Print

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

[silvern]

$0 Action
+1 card
+1 action
You may trash a card from your hand
---------
When you gain this, gain two coppers and a curse.

This seems at first like it could be WAY overpowered--use this until you want to trash it with something else. However, I think it could work--it certainly wouldn't break the game, a zero dollar price point isn't much more ridiculous than $2, and it will ever really benefit you to have gobs of these. It's kind of the same concept as chapel, in a way.
Thoughts?

[Awaclus]

Getting Rats from Black Market is extremely powerful. This is basically that, except it requires no effort at all to get.

[silverspawn]

mh, i'm sorry but I dont think this works at all. the drawback of -1 VP on a trasher like this isn't really a drawback at all, so you basically just have a card worth 4$ for 0$. makes woodcutter more useful...

[silvern]

I changed the nerf. Honestly though, I don't think it would be broken. Chapel certainly isn't...

[silverspawn]

I changed the nerf. Honestly though, I don't think it would be broken. Chapel certainly isn't...

Chapel certainly is! chapel is possibly the most overpowered card in the game. it could cost 4$ and would still be good.

good design is to not look at balance, but at fun factor when pricing a card, that's why chapel costs 2$. if it cost 4$, it would still be bought (you can still open silver/chapel), but it would be less fun.

Just like chapel, your card wouldn't break the game at 0$, because all it does is trash other cards, but it would make a lot of other cards really bad, like lookout, forager, trade route, trading post, and some others.

your new version is the other extreme, it's really weak. Even just "when you gain this, gain a curse" is more of a drawback than "-1 VP".

you're not the first one who suggests a trasher that junks yourself at gain. There is probably a way to make it balanced, but I doubt there's a way to make it exciting. At this point, when you make a trasher, you probably need to come up with something new.

[silvern]

Donald has expressed before, and I agree, that Chapel's price is far best at two. Pricing in Dominion, as many have pointed out, is not solely based on card strength, but also on just what works well in making it a fun card.

[GendoIkari]

If you're going to edit a card, PLEASE leave the original card in the OP, perhaps crossed out. It's confusing to read replies that were replying to a card that is no longer listed anywhere.

[popsofctown]

I changed the nerf. Honestly though, I don't think it would be broken. Chapel certainly isn't...

Chapel certainly is! chapel is possibly the most overpowered card in the game. it could cost 4$ and would still be good.

good design is to not look at balance, but at fun factor when pricing a card, that's why chapel costs 2$. if it cost 4$, it would still be bought (you can still open silver/chapel), but it would be less fun.

Just like chapel, your card wouldn't break the game at 0$, because all it does is trash other cards, but it would make a lot of other cards really bad, like lookout, forager, trade route, trading post, and some others.

your new version is the other extreme, it's really weak. Even just "when you gain this, gain a curse" is more of a drawback than "-1 VP".

you're not the first one who suggests a trasher that junks yourself at gain. There is probably a way to make it balanced, but I doubt there's a way to make it exciting. At this point, when you make a trasher, you probably need to come up with something new.

Chapel also makes mediocre trashers really weak..

[silverspawn]

i know, but that's not an argument

[RTT]

its now even a solid garden support. once gardens are gone empty this and the curse-pile alongeside if you get all 10 of them its 40 cards thats huge and probably enough to make gardens worth much more then the curses you get. also it ends the game very fast. I guess a trasher should not work well with gardens its funny that this one does.

[SirPeebles]

you're not the first one who suggests a trasher that junks yourself at gain. There is probably a way to make it balanced, but I doubt there's a way to make it exciting.

Death Cart?

[RTT]

you're not the first one who suggests a trasher that junks yourself at gain. There is probably a way to make it balanced, but I doubt there's a way to make it exciting.

Death Cart?

Well the main purpose of deathcart is not trashing but money generating. the only games i would think about it as a trasher are probably cultist or marauder games.

[silverspawn]

you're not the first one who suggests a trasher that junks yourself at gain. There is probably a way to make it balanced, but I doubt there's a way to make it exciting.

Death Cart?

Well the main purpose of deathcart is not trashing but money generating. the only games i would think about it as a trasher are probably cultist or marauder games.

yes, death cart isn't a trasher

[Holger]

your new version is the other extreme, it's really weak. Even just "when you gain this, gain a curse" is more of a drawback than "-1 VP".

Agreed; and the card might be balanced if it said "when you gain this, gain a curse". Then it would only take it one shuffle to "repair its own damage", instead of three.

[RTT]

that might be ok but i still dont see the reason this has to cost 0$ it could also cost 2$ and so would not be a simple way to get down two piles at the same time with just enough buys. also with some buys and trader in hand this could be overpoverd.

[enfynet]

What about Oasis without the $1?

[GendoIkari]

also with some buys and trader in hand this could be overpoverd.

Channeling SheCantSayNo... With Watchtower, maybe. But with Trader in hand, you're still self-junking, just replacing Curse with another junk card.

[GendoIkari]

What about Oasis without the $1?

Aside from a few combos, this is usually worse than +1 card +1 action... a card which, aside from a few combos, you usually don't want in your deck; it's just less painful junk.

[Holger]

that might be ok but i still dont see the reason this has to cost 0$ it could also cost 2$ and so would not be a simple way to get down two piles at the same time with just enough buys. also with some buys and trader in hand this could be overpoverd.

Yes, there's a good reason not to do $0 kingdom cards. A $0 cantrip would also make Goons even stronger.

What about Oasis without the $1?

(Ninjaed) As another $0 card? Oasis without the $1 would almost be "strictly worse than buying nothing" (a cantrip with a penalty); I don't think I'd ever buy it. This could be another Ruins. 

[Awaclus]

What about Oasis without the $1?

Aside from a few combos, this is usually worse than +1 card +1 action... a card which, aside from a few combos, you usually don't want in your deck; it's just less painful junk.

Actually, aside from a few nombos (which are fairly common, though — terminal draw and opponent's discarding attacks), you want it in your deck. Gives you better control over your reshuffles.

[silverspawn]

What about Oasis without the $1?

Aside from a few combos, this is usually worse than +1 card +1 action... a card which, aside from a few combos, you usually don't want in your deck; it's just less painful junk.

Actually, aside from a few nombos (which are fairly common, though — terminal draw and opponent's discarding attacks), you want it in your deck. Gives you better control over your reshuffles.

im not so sure. it does help, but it also decreases your hand size. you only want it if you are very likely to have dead cards in your hand, and that might just not be the case in games with strong trashing, or generally in a money based strategy.

[Awaclus]

What about Oasis without the $1?

Aside from a few combos, this is usually worse than +1 card +1 action... a card which, aside from a few combos, you usually don't want in your deck; it's just less painful junk.

Actually, aside from a few nombos (which are fairly common, though — terminal draw and opponent's discarding attacks), you want it in your deck. Gives you better control over your reshuffles.

im not so sure. it does help, but it also decreases your hand size. you only want it if you are very likely to have dead cards in your hand, and that might just not be the case in games with strong trashing, or generally in a money based strategy.

Oh, I was referring to a pure cantrip. Pretty sure you never want this.

[GendoIkari]

What about Oasis without the $1?

Aside from a few combos, this is usually worse than +1 card +1 action... a card which, aside from a few combos, you usually don't want in your deck; it's just less painful junk.

Actually, aside from a few nombos (which are fairly common, though — terminal draw and opponent's discarding attacks), you want it in your deck. Gives you better control over your reshuffles.

im not so sure. it does help, but it also decreases your hand size. you only want it if you are very likely to have dead cards in your hand, and that might just not be the case in games with strong trashing, or generally in a money based strategy.

Oh, I was referring to a pure cantrip. Pretty sure you never want this.

There was a bunch of discussion about when you want the pure cantrip in your deck before... I'm pretty sure the cons outweigh the pros on the average board. Terminal draw is going to be way more common than the amount that you need to purposefully avoid drawing 1 extra card to avoid a reshuffle.

Found the thread: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=2308

[Awaclus]

What about Oasis without the $1?

Aside from a few combos, this is usually worse than +1 card +1 action... a card which, aside from a few combos, you usually don't want in your deck; it's just less painful junk.

Actually, aside from a few nombos (which are fairly common, though — terminal draw and opponent's discarding attacks), you want it in your deck. Gives you better control over your reshuffles.

im not so sure. it does help, but it also decreases your hand size. you only want it if you are very likely to have dead cards in your hand, and that might just not be the case in games with strong trashing, or generally in a money based strategy.

Oh, I was referring to a pure cantrip. Pretty sure you never want this.

There was a bunch of discussion about when you want the pure cantrip in your deck before... I'm pretty sure the cons outweigh the pros on the average board. Terminal draw is going to be way more common than the amount that you need to purposefully avoid drawing 1 extra card to avoid a reshuffle.

Well, as long as there isn't a reason to not go for the cantrip, it's always a good addition to your deck. So it's more like "terminal draw is going to be way more common than rare".

[silverspawn]

there are quite a lot of cases where it matters though. herald, tribute, thief, saboteur, knights, rogue, scrying pool, pirate ship, noble brigand, menagerie, horn of plenty, hunting party, ...

it's not very unlikely that at least one of those is present, and most of them favor action cards.