Print

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

[Seprix]

These topics are Mine. Mine own. Mine precious. Not Jack Rudd's. Mine.

-Mine into Platinum is underappreciated, but is Mine into Relic/Treasure Trove strong and worth considering?
-Any use in an engine?
-Any weird reason to pick this card up?

[Roadrunner7671]

I've misclicked so many times with Golds and Platinums in play.

I think this card's on play ability is underrated, keep in mind it was released with Prosperity, so back then, you could gain tons of Royal Seals and stuff.

[Seprix]

I've misclicked so many times with Golds and Platinums in play.

I think this card's on play ability is underrated, keep in mind it was released with Prosperity, so back then, you could gain tons of Royal Seals and stuff.

Yeah. Royal Seal. What a great card. 

[Beyond Awesome]

I can't recall the last time I bought this card. Bottom tier for sure. Not much else to say.

[jsh357]

It's got a decent effect when there are alternate treasures around (and sometimes even just for Gold) but it's very difficult to work in to a deck in a way that isn't terrible.

[SirSlugma]

Sometimes it's your best source of quickly trashing coppers.  And if there's Platinums or Banks or something else fun around, having an extra one is nice.

[LastFootnote]

-Mine into Platinum is underappreciated, but is Mine into Relic/Treasure Trove strong and worth considering?

I wouldn't call it strong, but of course it's worth considering. It's highly tactical, and by that I mean the decision is dependent both on your current hand and what you want in your deck.

-Any use in an engine?

I think it's main use is in engines. It increases your buying power over time without adding more Treasures to your deck. If Copper trashing is otherwise unavailable or impractical, Mine can be great. Or even, dare I say it, in situations where your deck has a moderately large influx of Silver that you'd like to upgrade to Gold.

-Any weird reason to pick this card up?

One big "weird" reason is in conjunction with Remodel, or any other card that can turn Golds into Provinces.

[ConMan]

I've misclicked so many times with Golds and Platinums in play.

I think this card's on play ability is underrated, keep in mind it was released with Prosperity, so back then, you could gain tons of Royal Seals and stuff.

I don't know whether to be satisfied or disappointed with this.

[werothegreat]

Mine is one of the key components of the First Game engine.

[mameluke]

It's quite good when there are Gold gainers (like Tunnel, Soothsayer, Market Square) on Platinum boards.

[ConMan]

Anyway, Mine. Definitely works best if you can get it paired with better Treasures faster. If you're planning on using it as your Copper trasher, then good luck. Can be pretty nice with King's Court on a Platinum board, but otherwise you really want to match Mine with Silver fairly early on, and if there are Platinums to be had then you want to get Mine and Gold together not long after.

It can be pretty neat in the presence of other Treasures, too. I'd be interested in seeing how it performs with Treasure Trove in a mostly BM situation, and I'd give it serious consideration if Relic is around. Potion is another good one - as the article on the wiki points out, being able to swap other Treasures into and out of Potion can be super on an Alchemist board. Loan is actually kind of neat, since combining the two actually does make for a half-decent Copper trashing method, which you can then turn into Gold as necessary. And don't forget Silver -> Harem as a means of getting some last minute points.

[ConMan]

It's quite good when there are Gold gainers (like Tunnel, Soothsayer, Market Square) on Platinum boards.

Good point. Mine + Market Square is pretty good, and can be great when there's Platinum in the mix.

EDIT: Also, how many people playing with Mine IRL forgot about the gain-to-hand part at some point?

[Chris is me]

Anywhere where Treasure is a big part of your payload, there is no Copper trashing, and good engine potential with plenty of time to cycle, Mine is valuable, and in fact a good card. The First Game engine is the most obvious example.

Obviously this scenario is somewhat contrived. Oftentimes, it's faster to trash the Coppers and buy the Golds directly. Oftentimes, your payload isn't Treasure. Oftentimes, BM is faster than an engine using Mine to upgrade.

Any Kingdom treasure makes Mine instantly better, though not always good. Especially treasures you want sometimes, and on specific turns, but not the entire game (Potion, Loan, Contraband).

[amoffett11]

You need to be careful opening this with a 5/2 opening, ya you trash 5 of your coppers  but now what are you going to buy even a silver with?  Now with Fool's Gold on the board, it's a whole different story.  Open this/Fool's Gold, and you're off to the races. 

[GendoIkari]

I especially like buying it with 5 coppers to trash them all.

[2.71828.....]

I mean, that is clearly mintmine's greatest utility.

[GendoIkari]

I mean, that is clearly mintmine's greatest utility.

Well, that and the fact that its name lends itself to both puns about the possessive pronoun, AND about its similarity to the other card, Mint.

[Marcory]

I mean, that is clearly mintmine's greatest utility.

Well, that and the fact that its name lends itself to both puns about the possessive pronoun, AND about its similarity to the other card, Mint.

And these kinds of jokes are some of the oldest and most popular on this forum, which makes them get funnier with each repetition. And since the hilarity of a joke increases exponentially as it is explained (and since making jokes funnier by explaning them is another feature of this forum), this post is one of the most amusing ever on f.ds.

[Awaclus]

I mean, that is clearly mintmine's greatest utility.

Well, that and the fact that its name lends itself to both puns about the possessive pronoun, AND about its similarity to the other card, Mint.

Combined with the fact that Mint's name also lends itself to puns about the plant.

[Max]

From the new set, only guide and story teller jump out as new enablers. Guide is certainly good for cycling, and mine and storyteller seem made for each other. Storytelling gets better with better treasures, mine gets better with better cycling.

I think CoTR isn't an enabler, but certainly a temptress. I can't see it being valid often though, In engine boards where there's no readily available +1 buy, this could help win the village split, but engines need +1 buy though - so perhaps boards where buy comes the form of travelling fair, a city, or from a teacher.

[Awaclus]

QFT

[Davio]

This card could cost $4 I think and it wouldn't make much of a difference.

[McGarnacle]

The picture just shows how worthless it is. Three miners in the whole mine (which is small, you can see the beginning of it) and only one of them is actually mining. The other two are pushing a cart. Seriously, one of those guys is going to get his feet run over.

[Minotaur]

Is Mine still regarded as almost always ignorable in 2018?  And if so, should it have been updated in 2nd Edition?

If "+$1" were added to Mine, would it make a difference?  Would it be OP as a cantrip?  Would it be strong if it had "+1 Action"?  What if it gave +$2 (and would it then have to cost $6 or $7)?

For example, imagine if it had +1 Action and you had it on the same board as Bureaucrat.  Probably not necessarily a top-tier combo, but without +1 Action tacked on, trying to combo Mine with Bureaucrat and enough Villages is completely unreliable and not worth taking on the failure rate.

[Seprix]

Is Mine still regarded as almost always ignorable in 2018?  And if so, should it have been updated in 2nd Edition?

Mine is really nice with Platinums and boards where there's no Copper trashing but everything else and reason to build up

[Awaclus]

Is Mine still regarded as almost always ignorable in 2018?  And if so, should it have been updated in 2nd Edition?

Mine is really nice not entirely useless with Platinums and boards where there's no Copper trashing but everything else and reason to build up

FTFY

[William Howard Taft]

If there's no other trashing and Throne Room is on the board I might pick one up. Turning two Coppers into two Silvers is nice, or turning one Copper into a Gold.

Turning Silvers into Idols is pretty nifty too. Or at least it was in the Recommended Kingdom I played it in when I first picked up Nocturne.

[crj]

Looking at recent expansions, it feels like Crown, Rocks and Heirlooms might interact interestingly with Mine.

Probably not earth-shatteringly, just interestingly.

[Holunder9]

Although Mine at $4 is arguably a little bit better than Taxman it should nonetheless have been changed to cost $4 for the second edition.

[crj]

I'm guessing it got playtested at $4, many moons ago?

[LastFootnote]

I'm guessing it got playtested at $4, many moons ago?

I doubt it.

[crj]

I doubt it.

Really? Gosh. I thought Donald X. established the principle of letting every card be as cheap as possible very early in development and basically everything got tried at a lower cost at least once.

[Minotaur]

I kind of like +1 Action instead of having it cost $4.  Considering everything else you could get for $5, would that be all that strong?  Probably not?  It would make Explorer look pretty bad, I guess.

[Seprix]

I kind of like +1 Action instead of having it cost $4.  Considering everything else you could get for $5, would that be all that strong?  Probably not?  It would make Explorer look pretty bad, I guess.

Explorer is still way better in Donate Money

[LastFootnote]

It would be weird for some Dominion sets to have a Mine that cost $4 and one that had one costing $5. And so they'd have to be two different(ly named) cards. And one card cannot be strictly better than another card, even when one is in a previous edition. I think that really sucks (Woodcutter's Ghost still hangs over us; can't make Woodcutter-with-a-bonus for $3), but that's the way it was decided. So, a $4 Mine or a Mine with +1 Action was just never going to happen in the official second edition.

[Holunder9]

It would be weird for some Dominion sets to have a Mine that cost $4 and one that had one costing $5. And so they'd have to be two different(ly named) cards. And one card cannot be strictly better than another card, even when one is in a previous edition. I think that really sucks (Woodcutter's Ghost still hangs over us; can't make Woodcutter-with-a-bonus for $3), but that's the way it was decided. So, a $4 Mine or a Mine with +1 Action was just never going to happen in the official second edition.

I think that changing Woodcutter or Village, cards who are the basis for a whole family of cards, is indeed not feasible. But a fairly unique card like Mine can be changed (OK, Taxman is similar so a second version of Mine would have to be tested alongside Taxman) in principle.
But then again it depends on whether you want to market Dominion more as a family game where this is dubious (then again, casual gamers don't buy a second version of a game they already have so they wouldn't notice changes anyway) or as a player's game where this is normal. Happens all the time with LCGs and some other deckbuilders also update cards whose evaluation has changed with a new printing or a new epansion.

But it is a matter of design philosophy and it also has its advantages; instead of simply a buffed Scout we now got a totally new card.

[Donald X.]

I doubt it.

Really? Gosh. I thought Donald X. established the principle of letting every card be as cheap as possible very early in development and basically everything got tried at a lower cost at least once.

Another early principle was to not change cards that were working fine. For early cards in general, I simply didn't try alternate versions; the card had to be clearly weak or strong or bad in whatever way for me to change it. We bought Mine; it was always $5. The one thing that changed about it was phrasing it as "costing up to $3 more" rather than "Copper for Silver or Silver for Gold," so as to include expansion Treasures.

Another early principle was to not be so clear as to how good cards were. Mine seemed better then.

There were enough cards to want to replace in the main set that I didn't get to Mine. And it certainly does fine work for new players.

[Commodore Chuckles]

I doubt it.

Really? Gosh. I thought Donald X. established the principle of letting every card be as cheap as possible very early in development and basically everything got tried at a lower cost at least once.

I think that principle was developed a few expansions in. I seem to recall him saying that Adventurer was $6 because it started at that price and people were willing to buy it.

[Minotaur]

I'm not sure I agree with leaving it alone, but I do appreciate the problems with updating, and I can see where other cases were clearly more urgent.  If it were a fully digital game where you could just patch everything, maybe I would be more against leaving it where it is now.

Still, it's niche-at-best and needs Platinum or a cool alternate treasure gimmick to justify it, or a complete lack of trashing and sifting alternatives at the very least.

It's sort of a n00b trap, but it's not quite bad enough to actually be a legitimate n00b trap in the sense of Scout+Action-VP decks.

I have pretty mixed feelings about Mine, and it's sad, because I always wanted to like Mine.

[Honkeyfresh]

Mine can be good in games where you get benefit for trashing like Tomb & now Priest, At least make it worth buying, because other than colonies and tomb games I really rarely get mine's unless there are actions and draw galore.

Oh it can also be good in wall by recycling rather than amassing treasure.  I used it in one bandit fort game to build up to golds and then mine them back to coppers at the end.

[grrgrrgrr]

Mine/chapel is a farily OK opening actually. It allows for some super aggresive thinning, while generating a decent amount of gold rather quickly. Not amazing by any means, as they can collide.

[Honkeyfresh]

The picture just shows how worthless it is. Three miners in the whole mine (which is small, you can see the beginning of it) and only one of them is actually mining. The other two are pushing a cart. Seriously, one of those guys is going to get his feet run over.

Golf Clap...

[NoMoreFun]

It would be weird for some Dominion sets to have a Mine that cost $4 and one that had one costing $5. And so they'd have to be two different(ly named) cards. And one card cannot be strictly better than another card, even when one is in a previous edition. I think that really sucks (Woodcutter's Ghost still hangs over us; can't make Woodcutter-with-a-bonus for $3), but that's the way it was decided. So, a $4 Mine or a Mine with +1 Action was just never going to happen in the official second edition.

You could design a card that's better than Mine but interacts with it in an interesting way so Mine is still relevant in Kingdoms with both Mine and the new card.

Or you could do a card that is overwhelmingly better than Mine and costs $6 (similar to Chancellor -> Scavenger) or a card that's better but overspecified (Thief -> Noble brigand). Or do it as a treasure which leaves Mine available for Action combos (Candlestick Maker -> Ducat)

[Honkeyfresh]

I think giving mine +1 action would be a better way of making it a decent albeit not great card.  As is it really kind of sucks.

[exek]

i like this card even though its a bit hard to unerstand what it does because it makes your treasury card better FOREVER. One of my Favorite cards in game..

[Jack Rudd]

i like this card even though its a bit hard to unerstand what it does because it makes your treasury card better FOREVER. One of my Favorite cards in game..

Minor nit: treasure, not treasury. (Treasury is a different card, and it is not a treasure.)

Yes, it makes your treasure cards better, but... very, very slowly. It suffers from the same problem a lot of treasure-based cards have: in order for it to be useful, you need treasure cards in your deck, but having treasure cards in your deck makes it harder to actually draw the Mine.

[DG]

In terms of raw income in a basic deck, you are looking to play the mine and its associated treasures 4 times to have generated more income than a silver (bought instead of a mine). This is too slow for a basic deck. The mine is useful if you want to add income to a deck without adding many extra cards or using any more buys. The mine can also have a more subtle purpose, such as changing 0 cost cards into 3 cost cards.

[werothegreat]

I like Mine.

I think giving mine +1 action would be a better way of making it a decent albeit not great card.  As is it really kind of sucks.

We already went down that rabbit hole with Rebuild let's not do that kind of shit willy nilly again

[Holger]

It would be weird for some Dominion sets to have a Mine that cost $4 and one that had one costing $5. And so they'd have to be two different(ly named) cards. And one card cannot be strictly better than another card, even when one is in a previous edition. I think that really sucks (Woodcutter's Ghost still hangs over us; can't make Woodcutter-with-a-bonus for $3), but that's the way it was decided. So, a $4 Mine or a Mine with +1 Action was just never going to happen in the official second edition.

Why couldn't a second edition card be strictly better than a replaced one? They're not supposed to be used together in one game, so there's no argument that the worse card would be useless in a game with both.

And you could always call the new card "New Mine" or something like that to avoid confusion...

[Holger]

I doubt it.

Really? Gosh. I thought Donald X. established the principle of letting every card be as cheap as possible very early in development and basically everything got tried at a lower cost at least once.

I think half of the first edition base set's actions could have been cheaper without making them overpowered. All of the replaced cards, Mine, Bureaucrat, Workshop, ...
I think LFN argued in an older thread that Adventurer would still not be strong if it cost $2...

[hhelibebcnofnena]

They're not supposed to be used together in one game, so there's no argument that the worse card would be useless in a game with both.

There's no rule preventing you from continuing to use the 1E cards. They don't exist online anymore, but I (and I'm sure I'm not alone on this) still own the physical copies, and use them sometimes (except Saboteur, which I don't use for other reasons).

[LastFootnote]

I like Mine.

I think giving mine +1 action would be a better way of making it a decent albeit not great card.  As is it really kind of sucks.

We already went down that rabbit hole with Rebuild let's not do that kind of shit willy nilly again

I respectfully disagree. The problem with Rebuild is that it allows you to effectively skip building your deck up. Once you can get to $5, you're good. Pageant once let you convert any number of $ into Coffers, and it had a similar issue. After getting a Silver or two, it was faster to just save your $ every turn and buy only Provinces.

I feel pretty safe in saying that non-terminal Mine wouldn't have this issue. I mean the entire function of Mine is to build up your deck. And to be clear, by "build up your deck", I mean build up what it can do. Rebuild doesn't build up what your deck can do.

[Donald X.]

Why couldn't a second edition card be strictly better than a replaced one? They're not supposed to be used together in one game, so there's no argument that the worse card would be useless in a game with both.

Absolutely the only problem with strictly better cards is that some people hate them - hate that they exist. I don't want to generate that hate and don't need to.

I don't know how much those people would have hated e.g. an Adventurer replacement that's strictly better than Adventurer, given that the card was officially being retired. There was no need to risk it and I didn't.

[Holger]

They're not supposed to be used together in one game, so there's no argument that the worse card would be useless in a game with both.

There's no rule preventing you from continuing to use the 1E cards. They don't exist online anymore, but I (and I'm sure I'm not alone on this) still own the physical copies, and use them sometimes (except Saboteur, which I don't use for other reasons).

Of course you can continue using them (I also do for some of then, as I don't own the 2E cards), but they're not meant to be used TOGETHER with the replacement cards, and it would be absurd to complain about a replacement being better than the original, since that's the whole point of replacing those duds.
(Whether you replace them with new cards that are almost always better or with strictly better/cheaper versions of the originals is more a matter of taste for me - personally, I'd prefer "fixing  " the duds over scrapping them altogether...)

[Seprix]

I like Mine.

I think giving mine +1 action would be a better way of making it a decent albeit not great card.  As is it really kind of sucks.

We already went down that rabbit hole with Rebuild let's not do that kind of shit willy nilly again

No +Action would make Rebuild completely unplayable.

...why am I defending rebuild again...?

[Awaclus]

No +Action would make Rebuild completely unplayable.

Well, Rebuild isn't super strong as it is.

[hhelibebcnofnena]

They're not supposed to be used together in one game, so there's no argument that the worse card would be useless in a game with both.

There's no rule preventing you from continuing to use the 1E cards. They don't exist online anymore, but I (and I'm sure I'm not alone on this) still own the physical copies, and use them sometimes (except Saboteur, which I don't use for other reasons).

Of course you can continue using them (I also do for some of then, as I don't own the 2E cards), but they're not meant to be used TOGETHER with the replacement cards, and it would be absurd to complain about a replacement being better than the original, since that's the whole point of replacing those duds.
(Whether you replace them with new cards that are almost always better or with strictly better/cheaper versions of the originals is more a matter of taste for me - personally, I'd prefer "fixing  " the duds over scrapping them altogether...)

I personally wouldn't complain about a replacement being strictly better than the original, and in that case I probably would stop using the original and switch to the replacement. Mill/Great Hall doesn't count because Great Hall costs less, so I still use Great Hall. But, my point is that because I still use the original cards, and might even use them in the same game as the replacements, and it is generally a good assumption that people exist who are more extreme than me, that means that there are probably people who would complain a lot.

[werothegreat]

I like Mine.

I think giving mine +1 action would be a better way of making it a decent albeit not great card.  As is it really kind of sucks.

We already went down that rabbit hole with Rebuild let's not do that kind of shit willy nilly again

No +Action would make Rebuild completely unplayable.

...why am I defending rebuild again...?

Hard disagree.  I've played many games where I go Rebuild/BM, and maybe once if at all each game do I play multiple Rebuilds in a turn.

[Holger]

I like Mine.

I think giving mine +1 action would be a better way of making it a decent albeit not great card.  As is it really kind of sucks.

We already went down that rabbit hole with Rebuild let's not do that kind of shit willy nilly again

No +Action would make Rebuild completely unplayable.

...why am I defending rebuild again...?

Hard disagree.  I've played many games where I go Rebuild/BM, and maybe once if at all each game do I play multiple Rebuilds in a turn.

That once (or twice...) per game matters, together with the ability to add terminal support cards. Rebuild without +1 Action is hardly better than Smithy-BM, as I simulated years ago:

TerminalRebuild loses to the strongest BM cards: Wharf, Goons, GhostShip, DoubleJack, all Cursers.

It essentially ties with Monument (51:49), Envoy (48.5:51.5), Smithy (52:48) and Courtyard (50:50), and wins against all other implemented one-card strategies (Militia, Masq., HP, Amb., Library, ...).

So BM-TerminalRebuild is about as strong as standard Smithy-BM, i.e. far from overpowered, but occasionally useful on BM boards.

[JW]

Hard disagree.  I've played many games where I go Rebuild/BM, and maybe once if at all each game do I play multiple Rebuilds in a turn.

In non-mirror situations with Rebuild, you want to buy more Rebuilds than in mirrors. Rebuild would be weaker against engines if you never buy more than, say, 2 Rebuilds. In Wandering Winder's great Rebuild video series, I recall that he almost always buys at least three Rebuilds.

First video here:

[popsofctown]

I think what might be counterintuitive about this is how different a terminal collision in a Rebuild deck is than in an engine deck, and since these days we spend 90% of the time playing engines that's the kind of 5$ + 5$ collision you're gonna be thinking about.  Colliding 2 5$ terminals is really bad in any deck.  But like.  In a Village-Journeyman deck or what have you, if you collide your Journeyman, you have something that should have been a 5$ turn and messes up and becomes a 3$ turn.  So you buy Village when you would have rather bought Journeyman.  It's bad.  But it's a deck where you are trying to get pair Villages and Journeymans with eachother, that's the game, and a Village is still helpful.  Say you have 4 Villages and 2 Journeyman at this point.  It'd definitely be better to get a Journeyman.  But having 5 villages instead of 4 still increases the chance you draw a village and a journeyman together, even if it doesn't do so quite as effectively as an additional Journeyman would. 
Like in actuality you often have this happen with 4 journeyman 1 village because you've seen this movie before and you know how this works.  You collide your journeymans, can only buy a village, and it's kind of a blessing in disguise.
The consequence of colliding terminals in a terminal rebuild deck is totally different.  Do not pass go do not collect 200$.  The effect is 100% of the time "take 3 VP chips and throw them into the motherRatsing Garbage".  It's always -3 VP, every time.  It is always, Witch yourself 3 times, minues the actual clogging amount.   But still.  This is brutal.  This is so much more brutal than "I'd rather play a rigged poker deck with 6 Queens and 4 Jacks instead of a rigged poker deck with 5 Queens and 5 Jacks", which is what the engine scenario was like.  This is like your wife passes buy the table and picks up half your chips and heads to the cocktail bar to buy drinks with them.  So it makes lots of sense that it would fall off very rapidly.

[NoMoreFun]

Probably the best approach would be a significantly better card at a slightly higher cost (eg Chancellor -> Scavenger).

Cantrip Mine for $6?

[LastFootnote]

Probably the best approach would be a significantly better card at a slightly higher cost (eg Chancellor -> Scavenger).

Cantrip Mine for $6?

I believe one Empires outtake was "You may trash a Treasure from your hand, to gain a Treasure to your hand." That was pretty fun. I think it cost 8 Debt which didn't work out (you always wanted it immediately), but it could maybe cost $6 or $7 and be fine.

[Holger]

Probably the best approach would be a significantly better card at a slightly higher cost (eg Chancellor -> Scavenger).

Cantrip Mine for $6?

I believe one Empires outtake was "You may trash a Treasure from your hand, to gain a Treasure to your hand." That was pretty fun. I think it cost 8 Debt which didn't work out (you always wanted it immediately), but it could maybe cost $6 or $7 and be fine.

That sounds nice, though it may be overpowered in Platinum games...

[LastFootnote]

Probably the best approach would be a significantly better card at a slightly higher cost (eg Chancellor -> Scavenger).

Cantrip Mine for $6?

I believe one Empires outtake was "You may trash a Treasure from your hand, to gain a Treasure to your hand." That was pretty fun. I think it cost 8 Debt which didn't work out (you always wanted it immediately), but it could maybe cost $6 or $7 and be fine.

That sounds nice, though it may be overpowered in Platinum games...

I think the original version was actually "Mine 3 times", which could turn Copper into Platinum, but without Platinum it could e.g. turn two Coppers into a Silver and a Gold. I want to say changing it to "Trash a Treasure from your hand to gain a Treasure to your hand" was my idea, but I could be wrong and anyway it didn't survive.

[mxdata]

I like Mine.

I think giving mine +1 action would be a better way of making it a decent albeit not great card.  As is it really kind of sucks.

We already went down that rabbit hole with Rebuild let's not do that kind of shit willy nilly again

I respectfully disagree. The problem with Rebuild is that it allows you to effectively skip building your deck up. Once you can get to $5, you're good. Pageant once let you convert any number of $ into Coffers, and it had a similar issue. After getting a Silver or two, it was faster to just save your $ every turn and buy only Provinces.

I feel pretty safe in saying that non-terminal Mine wouldn't have this issue. I mean the entire function of Mine is to build up your deck. And to be clear, by "build up your deck", I mean build up what it can do. Rebuild doesn't build up what your deck can do.

Also, the digging capability of Rebuild is a big part of what makes it so overpowered.  If Rebuild was more like Mine, and could only work on cards you have in hand, it would be a lot less powerful, since it would be useless if you drew it without any victory cards.  Of course, it would still be very powerful on boards that enable strong engines - if you're reliably able to draw most or all of your deck, then you're still going to be able to use it a lot.  So, it seems to me that this hypothetical card would be a much more situational one that, on a lot of boards, would be useful but not over-powered

[Joshua]

Sometimes it's your best source of quickly trashing coppers.  And if there's Platinums or Banks or something else fun around, having an extra one is nice.

You just described the uses of mine perfectly