community's feedback about whether these cards appear overpowered, underpowered, or just plain boring.

The theme of the expansion is one-shot cards, so that's a strike against it right from the get-go. As Donald X. has stated, one-shots are not a good theme. Some people just don't like the fact that they don't get to keep the cards they buy. I've tried to overcome that by using one-shot mechanics in more interesting, less harsh ways. There's only one card in the set that's always a one-shot, and you get it for free when you buy a different card. Some cards can be one-shots (like Mining Village). Many replace themselves with other cards when using their one-shot ability (like Treasure Map). A couple are just unrelated to one-shots. I'm going to avoid commenting on the individual cards in this post, since I don't want to bias perceptions concerning what each card is all about.

Thanks for any feedback you provide!

Missionary
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: 2
+1 Coin. Reveal the top two cards of your deck. Discard one of them and put the other one into your hand.
----------------------------------------------------------
When another player plays an Attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash down to 3 cards in your hand.

Mill Town
Types: Action
Cost: 3
+1 Card. +2 Actions. Discard a card. You may reveal 2 or more Coppers from your hand. If you do, gain a card costing exactly 1 Coin per Copper card revealed.

Prospector
Types: Action
Cost: 3
+2 Coins.
----------------------------------------------------------
If this is in play at the start of Clean-up, you may reveal a Gold from your hand. If you do, trash this and gain 2 Gold cards, putting them on top of your deck.

Aqueduct
Types: Victory
Cost: 4
Worth 2 VP.
----------------------------------------------------------
When you gain this, reveal the top 5 cards of your deck. Discard all revealed Victory and Curse cards and put the rest back on top in any order.

Fund
Types: Treasure
Cost: 4
Worth 2 Coins. +1 Buy. When you play this, discard your hand.
You may trash this card immediately. If you do, all cards cost 1 Coin less this turn, but not less than 0 Coins.

Mercenaries
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 4
+2 Cards. +1 Action. Each other player reveals the top two cards of his deck, discarding one that you choose and putting the other back on top.
You may discard a Treasure card from your hand. If you don't, trash this card.

Tinker
Types: Action
Cost: 4
+1 Card. +1 Action. Reveal the top card of your deck and trash it.  You may trash this card. If you do, gain a card other than a Tinker that costs up to 2 Coins more than the revealed card, putting it on top of your deck.

Barracks
Types: Action
Cost: 5
Choose one: +2 Actions and +1 Coin; or reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Attack card, discard the other cards, then play the Attack card.
----------------------------------------------------------
When you gain this, gain an Conscripts card.

Cathedral
Types: Action
Cost: 5
+3 Cards. +1 Action. Put 2 cards from your hand on top of your deck.
You may spend a Cathedral token. If you do, trash the top 2 cards of your deck.
----------------------------------------------------------
When you gain this, take a Cathedral token.

Inventor
Types: Action
Cost: 5
Choose one: +3 Cards; or +1 Action and set this aside on your Inventor mat.
----------------------------------------------------------
When you gain this, set it aside on your Inventor mat.
At the start of your turn, you may remove this from your mat and put it into your hand.

Monopoly
Types: Action
Cost: 5
+2 Coins. Trash this card. Name a Kingdom card. The player to your left reveals then discards the top 5 cards from his deck. For each copy of the named card revealed, gain a Gold, putting it on top of your deck.
------------------------------------------------------------
When you buy this, trash a Kingdom card from the Supply.

Tax Collector
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 6
+1 Buy. +2 Coins. Each other player with at least 5 cards in hand trashes a card from his hand costing 2 Coins or more (or reveals a hand with no such cards). He may gain a card costing less than it that is not a Victory card.

Conscripts
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 0*
+2 Coins. Trash this card. Each other player gains a Curse.
(This is not in the Supply.)

EDIT: Cards revised on 02/16/2012
« Last Edit: November 15, 2013, 11:32:40 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

Jack Rudd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1325
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jack Rudd
  • Respect: +1384
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #1 on: December 02, 2011, 06:09:30 pm »
0

Tax Collector looks obnoxious. "I trashed your Province out of your hand. You lose."
Logged
Centuries later, archaeologists discover the remains of your ancient civilization.

Evidence of thriving towns, Pottery, roads, and a centralized government amaze the startled scientists.

Finally, they come upon a stone tablet, which contains but one mysterious phrase!

'ISOTROPIC WILL RETURN!'

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2011, 06:10:55 pm »
0

Apologies, there is one new mechanic that I neglected to explain: that of spending a token. When you spend a token, you return it to the communal pile. You can't use it multiple times.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2011, 06:16:59 pm »
0

Tax Collector looks obnoxious. "I trashed your Province out of your hand. You lose."

Sorry if it's not clear, but the victim chooses which card to trash, not the attacker.

EDIT: Sorry, I had accidentally deleted the 'Trash this card' clause from Conscripts. I have added it.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2011, 06:54:40 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

Newcomer

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 57
  • Respect: +2
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2011, 07:37:22 pm »
+1

Re: Conscripts: do you want an "if you do" clause there?

Barracks: I'm guessing you meant "reveal cards from your deck"?

I like the look of this set! Nothing jumped out at me as wrongly costed at first glance. I really like your ideas. I might have more feedback later if I get the chance to analyze the cards more closely. But they look great!
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #5 on: December 02, 2011, 08:41:15 pm »
0

Re: Conscripts: do you want an "if you do" clause there?

Actually, it originally had that. I took it out because it didn't really seem necessary. I mean, most existing cursing Attack cards can be Throned, and chances are pretty good that Conscripts is going to be played by Barracks anyhow.

Quote
Barracks: I'm guessing you meant "reveal cards from your deck"?

Yes! Thanks for catching that.

Quote
I like the look of this set! Nothing jumped out at me as wrongly costed at first glance. I really like your ideas. I might have more feedback later if I get the chance to analyze the cards more closely. But they look great!

Thanks! I'm glad you like it. Hopefully I'll get the chance to playtest some of it soon and tweak the cards.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #6 on: December 04, 2011, 05:14:24 pm »
0

Man, I was hoping for a little bit more feedback than this! Specifically, I was hoping rinkworks would weigh in. I guess these cards just don't inspire interest. I've done a little simulated testing with a few of them, so I'll post my experiences here.

I found out that Mercenaries is an amazing Conspirator enabler. I never used its one-shot ability, because I didn't mind discarding my Coppers. Usually in a Conspirator deck, you need some trashing in order to get enough Action card density. Mercenaries cycles quickly enough that you don't need to trash anything. I'll have to try it in another set.

The idea behind Cathedral is that it's a Chapel-after-the-fact. Its non-one-shot ability is meant to be useful, but not worth its 5 Coins price tag. In the set I tried, it might have been worth $5 just for that. The set included Navigator, and the combination is pretty stunning. Play Cathedral, put two bad cards on your deck, then use Navigator to discard them. I like the fact that the card has positive synergy with Navigator and Chancellor, though. Those cards need more love.

Cathedral's one-shot ability is pretty astounding, though. A deck with about three or four Cathedrals beat a double Mountebank deck. I may have to nerf the ability so that it reveals the top 4 cards of your deck, rather than the top 5.

Tax Collector actually seems pretty balanced from my first test. I may have to give myself a pat on the back for successfully designing a card that trashes opponent's cards. As Donald X. has stated, they're tough to pull off. The biggest issue with the card that I've noticed so far is the large amount of analysis paralysis it could cause. When you get hit by it, you have to decide both what to trash and what to gain in its place. That's Forge-level AP right there.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 06:04:22 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #7 on: December 04, 2011, 05:16:54 pm »
0

Man, I was hoping for a little bit more feedback than this! Specifically, I was hoping rinkworks would weigh in.

I read your post with great interest, but I was waiting until Monday, when I'll have more time for a thorough reply, to do so.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #8 on: December 04, 2011, 05:40:26 pm »
0

Ah, much obliged! Thanks for reading and I look forward to your feedback.

EDIT: I've removed the Reaction type from Inventor because I don't think it actually needs to be a Reaction card to do what it does. I've also made small formatting changes to some cards. These are all very minor changes, but I might as well note them.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2011, 01:04:10 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #9 on: December 05, 2011, 01:04:55 pm »
+1

I kind of regret that apparently a lot of one-shots were thrown out of the line-up of official cards.  While presumably the most interesting one-shots nevertheless survive, it seems like there is a lot of fertile ground that the official cards aren't going to cover.  That makes it perfect for fan cards to explore.

Some really good ideas in here, starting with...

Missionary
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: 2
+1 Coin. Draw until you have 5 cards in hand.
----------------------------------------------------------
When another player plays an Attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash down to 3 cards in your hand.

...this one.  What a great reaction ability!  Often with Militia you're discarding stuff you'd rather not have in your deck in the first place.  This reaction provides a great opportunity to slim down.  Ironically, however, by using this reaction, you're setting up your deck in such a way that future Militia attacks will hurt more, or at least seem to.  Cursing attacks will hurt more too, because those Curses come up more often in a slim deck.   But at least this card provides a way to maybe trash those Curses.   It's a really interesting balancing act here.

Also, I like how the action component complements  the reaction component.  Trash down to 3, then draw back up to 5.  As with Watchtower, you have to eat an action to do it, but in a hand of 3 cards, Missionary becomes a Smithy and a coin.  Actually, when I put it like that, I wonder if the card is too strong.   "Up to 5 and +$1" is not substantially different from "up to 6" in terms of power level.  In some decks, it's stronger; in others, weaker.  Is the reaction component enough weaker than Watchtower's to warrant a cheaper cost?  Tough to say, but the fact that it's tough to say makes me wonder if $3 would be a better price.

Quote
Tinker
Types: Action
Cost: 3
Reveal the top card of your deck. Choose one: Trash the revealed card and gain a card costing exactly 1 Coin less than it, putting it on top of your deck; or trash the revealed card and gain a card costing up to 2 Coins more than it, then trash this card. +1 Card. +1 Action.

Suggested rewording:

Reveal the top card of your deck and trash it.  You may trash this card; if you do, gain  a card costing up to $2 more than the revealed card; otherwise, gain a card costing exactly $1 less than the revealed card.

This is a hard one to envision, but I really don't like how it always trashes the top card of your deck.  True, a number of cards let you know what that top card is, or purposely place a particular card there, but most of the time you'll be trashing blind.  It just seems like a royally bad idea, although it's made much better by the fact that unless the supply pile is empty, you can trash the Tinker to replace your lost card with a copy of it.

But if you do that, you're essentially acknowledging that buying the Tinker in the first place was a mistake, because playing it didn't really do much for you.  So you have to want to use its Remodelling capability.  If you can turn a Gold into a Province in the end-game, great.  But what are the chances you can coordinate that?  Far far less than you could with an actual Remodel, which you can reuse over and over again and only costs $1 more.  And Remodel is ultimately kind of a weak $4 card.

So you also need to use the "exactly $1 less" feature of Tinker in order to get your money's worth out of it.  That feature of the card seems pretty good.  It can trash Coppers and Estates slowly but without consuming an action and leaving you with a 5-card hand after the fact.  It's pretty comparable with Loan, I guess, which can be thought of as doing that same thing, but only working on Coppers and mandating that one of your five cards is a pseudo-Copper.

But Tinker has a huge drawback in that, when it fails -- when it turns up your opening Silver buy or a Gold or an important $5 card -- it's kind of a really big deal.  You trash the Tinker to escape the damage that would otherwise be wrought on the deck, but now your Copper-and-Estate trashing has come to an end.  Against a luckier opponent, is that game over?  Or might you still buy another Tinker and resume your deck-thinning without too much of a tempo-loss?

Despite how my thoughts here sound, I think I'm talking myself into really liking the card, or at least really wanting to try it.  Because although I keep trying to compare this to Loan or a one-shot Remodel, I think it's clear that it is neither.   $3 does seem like the right price, by the way, insofar as I can envision how this will play.

Quote
Prospector
Types: Action
Cost: 3
+2 Coins.
----------------------------------------------------------
If this is in play at the start of Clean-up, you may reveal a Duchy from your hand. If you do, trash this and gain a Gold.

Not excited about this.  I think it's balanced, probably, but the card mandates a weird strategy to be useful.  Usually you don't want to buy Duchies until you're buying nothing but green cards.  So yeah, if your strategy is one of those exceptions, like Duchy/Duke, it's a great fit.  Otherwise, the window of opportunity where you'd want this in your deck is excessively tiny:  basically, it would be on the shuffle where you want Duchies but don't yet want Estates.  How much of the game is left after that?  Maybe enough to use the card once, but not twice.  So you get one Gold out of it, and almost certainly the game ends before you get to use the Gold.

So the question becomes, might the card be its own strategy, rather than something you slip into some other strategy?  That is, buy this and a Duchy early on, for the purpose of trying to collide them?  Well, let's compare to Tournament.  Tournament (1) is a non-terminal and often a cantrip, so a Tournament that fails to activate isn't as big a deal, (2) activating it means buying a card you almost certainly want anyway, (3) usually offers a better reward, and (4) the reward goes on top of the deck.

Compared to Treasure Map?  Treasure Map (1) is more useless until it activates, (2) is activated with a less desirable card to have in your deck anyway [another Treasure Map], but (3) gets rid of both cards when it activates, not just one, and (4) offers a way way better prize.

Prospector is cheaper than both Tournament and Treasure Map, so it makes sense that it's weaker than both of those.  But the difference between $3 and $4 is pretty small, and Prospector really seems so much weaker.  Unless you're pursuing a Duchy-based strategy anyway.  But there really aren't too many of those.

I'd want to see a prettier reward for activating this (such as, at minimum, putting the Gold on top of the deck) and probably a nicer action piece as well.  Then again, terminal Silvers at the $3 level tend not to be very good,  so you couldn't beef it up very much without necessitating a price increase.  But as-is, I think I'd buy Prospector a whole lot less than Woodcutter and Chancellor, which is saying something.

Then again, maybe I'm missing something important about how to use the card.  If you had any specific application in mind that I haven't touched upon here, by all means, say on.

Quote
Fund
Types: Treasure
Cost: 4
Worth 2 Coins. +1 Buy. When you play this, discard your hand.
You may trash this card immediately. If you do, all cards cost 1 Coin less this turn, but not less than 0 Coins.

Interesting.  A tough one to envision how it will play.  The "discard your hand" penalty very cleverly limits you to playing just one Fund per turn.  That's probably all it does, since it's very rare that this can't be played last without consequence.  But it means you can't accumulate these and build up to a mega-turn.  If you could, the self-trashing penalty wouldn't matter at all, because you'd just wait for the megaturn, buy out the Provinces, and call it a day.  You're very smart to have designed a penalty that precludes this possibility.

Nevertheless, I think this needs to be a $5 card.  The reason is just that Silver is supposed to be competitive at $4, and so Silver-with-a-small-bonus cards get placed in the $5 tier (Royal Seal, Stash), even if the bonus is weak.  This card doesn't quite fall into that category, since it has a nominal penalty and therefore isn't strictly subject to that de facto rule.  But the penalty is essentially zero if you only have one copy to play.  And because the card can't be played in multiples, you probably don't want to buy more than one in the first place.

Besides, although I probably underrate Royal Seal, I see myself buying this more often than it or Stash.  The ability to strategically time when you activate it is pretty potent.

Anyway, I really admire the cohesive design of this card.  The various pieces complement each other really well.  I keep thinking there should be a hole I can poke in it, but I can't find one.

Quote
Mercenaries
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 4
+2 Cards. +1 Action. Each player (including you) reveals the top card of his deck and either discards it or puts it back, your choice.
You may discard a Treasure card from your hand. If you don't, trash this card.

Spy : Mercenaries :: Laboratory : Stables?

I think that analogy holds well enough to justify the card's utility and power level.  One big difference, though, is that the discard happens after the card draw, and moreover that it's optional.  That might turn out to be a big deal.

I don't think I'd like the card as well if the discard happened first, unless that discard was mandatory (otherwise you'd have a lot of AP from players trying to guess what their next two cards would be and estimating the non-trivial ramifications of the various possibilities).  But with it after, I have a small worry that the card is a touch overpowered.

Quote
Mill Town
Types: Action
Cost: 4
+2 Actions. You may reveal 2 or more Coppers from your hand. If you do, gain a card costing exactly 1 Coin per Copper card revealed.

I don't like this at all.  With Mill Town and four Coppers, you basically get a Throne Roomed Workshop, and that's it.  With MT+3C, you get a Silver and the actions you need to use your fifth card, if that happens to be an action.  With MT+2C, you get a $2 -- if there's even one you want -- which is a pretty tiny consolation prize for having a turn that isn't very good.  And you still probably won't need the Village-effect.  That's the other problem:  the two effects anti-synergize.  If your deck is full of Copper, it's probably not also full of Actions, and vice versa.

Coppersmith usually always going to be preferable.  The one time it's clearly inferior is when you can get a lot of Copper into your hand AND you don't have an outside source of +Buy.  Then you could double-Province, in theory.  But Coppersmith in a small hand is usually better, and Coppersmith plus +Buy in a large hand is usually better.  Considering how situational Coppersmith already is, that makes this card even more so.  You can't even stack these very well, because MT+MT+MT+Copper+Copper just buys you four Pearl Divers.  I guess it's good for running out the Estates, but if you have a deck full of Mill Towns and Coppers, you're probably never going to find yourself needing to.

Quote
Aqueduct
Types: Victory
Cost: 5
Worth 2 VP.
----------------------------------------------------------
When you gain this, reveal the top 5 cards of your deck. Discard all revealed Victory and Curse cards and put the rest back on top in any order.

Was it you that posted this exact card in the thread where we were talking about what cards might be in Hinterlands?  I spotted it there and played several games with it.  I really really like it.  The only thing is, I'm not sure that $5 is the right cost.  I tried it there, and I tried it at $4.  As much as I like the Aqueduct-or-Duchy decision it forces at $5, I think I prefer it at the cheaper price.  But I'm not super confident about that conclusion.

Anyway, this is a great buy in the endgame and works exactly as you'd think.  Sometimes it whiffs and discards nothing, but I've saved whole turns with it.  Most likely it gets rid of 1-2 green cards, and that in itself makes it worth the purchase.

As an experiment, I tried opening with a rush of these.  I bought nothing but Aqueducts when I could and Silver when I couldn't.  I was amazed at how easily I could maintain my momentum and clean out the Aqueducts -- twelve of them, in fact, not eight -- without slowing down.  But then, of course, I ground to a halt and couldn't do anything.  Obviously that's not a good strategy, not that I thought it would be.  I just wanted to get a feel for the card.

After you've already got a pile of Provinces, racing Aqueducts isn't quite as assured, even at $4.  They're good buys, but I didn't often get more than 2-4 before the game ended.  Anyway, it's a lot of fun.

I'll look at the rest of your cards in a later post.
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #10 on: December 05, 2011, 03:29:25 pm »
+1

Continuing from my last post....

Barracks
Types: Action
Cost: 5
Choose one: +1 Card and +2 Actions; or reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Attack card, discard the other cards, then play the Attack card.
----------------------------------------------------------
When you gain this, gain an Conscripts card.

Conscripts
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 0*
+2 Coins. Trash this card. Each other player gains a Curse.
(This is not in the Supply.)

This is terrific.  I remember Donald X talking about one of the now dead one-shots being "Search your deck for attack cards and play them all."   Which sounded great, except in kingdoms where there are no attack cards.  I'm sure he had some remedy for that problem, but I don't know what it was.  Anyway, this is a good one, as you get an attack card when you buy it.

This is such an exotic combo that it's hard to price, but at first blush I don't see anything wrong with it.  Oddly, the closest thing I can compare it to is Ill-Gotten Gains.  Both amount to a one-shot cursing attack.  IGG's is immediate, but this attack will tend to happen at the top of the reshuffle, because you get to play it as soon as you hit either card, rather than one specific card.  In compensation for the delay, you get a free Village instead of a Copper-generating Copper.

In combo with other attack cards, this could be brutal, as the potential is that you play those attacks more often.  But I don't have a good handle on how much it increases that frequency on average.  Anyway, another really cool and original idea.

Quote
Cathedral
Types: Action
Cost: 5
+3 Cards. +1 Action. Put 2 cards from your hand on top of your deck.
You may spend a Cathedral token. If you do, reveal the top 5 cards of your deck, trash any number of them, and discard the rest.
----------------------------------------------------------
When you gain this, take a Cathedral token.

I worry that this card will decide the game based on who gets the 5/2 split.  You get one of these on turns 1 or 2, trash 5 Coppers and Estates on turn 3, and on many boards you'll be uncatchable.  I suspect it would be too strong even if you limited it to 4 cards, because the thing is, you don't miss having a decent buy when you trash all those cards.   I love the idea of a one-shot where you don't actually lose the card, but I don't think this is a good thing to have it do.

The action component feels like it might be a $5 card all by itself, but I can't be sure.  Courtyard is one of the cards I'm least good at using, so it's all the harder to envision how a non-terminal variation of it would play.  But Courtyard is pretty strong already, so I have to think making it a non-terminal (even though having to put an extra card back is a big deal) makes it crazy.  As it should be, to cost $3 more.  Anyway, you'd want to test this really really well, because the power of Courtyard-like deck manipulation is really subtle and varies wildly from deck type to deck type.

Quote
Inventor
Types: Action
Cost: 5
Choose one: +3 Cards; or set this aside on your Inventor mat.
----------------------------------------------------------
When you gain this, set it aside on your Inventor mat.
At the start of your turn, you may remove this from your mat and put it into your hand.

I hate to pass on this one, but I guess I just don't understand what this one is all about.  I guess it's a Smithy you can play whenever you want?  I guess that's worth $5.  Maybe the part I don't understand is the option to set it aside after you've pulled it into your deck the first time.  I don't know why you ever would.  I guess I'd remove that option entirely.  If you're stuck on keeping it, make it a cantrip if you set it aside, so at least then you aren't burning a card slot and an action for the privilege of not playing it.

Quote
Philanthropist
Types: Action
Cost: 5
+2 Cards. +2 Coins. Each other player may gain a Copper, putting it in his hand.

I could be wrong, but I'm almost certain this is too strong.  Optionally gaining Copper to hand is not insignificant, but, as one of the "other players," I'd only very rarely ever want to do this before the end game.  Which means that until the end game, you've got a +2 Cards, +$2 card (worth $6 or $7, say) for $5.  I think a stronger penalty is needed here.

Quote
Tax Collector
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 6
+1 Buy. +2 Coins. Each other player with at least 5 cards in hand trashes a card from his hand costing 2 Coins or more (or reveals a hand with no such cards), then gains a card costing less than it that is not a Victory card.

Saboteur is my least favorite card in the game and the only one I actively dislike.  This provides the player some limited choice on which card gets hit, but it has three extremely significant improvements on Saboteur:

(1) +1 Buy, +$2.  Considering that Saboteur offers nothing to the player, this alone is a humongous improvement over  Saboteur, for just $1 more.
(2) The replacement card is required.   That means you can't get rid of a neutral card like Silver without semi-cursing yourself as well by taking a Copper.
(3) The replacement card can't be a Victory card.  This is the most serious problem, I think.  If you have a stroke of bad luck and have to trash a Province or even a Duchy, that might be the game right there.  I see why you did this:  you don't want the victim to be able to purposely trash a Gold for a Duchy in the endgame when that's a good move.  But it's just so brutal and swingy with the restriction.  Maybe you could allow the replacement card to be a Victory card if the trashed card was also a Victory card?  Then you circumvent both issues.

So anyway, not a fan of this one, but it's unlikely that I would like any version of this card, no matter how balanced and fair.

It's too bad I had to end on a bad note, but by and large I'd say that's the strongest set of cards I've seen posted here.  There are tons of great ideas in them and some clever implementations of those ideas.  Thanks!
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #11 on: December 05, 2011, 07:57:14 pm »
0

Wow, thanks for the fantastic feedback! I think most of your criticisms are spot on. I'm going to suggest some changes for some cards and push back on some others, explaining my reasoning for why I made them the way I did. If you've got time, let me know what you think.

Quote
Missionary
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: 2
+1 Coin. Draw until you have 5 cards in hand.
----------------------------------------------------------
When another player plays an Attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash down to 3 cards in your hand.

I think you actually like this card better than I do. The way I see it, it's got two problems. First, as you said, it may be too powerful when you are attacked, allowing you to trash some junk and then restore your hand. Second, I think it's not powerful enough when you're not hit by an attack.

Here's my proposed change:

Missionary
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: 2
+1 Coin. Reveal the top two cards of your deck. Discard one of them and put the other one into your hand.
----------------------------------------------------------
When another player plays an Attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash down to 3 cards in your hand.

This makes the card less powerful after you've used the Reaction ability: you can't just restore your hand to five cards. As a bonus, it's also effective against deck-rearranging attacks, which the Reaction ability doesn't really help against. I've always liked that about cards like Secret Chamber, Watchtower, and Horse Traders. Their action ability helps against most of the attack effects that their reaction ability misses.

As an added note, the reason that I really wanted to include this Reaction ability in this set is that it allows the card to trash itself if you think you've gotten enough use out of it. That's kind of like a one-shot, right?

Quote
Tinker
Types: Action
Cost: 3
Reveal the top card of your deck. Choose one: Trash the revealed card and gain a card costing exactly 1 Coin less than it, putting it on top of your deck; or trash the revealed card and gain a card costing up to 2 Coins more than it, then trash this card. +1 Card. +1 Action.

First of all, I like your rewording, so I'll go with that. The reason I didn't word it that way in the first place is that I thought I'd need to start the card with, "Trash the top card of your deck. You may trash this card." This creates an ambiguity when you later refer to 'the trashed card'. Your 'reveal then trash' wording nicely circumvents that issue.

As for the card's actual effect, I admit that it's a gamble. There's a lot of luck involved. Overall, though,  I think the effect is a net postive and a little luck can be a lot of fun sometimes. Let's walk through what could happen when you play Tinker. Chances are good you're going to open with it to maximize the number of Coppers and Estates you can trash with it, so let's assume that.

Scenario #1: You reveal a Copper, Curse, or Estate. Obviously you're usually going to pick the '$1 less' option and trash these cards. In this case, Tinker is comparable to Spice Merchant's cards/actions option, except that it allows you to trash Estates and Curses as well as Coppers. It trashes a bad card, draws you a card to replace itself, and gives you an action. It doesn't cycle quite as much as Merchant, but that's not that big a deal. Overall, success!

Scenario #2: You reveal a $2 card that you bought. This will almost always be bad. It's not too unreasonable to just say, "Maybe I won't buy $2 cards if I'm using Tinker." For a lot of $2 cards, that's probably a good tradeoff.

Scenario #3: You reveal another $3 card, like Silver. Chances are good that you don't mind trashing that card in order to gain a juicy $5 card. This may seem expensive, since you lose both your Tinker and your original $3 card (which you didn't get to play), but remember that Tinker still draws you back up to 5 cards, so your buy this turn is likely to still be worth at least $3 or $4, maybe $5 or more depending on what stage of the game you're at. Overall, this isn't as great a result as turning up a bad card, but it likely improves your deck overall at the cost of not being able to play that $3 card this shuffle.

Scenario #4: You reveal a $4 card. This is actually a pretty good pull. You could just take the Gold or good $5-6 card and buy a decent card this turn, just like in Scenario #3. However, if there's a nice $3 that you really want to play this turn, you can gain that, putting it on your deck, and immediately draw and play it thanks to Tinker's +1 Card/+1 Action.

Scenario #5: You reveal a $5 card. You just won the pain lottery. This is probably the single worst result for most games. Unless there's a $4 card you really want to play right now, you lose your Tinker to either replace the $5 card with a copy of itself or a Gold. Either way, you don't get to play that $5 card this shuffle.

Scenario #6: You reveal a $6 card. If it's early game, grab a good $5 coster and play it immediately. Otherwise, gain the Province.

Scenario #7: You reveal a Province. Take another one and trash your Tinker.

Things get a little wackier with Prosperity cards, but that's what you're looking at most games. Really, the $5 pull is the only catastrophic result. Even that can be OK if there's a $4 card that you really want to play this turn. That's one of the things I like about the card, though. Like Swindler, its power varies greatly depending on the distribution of cards at each price point, and those dynamics may not be immediately obvious.

Quote
Prospector
Types: Action
Cost: 3
+2 Coins.
----------------------------------------------------------
If this is in play at the start of Clean-up, you may reveal a Duchy from your hand. If you do, trash this and gain a Gold.

I completely agree that this card needs work. It was added to the set very late because I wanted a $3 card that generated $2, or did something roughly equivalent. I felt like that was an important thing to have to keep the expansion cohesive as a whole. Anyhow, originally it worked such that if you got to your Clean-up phase and had at least two copies of it in play, you trashed all of them for one Gold each. I thought this was brilliant until I realized it couldn't be done without a +2 Actions card. So I had to substitute the second Prospector for one of the basic cards. The Duchy was the last incarnation of that line of thought, and I didn't put enough consideration into it. Conversely, its penultimate iteration was probably more interesting and useful. Take a look:

Prospector
Types: Action
Cost: 3
+2 Coins.
----------------------------------------------------------
If this is in play at the start of Clean-up, you may reveal a Gold from your hand. If you do, trash this and gain 2 Gold cards.

Hmm, so do I play the Gold now, or do I keep it in hand in order to gain more Gold? Unlike Duchies, you're liable to pick up some Gold fairly early in the game. Is it worth having a terminal Silver until you match the two together?

I don't have time to post responses regarding all the cards right now, but I'll pull one out of order before I go.

Quote
Aqueduct
Types: Victory
Cost: 5
Worth 2 VP.
----------------------------------------------------------
When you gain this, reveal the top 5 cards of your deck. Discard all revealed Victory and Curse cards and put the rest back on top in any order.

Yes, I was the one that posted this card in the other thread. I'm just completely blown away that you thought it was good enough to playtest and that it tested so well! Thanks!

I admit that I'd assumed the Aqueduct-or-Duchy choice was integral to the card. I figured that if I priced it at $4 that there would be no strategy there at all; with $4 you'd buy Aqueduct and with $5 you'd buy Duchy. Since you've actually tested the card, though, I'm happy to defer to your experience. At minimum, I'll test it at $4 myself.

I'll post more when I have time. Thanks again for your insight!
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3296
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4443
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #12 on: December 05, 2011, 08:37:03 pm »
+1

Quote
Tinker
Types: Action
Cost: 3
Reveal the top card of your deck. Choose one: Trash the revealed card and gain a card costing exactly 1 Coin less than it, putting it on top of your deck; or trash the revealed card and gain a card costing up to 2 Coins more than it, then trash this card. +1 Card. +1 Action.

As for the card's actual effect, I admit that it's a gamble. There's a lot of luck involved. Overall, though,  I think the effect is a net postive and a little luck can be a lot of fun sometimes. Let's walk through what could happen when you play Tinker. Chances are good you're going to open with it to maximize the number of Coppers and Estates you can trash with it, so let's assume that.

The obvious comparison here is Lookout, right, as another nonterminal blind trasher. Tinker gives you less flexibility about what to trash at any given time; but on the other hand I would love to have a Lookout that could self-trash when my deck got good enough to not need the Lookout anymore.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #13 on: December 05, 2011, 08:41:17 pm »
0

The obvious comparison here is Lookout, right, as another nonterminal blind trasher. Tinker gives you less flexibility about what to trash at any given time; but on the other hand I would love to have a Lookout that could self-trash when my deck got good enough to not need the Lookout anymore.

Hmm, good call. I can't remember whether I was going for a Lookout-like effect when I first came up with the idea for this card. Unlike Lookout, Tinker also draws a card to replace itself to make up for the fact that you have zero control over what you trash.

EDIT: I just made rinkworks's change to the wording of Tinker, but now I'm worried about whether it's clear that you only put the gained card on your deck if you chose not to trash the Tinker. The other thing is that if you Throne or KC it, it now only lets you get the Remodel effect for one usage. Better choose wisely!
« Last Edit: December 05, 2011, 08:48:07 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #14 on: December 05, 2011, 10:32:06 pm »
0

OK, I'm back and continuing my response to rinkworks's comments.

Quote
Fund
Types: Treasure
Cost: 4
Worth 2 Coins. +1 Buy. When you play this, discard your hand.
You may trash this card immediately. If you do, all cards cost 1 Coin less this turn, but not less than 0 Coins.

I'm glad you like the card! As far as its cost goes, I think I came at it from the opposite (and mostly likely wrong) direction. Early on in the design of the set, I had another one-shot Treasure that cost $5. I wanted Fund to have a lower price point to help differentiate the two. I also didn't want it to be worth $1 when played, because then you'd almost certainly just use the one-shot ability the first time you played it. Silver-with-a-bonus couldn't cost $3, obviously, so $4 was the only reasonable price point.

However, I quickly realized the inherent problem with a $4 Silver-with-a-bonus, which is that because $3 is so close to $4, the stack would quickly empty as players who had $4 to spend and wanted Silvers bought Funds instead. The 'discard your hand' clause seemed like the most elegant way to discourage that. Anyhow, I have a feeling that one of the reasons that cards like Stash are priced at $5 is because at $4 they'd be gone in a heartbeat. My solution to the problem is different, and I suppose time and testing will tell whether or not it's a good solution. It certainly seems clever at first glance.

Skipping forward, I actually added the +Buy much later, because the set needed some cards with +Buy and this seemed like a much better place to stick it than most. It also allowed the one-shot bonus to be the elegant 'cards cost $1 less', which is a great halfway point between producing an extra $1 (which is boring and perhaps not powerful enough) and an extra $2 (which is way too powerful).

So getting back to the card's current incarnation, I realize that unless you're playing some sort of moneyless strategy, you're probably going to want to have one of these in your deck. Maybe you'll get two if you're feeling lucky. If 'should I buy it' is a forgone conclusion, the strategy space around this card then boils down to 'when do I buy it' and 'when do I trash it'. I'm hoping that that's enough to make it a balanced card, but I'm not sure yet.

Quote
Mercenaries
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 4
+2 Cards. +1 Action. Each player (including you) reveals the top card of his deck and either discards it or puts it back, your choice.
You may discard a Treasure card from your hand. If you don't, trash this card.

Having tested this card out in a game, I agree that it's too powerful in its current incarnation. With a few Mercenaries, you can build an Action-heavy deck (like a Conspirator or Minion deck) without even needing to trash your starting Coppers and Estates. Thanks to the +2 Cards and the ability to discard your top card, the Mercenaries can easily scream through your entire deck, discarding unneeded Coppers as they go.

One solution is to have its Spy effect only hit your opponents and not you. However, I worry that because of its similarity to Spy, the player playing the card might often reveal their top card just out of habit. So, I'd also want to alter the attack portion.

Mercenaries
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 4
+2 Cards. +1 Action. Each other player reveals the top two cards of his deck, discarding one that you choose and putting the other back on top.
You may discard a Treasure card from your hand. If you don't, trash this card.

Quote
Mill Town
Types: Action
Cost: 4
+2 Actions. You may reveal 2 or more Coppers from your hand. If you do, gain a card costing exactly 1 Coin per Copper card revealed.

OK, I'll admit this is an odd one and I can't blame you for not liking it at first glance, but let me explain a bit and see if I can't change your mind.

Backing up a bit, let's talk about Coppersmith. In order for a Coppersmith to be even marginally useful, you need to have at least 3 Coppers in hand by the time your Buy phase rolls around. Otherwise, it's just a terminal Silver. It wasn't until Hinterlands was released and I played the suggested Money For Nothing set that I finally figured out how to build a Coppersmith deck. See, in order to get value out of it, you need a way to drastically increase your hand size. Now, you can try to do this with Wishing Well or Laboratory, but chances are that you're going to have to include an actions/cards engine, preferably with Torturer or Margrave or some other attacking, drawing card, because while the payoff can be huge, this strategy is slow. In order to take full advantage of such a deck, you'll probably want at least two Coppersmiths and a source of +Buy, preferably non-terminal. The Money For Nothing set, for instance, includes Coppersmith, Shanty Town (for +2 Actions), Torturer (for +3 Cards), and Pawn (for non-terminal +Buy). However, getting a draw engine like this to work while retaining all of your Coppers (and perhaps picking up 1 or 2 more) basically means buying no Treasure cards. Every single buy until you start greening needs to be an engine component. When you draw a crap hand with a few Coppers, buy a Shanty Town or Pawn. When a Coppersmith gets you to $6, you buy a Torturer.

The short version is that in order to make Coppersmith really pop, you need a way to increase hand size while quickly cycling, a source of +Buy, and a way to slow your opponent down. That's a lot of pieces to put together without much wiggle room.

Mill Town is an attempt to incorporate some of those pieces into a single card. In theory, all you need for it to work is a good source of +Cards. You don't need +Buy thanks to Mill Town's gain ability, and the +2 Actions allows you to play terminal actions that can draw cards and slow your opponents down.

Your assessment of Mill Town's poor early-game prowess is spot-on, but I never intended Mill Town as an opener. Like most villages, you'd only buy it after you accumulated a few terminal Action cards. Until you've got enough of an engine going that you have 5 Coppers in hand, you'd probably pass on using Mill Town's gain ability. If there are nice Villages and other cantrips at $3 and $4, then you can amass those quite quickly, but if you do it too fast, you run the risk of an opponent being able to end the game on three piles before you're able to get a big payoff from the Mill Towns. My hope is that there's some interesting strategy there.

... to be continued ...
« Last Edit: December 06, 2011, 01:29:40 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3296
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4443
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #15 on: December 06, 2011, 09:56:54 am »
+1

EDIT: I just made rinkworks's change to the wording of Tinker, but now I'm worried about whether it's clear that you only put the gained card on your deck if you chose not to trash the Tinker. The other thing is that if you Throne or KC it, it now only lets you get the Remodel effect for one usage. Better choose wisely!

I wonder actually if having a remodeled card go on your deck wouldn't be a good idea. Consider the early-game scenario Rinkworks was worried about: you open Tinker/Silver, then on the first reshuffle you play Tinker and trash the Silver. So you can gain a Wharf or whatever to make up for it, but you've lost both your only Silver and your only trasher; that's not a very good bargain. And if you'd been luckier and your Tinker had hit an Estate, you probably would have bought a Wharf on the next turn anyway, so you haven't gained any momentum by doing this. If the Wharf goes onto your deck, at least you get to play it sooner than you would if you'd been luckier with your Tinker and just bought the Wharf normally—the Tinker in effect retroactively converts your Silver/Tinker opening into a (respectable) Wharf/nothing opening.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #16 on: December 06, 2011, 10:21:58 am »
0

I wonder actually if having a remodeled card go on your deck wouldn't be a good idea. Consider the early-game scenario Rinkworks was worried about: you open Tinker/Silver, then on the first reshuffle you play Tinker and trash the Silver. So you can gain a Wharf or whatever to make up for it, but you've lost both your only Silver and your only trasher; that's not a very good bargain. And if you'd been luckier and your Tinker had hit an Estate, you probably would have bought a Wharf on the next turn anyway, so you haven't gained any momentum by doing this. If the Wharf goes onto your deck, at least you get to play it sooner than you would if you'd been luckier with your Tinker and just bought the Wharf normally—the Tinker in effect retroactively converts your Silver/Tinker opening into a (respectable) Wharf/nothing opening.

OK, you've convinced me!
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #17 on: December 06, 2011, 01:32:20 pm »
0

Continued response to rinkworks...

Quote
Barracks
Types: Action
Cost: 5
Choose one: +1 Card and +2 Actions; or reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Attack card, discard the other cards, then play the Attack card.
----------------------------------------------------------
When you gain this, gain an Conscripts card.

Conscripts
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 0*
+2 Coins. Trash this card. Each other player gains a Curse.
(This is not in the Supply.)

Yeah, it's hard to gauge whether this is balanced without playing a bunch of games both with and without other Attack cards. I'm glad you like the idea, though.

Quote
Cathedral
Types: Action
Cost: 5
+3 Cards. +1 Action. Put 2 cards from your hand on top of your deck.
You may spend a Cathedral token. If you do, reveal the top 5 cards of your deck, trash any number of them, and discard the rest.
----------------------------------------------------------
When you gain this, take a Cathedral token.

I completely agree that this could easily decide the game on a 5/2 split. Somehow I never even considered that. I'm planning on changing the Cathedral token effect to one of these two:

"If you do, trash the top 2 cards of your deck."

"If you do, reveal the top 5 cards of your deck, trash any number of revealed cards that are not Treasures, and discard the rest."

As for the Action component, I think of it as a fairly powerful cantrip, but I'm not yet convinced that it's worth $5 all by itself. Courtyard nets you two cards in hand and costs an action, whereas Cathedral nets you 1 card, but lets you keep your action. Cathedral also gives you greater control over the top of your deck, but then again, it costs a lot more than Courtyard. To me, it seems less powerful than, say, Cartographer. I'll test it some more.

Quote
Inventor
Types: Action
Cost: 5
Choose one: +3 Cards; or set this aside on your Inventor mat.
----------------------------------------------------------
When you gain this, set it aside on your Inventor mat.
At the start of your turn, you may remove this from your mat and put it into your hand.

One of the first cards I created for the set was called Nest Egg. It was a Treasure that cost $5, generated $3, and trashed itself when you played it. When you gained it, it started on your mat and you could put it into your hand whenever you played an Action card. Eventually I axed it because I didn't want two Treasures and I liked Fund better.

Once I decided that I needed more card-drawing in the set, I stapled the whenever-you-want mechanic to a Smithy, changing the mechanics a bit and letting you keep it in your deck afterward.

Note that this card has several advantages over Smithy. First, not only can you put it in your hand at the beginning of any turn, but that turn could be the very next turn after you buy it, making it similar to Nomad Camp in that respect. Furthermore, Inventor doesn't replace another card in your hand; it's added in. So if you had a 5-card hand at the start of your turn, you'll have an 8-card hand after you use Inventor's ability and play it for cards.

As far as the ability to put it back on your mat goes, I've been in situations where I've got a Cards/Actions engine and my current hand contains a Smithy and four non-Action cards. Now, I could play the Smithy, but chances are good that I'm just going to draw a bunch of dead Action cards. With Inventor, you can use an action to set it aside for when you actually have need of it. So it's kind of like Walled Village, but for card draw rather than additional actions.

I'd considered making the set-aside effect a cantrip, but then to balance it, I'd probably have to make you discard a card from your hand when you took it off of your mat. That's a lot more words on the card and in my opinion it makes it less interesting. Part of the allure right now is that the Inventor gets 'havened' into your hand, rather than replacing an existing card there. Maybe I'll have it give +1 Action when you set it aside.

Quote
Philanthropist
Types: Action
Cost: 5
+2 Cards. +2 Coins. Each other player may gain a Copper, putting it in his hand.

I may just scrap this card altogether. It's probably too powerful and I don't think the Copper gain ability scales well with multiple players.

Quote
Tax Collector
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 6
+1 Buy. +2 Coins. Each other player with at least 5 cards in hand trashes a card from his hand costing 2 Coins or more (or reveals a hand with no such cards), then gains a card costing less than it that is not a Victory card.

So, your reaction to this card was the following:

Saboteur is my least favorite card in the game and the only one I actively dislike.  This provides the player some limited choice on which card gets hit, but it has three extremely significant improvements on Saboteur:

(1) +1 Buy, +$2.  Considering that Saboteur offers nothing to the player, this alone is a humongous improvement over  Saboteur, for just $1 more.
(2) The replacement card is required.   That means you can't get rid of a neutral card like Silver without semi-cursing yourself as well by taking a Copper.
(3) The replacement card can't be a Victory card.  This is the most serious problem, I think.  If you have a stroke of bad luck and have to trash a Province or even a Duchy, that might be the game right there.  I see why you did this:  you don't want the victim to be able to purposely trash a Gold for a Duchy in the endgame when that's a good move.  But it's just so brutal and swingy with the restriction.  Maybe you could allow the replacement card to be a Victory card if the trashed card was also a Victory card?  Then you circumvent both issues.

I agree that it's superior to Saboteur in these ways. However, it also has some significant drawbacks.

(1) Barring any Council Room shenanigans, you can only be hit by Tax Collector once per turn you take. A Saboteur every few turns is a minor nuisance. Several Saboteurs each turn is a serious threat. Playing Tax Collector multiple times only nets you a Woodcutter effect.

(2) Tax Collector has you gain a card costing less than the trashed card, not $2 less than it. This is pretty significant, especially for Alchemy cards (since $3P can turn into $3, $2P, or anything else worth less).

(3) Tax Collector isn't likely to hurt you until well into mid-game. First of all, it costs $6, so you can never open with it. That definitely had to be the case. Also, each player starts the game with 3 Estates, which can act as a nice Tax Collector buffer.

With all that being said, I think the mandatory gain needs to go, because if the game lasts long enough (which could easily happen if there are other Attacks being played), then everyone's deck is going to drift toward being filled with Copper. The more Copper in your deck, the more Tax Collector hurts because you have fewer choices for which card to trash.

I'm not convinced there's a big problem with not letting you gain a Victory card. Granted, if Tax Collector is out, it discourages strategies centering around many, smaller Victory cards. But if you get hit by a Tax Collector with a hand of five Provinces/Duchies, then (A) you're probably already winning by a large margin, and (B) your other hands in this shuffle were/will be amazing.

Anyhow, I just want to say thanks again for all the fantastic feedback (both rinkworks and AJD). I hope I'm not being too pigheaded on too many of these cards. If you've got some more time this week and are willing talk out some of these points, I'd really appreciate it. I'm also going to test these cards in some real games after I've made these revisions.

EDIT: I'm definitely moving Aqueduct to a $4 cost. It sounds like it works fine that way and as Donald has said, if in doubt between two costs, go for the lower one.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2011, 06:18:31 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #18 on: December 07, 2011, 12:46:00 pm »
0

OK, I've decided to throw out Philanthropist and replace it with a new card. The set needed another true one-shot card anyhow.

Monopoly
Types: Action
Cost: 5
+2 Coins. Trash this card. If you do, name a Kingdom card, then the player to your left reveals then discards the top 5 cards of his deck. If the named card was revealed, gain a Gold, putting it into your hand.
----------------------------------------------------------
When you buy this, trash a Kingdom card from the Supply.

EDIT: I made a few small changes. Aqueduct now only activates on buy and Monopoly now has all other players reveal 4 cards each.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2011, 04:11:55 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +938
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #19 on: December 08, 2011, 10:03:34 am »
+1

EDIT: I made a few small changes. Aqueduct now only activates on buy...

What was the reason for this change?  I haven't run into any problems with it being "on gain," but doubtless there are lots of combos I haven't hit yet.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Enterprise: A One-Shot Expansion
« Reply #20 on: December 08, 2011, 10:33:08 am »
0

What was the reason for this change?  I haven't run into any problems with it being "on gain," but doubtless there are lots of combos I haven't hit yet.
I was concerned about slowdown issues in the rare case that somebody used Ambassador to distribute copies of it. You generally wouldn't want to do that, but with Golem, anything can happen. In retrospect, I guess it isn't really a necessary change. I'll change it back.

I think Monopoly should definitely activate on buy. Otherwise you've got order issues with Jester. I guess you have order issues with Jester anyhow, though. Maybe I'll reconsider that one, too.

EDIT: Oh, I remember now. With Aqueduct, I was worried about interactions with Ironworks, specifically. I think I've resolved those rules questions, though, so it should be OK as on-gain.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2011, 10:48:39 am by LastFootnote »
Logged
Pages: [1]
 

Page created in 0.174 seconds with 20 queries.