Print

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

[belugawhale]

I was thinking about how Alchemy is hated due to its potion mechanic, and I thought of this card.

Money Exchange
Action -

+1 Buy
You may trash a card from your hand. If you trashed a treasure, choose one: +, or +. Otherwise, if you trashed a card, gain a treasure costing up to or more than the trashed card.
__________
In games using this, you may pay . If you do, +. You may pay . If you do, +.

The main idea of this card was the ability to buy potion-cost cards at a cost of a hit to your economy, and also to provide a use for a dead potion. This card allows you to buy a one-use potion for , or treat a potion as a silver (similar to mine/potion, but with more like an event). Its on-play effects are a variable but weaker moneylender, or a slightly stronger remodel with a higher opportunity cost.

Feedback is welcome.

[ChocophileBenj]

The card itself has a rather simple effect.

However, I'm pessimistic about Alchemy, you can't bring up a whole new mechanic to Potions like this... especially the one you suggested that will make Potion strictly better than Silver for an extra $1.

[Holger]

The card itself has a rather simple effect.

However, I'm pessimistic about Alchemy, you can't bring up a whole new mechanic to Potions like this... especially the one you suggested that will make Potion strictly better than Silver for an extra $1.

Yes, that would make Alchemy cards far too strong. And the "$3->P" transformation allows potion-cost cards to be bought on T1/2 (and without the opportunity cost of buying Potion first), which is almost as bad.

What might work is "You may pay P. If you do, +$1." (i.e. allowing Potions to be used as Coppers), which was suggested some time ago on BGG - this should reduce the potion-related variance without making Alchemy cards far too strong, at least when playing with only 1-2 Alchemy cards.