Print

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

[Co0kieL0rd]

This is my newest idea; a card that junks other players once when you buy it (similar to IGG), and when you play it, other players have to trash a copy of that specific junk card from their hand. Here's the catch: whenever the junk card (which is not in the Supply) is trashed, it gets topdecked, so in most games it's stuck in your deck. To make this less harsh, the junk cards are cantrips. The two cards could look like this:

   

Cabal, $5, Action/Attack
+$2. Each other player reveals their hand and trashes a Turncoat from it.When you buy this, each other player gains a Turncoat from the Turncoat pile.

Turncoat, $0*, Action
+1 Card. +1 Action.When you trash this, put it on top of your deck.
(This is not in the Supply.)

Opinions and suggestions are welcome

[LastFootnote]

I like the general idea. One question is, how many Turncoats are there, and does it very with the number of players? I don't think it's worth having 50 Turncoats just for this attack.

I have to ask myself if the end result here is really "worth it". Basically it's a discard attack that's more likely to hit the more of them you (and other players) buy. On the face of it, that seems weaker than Militia. It's potentially more devastating if a player starts with several Turncoats in hand. And being forced to essentially discard a random card hurts more than discarding your weakest card. Hmm. Maybe $5 is a better price. And maybe it's too harsh in general.

I think I'd rather see Cabal actually discard Turncoats rather than topdecking them. Turncoat's on-trash effect is still valid for other purposes, but discarding both makes Cabal cleaner and makes it harder to lock other players out.

Back in the day I had an idea for a fan set that used a penaltry card similar to Turncoat.

Cave-In: Cave-In, $0*
When you trash this, put it on top of your deck.
(This is not in the Supply.)

The idea was that you'd buy a powerful Action card and then get a Cave-In with it as a sort of limiter. And some of the Action cards would interact with Cave-Ins, etc. Anyway this was all over two years ago and you can read about it here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5566.0

Originally I was going to pursue that after finishing Enterprise (if that ever happens). Later I decided that having a whole expansion mechanic based on every card having a penalty sucked. For the most part, penalties aren't fun. But! If the self-inflicted "penalty" card were a cantrip like Turncoat, the idea might work! Some of the cards wouldn't work and the rest would have to be rebalanced. It probably wouldn't make a good mechanic for an entire set, but could easily produce a bunch of cool cards.

[Spellbound]

If it hits, Militia is still better, and if your victims has more Turncloak or just a single cantrip in his hand, Cabal basicly does no damage. If it doesn't, it is a really expensive terminal Silver.
You need to buy a lot of Cabal and have insane amount of +Actions and some +Cards to make use of it, which I think would be discouraging to pursue even if it allows a pin.
My idea is maybe nerf Turncloak to 'not a cantrip', like +2 Cards or +$2, as they won't have enough Actions to make use of tons of Turncloak you give, they are basicly pseudo-junk. Or if they can make use of them, you wouldn't buy Cabal anyway.

[GendoIkari]

If it hits, Militia is still better, and if your victims has more Turncloak or just a single cantrip in his hand, Cabal basicly does no damage. If it doesn't, it is a really expensive terminal Silver.
You need to buy a lot of Cabal and have insane amount of +Actions and some +Cards to make use of it, which I think would be discouraging to pursue even if it allows a pin.
My idea is maybe nerf Turncloak to 'not a cantrip', like +2 Cards or +$2, as they won't have enough Actions to make use of tons of Turncloak you give, they are basicly pseudo-junk. Or if they can make use of them, you wouldn't buy Cabal anyway.

You're missing something here. If it hits you a single time, and then you play a cantrip, then sure you'll draw the Turncloak back, but you'll still have a 4-card hand. Eventually you will have played all your cards, and at that point whatever card is now on top of your deck, you would have had in your hand if you hadn't been attacked. So it definitely does damage.

Actually the damage it does is almost exactly the same as putting the -1 card token on your deck; which is very similar to discarding a card at random, which is very similar to Minion's attack.

[Co0kieL0rd]

Thanks for your feedback, guys

As GendoIkari pointed out, if Cabal connects with opponents' Turncoats it slows down their cycling which is like a mini Ghost Ship attack. Also it seems like you are forgetting about the fact that when you buy Cabal you immediately junk your opponents with a card they normally can't get rid of. It's a cantrip, sure, but it's still a harsh attack that can hardly be blocked at all. The price you pay, like with IGG, is that you have a mediocre card in your deck; a terminal Silver that only occasionally does damage to other players.

The number of Turncoats included in a game is a problem that I didn't think about, though. Limiting their number to like 20 would be imbalanced with regard to player number. So to have 50 Turncoats would make more sense if there were at least 3 cards using it. I could work on it

[eHalcyon]

Actually the damage it does is almost exactly the same as putting the -1 card token on your deck; which is very similar to discarding a card at random, which is very similar to Minion's attack.

I think it's too similar to the -1 card token to be worth having the big pile of junk cards.

[GendoIkari]

when you buy Cabal you immediately junk your opponents with a card they normally can't get rid of.

I don't think I agree with this. Except for when Cabal is played while you have Turncoat in hand, Cabal isn't junk at all. Excepting the possibility of having Cabal played, it's more likely to help than to hurt... it helps with Peddler, Conspirator, Horn of Plenty, Menagerie, Gardens, Fairgrounds, Trash-for-Benefit... the only ways it hurts are discard attacks, Wishing Well, and Mystic.

If this basic idea turns out to work, I think it would make more sense if the attack simply forced them to put a Turncoat on top of their deck. Instead of having them trash a Turncoat and having Turncoat go on your deck when trashed.

[eHalcyon]

when you buy Cabal you immediately junk your opponents with a card they normally can't get rid of.

I don't think I agree with this. Except for when Cabal is played while you have Turncoat in hand, Cabal isn't junk at all. Excepting the possibility of having Cabal played, it's more likely to help than to hurt... it helps with Peddler, Conspirator, Horn of Plenty, Menagerie, Gardens, Fairgrounds, Trash-for-Benefit... the only ways it hurts are discard attacks, Wishing Well, and Mystic.

If this basic idea turns out to work, I think it would make more sense if the attack simply forced them to put a Turncoat on top of their deck. Instead of having them trash a Turncoat and having Turncoat go on your deck when trashed.

It also hurts terminal draw, which is a pretty big category...

[GendoIkari]

when you buy Cabal you immediately junk your opponents with a card they normally can't get rid of.

I don't think I agree with this. Except for when Cabal is played while you have Turncoat in hand, Cabal isn't junk at all. Excepting the possibility of having Cabal played, it's more likely to help than to hurt... it helps with Peddler, Conspirator, Horn of Plenty, Menagerie, Gardens, Fairgrounds, Trash-for-Benefit... the only ways it hurts are discard attacks, Wishing Well, and Mystic.

If this basic idea turns out to work, I think it would make more sense if the attack simply forced them to put a Turncoat on top of their deck. Instead of having them trash a Turncoat and having Turncoat go on your deck when trashed.

It also hurts terminal draw, which is a pretty big category...

Oops; good point.

[Co0kieL0rd]

I hope we have established now that Turncoat is definitely a junk card. The idea behind it, thematically, is that there's this spy in your deck that tries to act as unsuspiciously as possible and not do any harm, so he's being a cantrip. However, he's not doing anything productive, either, and when you try to get rid of him, he just comes back next turn. This is the most crucial part of Turncoat; it may not be as bad as Curse as a playable card but you cannot trash it and it passively hurts many groups of card (draw, sifting, tfb because it gets topdecked and slows you down, ...).

Cabal is comparable to IGG as it puts a junk card into other players's decks when you buy it. The attack often won't hit and a terminal Silver for $5 is very bad so that's the price you pay for on-buy junking. The trash clause of Turncoat helps to ensure that Cabal will at least sometimes connect with Turncoats in opponents' hands.

The only problem that I can see now is that you would indeed need as many Turncoats as there are Curses. So it would make sense if there were at least two more cards interacting with Turncoat. It could even be a Supply card that is added when this type of card is in the Kingdom, like Ruins.

[Awaclus]

It's only a junk card because of Cabal's on-play attack, though. In a vacuum, a vanilla cantrip is beneficial (because it gives you more shuffle control than nothing).

[Co0kieL0rd]

It's only a junk card because of Cabal's on-play attack, though. In a vacuum, a vanilla cantrip is beneficial (because it gives you more shuffle control than nothing).

That would mean there's no question whether to get a Pearl Diver over nothing. But if you don't draw you deck, any additional card hurts. Having a Turncoat just has to be worse than nothing, barring edge cases like Conspirator.

[Awaclus]

That would mean there's no question whether to get a Pearl Diver over nothing. But if you don't draw you deck, any additional card hurts. Having a Turncoat just has to be worse than nothing, barring edge cases like Conspirator.

There is no question whether to get a Pearl Diver over nothing, unless there's a specific reason why you don't want it (for example, when you're playing terminal draw big money). In a kingdom with just Pearl Diver and nothing else, you always get a Pearl Diver for $2.

[GendoIkari]

It's only a junk card because of Cabal's on-play attack, though. In a vacuum, a vanilla cantrip is beneficial (because it gives you more shuffle control than nothing).

That would mean there's no question whether to get a Pearl Diver over nothing. But if you don't draw you deck, any additional card hurts. Having a Turncoat just has to be worse than nothing, barring edge cases like Conspirator.

As Awaclus is saying, this isn't correct... my previous post goes into all the details of why. Most of the time the card will neither hurt nor help, but there's more edge cases where it helps than cases where it hurts. And I didn't even think about shuffle control in my post.

[Co0kieL0rd]

Okay then I seem to have no idea. Maybe Turncoat should just be +1 Action or something.

EDIT: Or Cabal could basically do the same thing with Curses.

[GendoIkari]

Okay then I seem to have no idea. Maybe Turncoat should just be +1 Action or something.

EDIT: Or Cabal could basically do the same thing with Curses.

You could make it a Looter, and just have it give out Ruins. Though then the other attack could be too strong. So I don't think there's anything actually wrong with the cantrip... Just don't think of it as a junk card by itself. It's something that only is an attack when you play it while there's one in their hand.

[Asper]

At first i thought the general idea was very, very clever. A discard attack that works by junking? Craaaaazy! Then i realized that Curse does the same thing, simply by always being a dead card. Still, this is an insecure discard, and can't be trashed, and doesn't cost a VP, so it's interesting at least. I do think that having only one card trigger it isn't that much, though.

If i was Donald and looking for a online-only promo, i'd think about a Turncloak that gets trashed/topdecked whenever any attack card is played. Or any ard that reacts without you wanting it to react, actually.

[LibraryAdventurer]

hmmm...

Turncoat, $0*, Action - Reserve
+1 Card. +1 Action. Put this on your tavern mat.When any other player plays an attack card, this is called automatically to... <fill in the blank*>
When you trash this, put it on top of your deck.
(This is not in the Supply.)

*Maybe "Put this and a card from your hand on top of your deck"?  I guess this changes it more than I intented, but my point was that you can have something act as an automatic reaction from your tavern mat.

Is there a reason Cabal's 'junking' is on-buy instead of on-gain?

[Co0kieL0rd]

hmmm...

Turncoat, $0*, Action - Reserve
+1 Card. +1 Action. Put this on your tavern mat.When any other player plays an attack card, this is called automatically to... <fill in the blank*>
When you trash this, put it on top of your deck.
(This is not in the Supply.)

*Maybe "Put this and a card from your hand on top of your deck"?  I guess this changes it more than I intented, but my point was that you can have something act as an automatic reaction from your tavern mat.

Is there a reason Cabal's 'junking' is on-buy instead of on-gain?

This is an interesting idea! If Turncoat was a reserve card you could not play it as often and it would really suck for you. It could just say, "when another player plays an attack card, call this". No need for "automatically". But maybe making it intrashable would be too harsh then.

Cabal's on-buy might as well be on-gain. There's actually no reason why it's on-buy.

[Asper]

If it just returns to your deck's top on calling, it had to be worse than a cantrip. A cantrip is as good as neutral to your deck and if it isn't topdecked from your hand, it doesn't harm you at all (or rather, not more than it helps you).

I'd suggest making it a coinless Oasis, so you still have a reason to play it beyond getting rid of it (and making it able to return to your deck top), without there being a real advantage of the play.

Of course there are options where calling does something else.

[GendoIkari]

With that version, it's not clear what Cabal would actually do. It would need to have the attack type, in order to interact with Turncoat, but then what's the attack? The attack is built into having Turncoat be called; but that text is on Turncoat. So what's the text/effect of Cabal?

[Asper]

With that version, it's not clear what Cabal would actually do. It would need to have the attack type, in order to interact with Turncoat, but then what's the attack? The attack is built into having Turncoat be called; but that text is on Turncoat. So what's the text/effect of Cabal?

It could be "Each other player gains a Turncoat" instead of the on-gain. I see we run into a problem here: If there's only one card giving out Turncoats, what's the point in having it react to any attack? Why not just stick to the idea in the OP? Might not have been my most clever idea ever...


(Not) totally different idea:

Shore Village, Action - Duration, $3
+1 Card
+1 Action
At the start of your next turn, if no other player played an attack card: +2 Actions
----
While this is in play, if another player plays an attack card, discard this

Edit: Thinking about this, that idea for a duration card is probably very, very old.

[popsofctown]

You should make it trash all Turncoats.  No more brutal than Torturer.

[Co0kieL0rd]

With that version, it's not clear what Cabal would actually do. It would need to have the attack type, in order to interact with Turncoat, but then what's the attack? The attack is built into having Turncoat be called; but that text is on Turncoat. So what's the text/effect of Cabal?

If Turncoat was a Reserve, maybe it should just give +1 Action. Cabal would still put one (or all) Turncoats from opponent's hands onto their deck. This way, either Cabal triggers the effect on-play, or Turncoat triggers itself from the Tavern mat when attacked. I would also like to think about another attack that hands out Turncoats on-play instead of on-gain. But Turncoat needs to be a real junk card that is sufficiently different from Ruins and Curse for that to be worth it.