Print

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

[silverspawn]

The first one is inspired by Cookie Lord's and Last Footnote's Poacher and Barrister. They both exchange one of the 10 starting cards with a unique, non-supply card, but neither of them change the number of coins in your deck. that got me thinking, what if you do change it, and give, say, Forest Hut in exchange for copper.

that sounded like a neat idea for a while, but it's probably not good. if you start with 6 coppers and essentially 4 estates, and there are no strong 2$'s, 3/3 has a huge advantage over 2/4, and that's gonna happen a lot. You can also not really choose anything, so it's swingy without a real reward. Going to opposite way would be neat, but it's a lot like Baker.

So, what I came up with instead, is this

XXX - Action - 2$
+1 Card
+1$
You may play an XXX from your hand.
-------
Setup: Each player (starting with Player one) may trash any number of coppers from his deck.

The top part should be a simple, balanced effect for 2$, that benefits from a small deck, but not so much that it becomes an auto-buy. There aren't many effects that fit these conditions, so I took this one that was suggested uh somewhere, I can't find the thread. This is going to increase the luck/swinginess of the first couple of turns a lot, but it might also increase the skill for these turns. I usually don't try super luck dependent cards, but maybe this is worth it? I think how many coppers you want in your starting deck is a non-trivial decision, but I could be wrong.

The second one is inspired by another thread that I can't find. it had a "set number of things total to X" theme.

YYY - Action - 4$
+2 Cards
Set your number of Actions to 2. Discard a card per Action gained this way.

This might seem strong/difficult to judge, so here are a few things it can do. Play one, it's an Inn. Play a second one, it's the "+2 cards, +1 Action, discard a card" thing that never wanted to be an official card. Play if after playing two villages, and it's a moat.

Play two in a row, and you have exactly the same effect as a warehouse and a village. If you already played a village, it can sift without decreasing your hand size. it will almost never be a dead card, so that's an advantage.

[market squire]

XXX - Action - 2$
+1 Card
+1$
You may play an XXX from your hand.
-------
Setup: Each player (starting with Player one) may trash any number of coppers from his deck.

The setup part sounds very very interesting.
Lets see... you could trash 5 Coppers, and open with XXX for sure. During each of your next turns, you will be able to get either your starting hand (which will get you another XXX) or draw an XXX to basically add +$1 to your starting hand (but you should get more XXXs first). Sounds a bit too dominant.
What about letting them trash only up to X Coppers, maybe 3?

The second one is inspired by another thread that I can't find. it had a "set number of things total to X" theme.

YYY - Action - 4$
+2 Cards
Set your number of Actions to 2. Discard a card per Action gained this way.

This might seem strong/difficult to judge, so here are a few things it can do. Play one, it's an Inn. Play a second one, it's the "+2 cards, +1 Action, discard a card" thing that never wanted to be an official card. Play if after playing two villages, and it's a moat.

Play two in a row, and you have exactly the same effect as a warehouse and a village. If you already played a village, it can sift without decreasing your hand size. it will almost never be a dead card, so that's an advantage.

This thread.
I think it is a nice card, although the discard part is a bit weird.

[Chaos]

What about letting them trash only up to X Coppers, maybe 3?

So you think the card should be called 333? Or maybe 27? 

[XerxesPraelor]

I like them both and i'st nice when people refine ideas as well as coming up with them. There's politics involved with XXX, but probably no more than FG.

[silverspawn]

Lets see... you could trash 5 Coppers, and open with XXX for sure. During each of your next turns, you will be able to get either your starting hand (which will get you another XXX) or draw an XXX to basically add +$1 to your starting hand (but you should get more XXXs first). Sounds a bit too dominant.
What about letting them trash only up to X Coppers, maybe 3?

It would suck if that was the right play. Which it could be. I don't like putting a restriction in the setup though. Maybe the top half needs to change so that it doesn't stack anymore.

... which leads back to the problem of, what kind of top does the job. I actually didn't intend to write such a long response, but this got me thinking about all possible combinations of vanilla-only cards that could cost 2$. that's interesting anyway, so let's do it (all effects that aren't immediately terrible in red):

1 or 2 different ones: all < pawn
2 of the same: +2 cards (< moat), +2 actions (< squire), +2 coins (= duchess), +2 buys (< squire)
4 or more is probably either silly or too strong. though I did try +3 actions, +1 buy once. but let's skip that one.

3 different ones: action/coin/buy (< CSM), card/action/buy (< Market Square), card/action/coin (=Peddler), card/coin/buy (terminal market)

and 3 not all different:

+3 cards (= smithy)
+3 actions (tried that one with +buy, didn't like it)
+3 buys (silly)
+3$ (too strong)

+2 cards, +1 action (= lab)
+2 cards, +1$
+2 cards, +1 buy

+2 actions, +1 card (= village)
+2 actions, +1$ (< squire)
+2 actions, +1 buy (boring and weak)

+2$, +1 card
+2$, +1 action (= silver)
+2$, +1 buy (= woodcutter)

+2 buys, +1 card (eehhh)
+2 buys, +1 action
+2 buys, +1$ (< squire)


so these are left:
+1 card, +1$, +1 buy
+2 cards, +1$
+2$, +1 card
+2 cards, +1 buy
+2 buys, +1 action

+2 buys, +1 action doesn't really make sense on this card, and it's also mphf. I'm sure you would buy it sometimes, but it doesn't feel right. same more or less goes for +2 cards, +1 buy. maybe if it was a different concept.

so, that only leaves the two coin/card combinations, the terminal market, maaaybe things with a 4+ bonus, and non-vanilla effects. right now the terminal market is the only thing that feels like it's worth a try.

[eHalcyon]

The first one is inspired by Cookie Lord's and Last Footnote's Poacher and Barrister. They both exchange one of the 10 starting cards with a unique, non-supply card, but neither of them change the number of coins in your deck. that got me thinking, what if you do change it, and give, say, Forest Hut in exchange for copper.

that sounded like a neat idea for a while, but it's probably not good. if you start with 6 coppers and essentially 4 estates, and there are no strong 2$'s, 3/3 has a huge advantage over 2/4, and that's gonna happen a lot. You can also not really choose anything, so it's swingy without a real reward. Going to opposite way would be neat, but it's a lot like Baker.

Unless I'm missing something, Forest Hut isn't like another Estate.  It actually wouldn't impact 3/4 openings at all (you just discard an Estate or Shelter).  But on what would be 5/2 opens, there is a 71% chance that it gets nerfed down to a 4/2 opening instead, when the Forest Hut is drawn with 4 Copper.  If it is drawn with 3 Estates instead, then it still works out as a 5/2 opening.  So Forest Hut would impact 12% of openings overall, and only negatively (this is without considering things like Nomad Camp and Noble Brigand).

If you want to change the starting deck, another approach would be to consider what kind of openings would be interesting and then go from there.  Maybe instead of just 4/3 and 5/2 openings you want the possibiilty of 6/2 or 5/3 or 4/4... and one way to do that is with Baker.

[silverspawn]

Unless I'm missing something, Forest Hut isn't like another Estate. (...)

that's right, I forgot that it can discard for $.