Print

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

[Jack Rudd]

It's the eponymous card of the expansion!

How does this card's self-topdecking ability compare with those of Treasury and Walled Village?
How well does it play with other Alchemy cards?
What, other than Goons, is it particularly awesome with?

[Roadrunner7671]

Let's Dicuss has turned into spam honestly.

There's no more discussion to be found here! Go die with the brackets!

[werothegreat]

I think the topdeck is somewhere between Treasury and Walled Village.  If you win the Alchemist split, it's pretty easy to get that Potion back in your hand.  You can also throw in a Herbalist if that's in the kingdom.

I think the more interesting question is: is this a better draw card than Scrying Pool?

[Infthitbox]

What, other than Goons, is it particularly awesome with?

I remember in my first ever league match, which I streamed, I played a game with Alchemist. I played (I thought) pretty well, and ended up winning the game. After the match, when I reviewed the chat in my video, they were all disgusted that both of us missed the topdeck interaction with Outpost.

3 card hands don't seem so bad when you start with a stack of Alchemists.

[Seprix]

Let's Discuss has turned into spam honestly.

There's no more discussion to be found here! Go did with the brackets!

You'd stop complaining if Scout got covered.

That being said, I thought we were taking a break with this.

I think the more interesting question is: is this a better draw card than Scrying Pool?

If there's no 'engine' payload, Alchemist is better. There was a game I played where I got all the Scrying Pools, and my opponent got all the Alchemists. He wiped the floor with me. I'd say more often than not, Scrying Pool is just insanely better, but Alchemist is strong.

Alchemist draw is so crucial in some Kingdoms, that it is be prudent to pick up a second Potion, just to get a more reliable draw.

[Roadrunner7671]

Let's Discuss has turned into spam honestly.

There's no more discussion to be found here! Go did with the brackets!

You'd stop complaining if Scout got covered

There would be so many trolls though.

[Chris is me]

Let's Dicuss has turned into spam honestly.

There's no more discussion to be found here! Go die with the brackets!

The brackets are worse!

Anyhow, somebody tell me when it's the right move to trash the Potion when chaining Alchemist. Is always top decking the Alchemists always worth the dead card, or do you sometimes want to be rid of it?

[LastFootnote]

Lately I keep trashing my Potion, forgetting I need it to topdeck Alchemists.

[Seprix]

Let's Dicuss has turned into spam honestly.

There's no more discussion to be found here! Go die with the brackets!

The brackets are worse!

Anyhow, somebody tell me when it's the right move to trash the Potion when chaining Alchemist. Is always top decking the Alchemists always worth the dead card, or do you sometimes want to be rid of it?

You don't want consistent drawing? It's completely worth the extra dead card. It's worth TWO Potions at least, and top players pick up 2 Potions in order to more consistently get that draw. In some cases, you'll want the Potion for a last turn Remodel into a Duchy or something anyways.

[werothegreat]

This is just all making me think of all the non-intuitive interactions with Potion arising from the fact that it's a Treasure.  You can discard it to Stables and Plaza, it protects you from Noble Brigand, and you can gain it with Hero.  Have any of you ever gained a Potion with Hero?

[Seprix]

This is just all making me think of all the non-intuitive interactions with Potion arising from the fact that it's a Treasure.  You can discard it to Stables and Plaza, it protects you from Noble Brigand, and you can gain it with Hero.  Have any of you ever gained a Potion with Hero?

I'll be able to gain a Potion with Hero WHEN FREAKING MAKING FUN RELEASES THE ADVENTURES EXPANSION.

[schadd]

Let's Dicuss has turned into spam honestly.

There's no more discussion to be found here! Go die with the brackets!

The brackets are worse!

Anyhow, somebody tell me when it's the right move to trash the Potion when chaining Alchemist. Is always top decking the Alchemists always worth the dead card, or do you sometimes want to be rid of it?

well think of it this way: don't trash the potion you stupid baby. maybe unless you can remake it into literally three laboratories and a swindler.


i mean, alchemist is a pretty good card and it costs more than lab; when the potion is gone it becomes a lab which is a worse card.
having the potion lets you play your alchemists more often and you draw more cards thusly, and deleting potion is an attempt at drawing more (good) cards but it just does that worse. and if you are confident that you will draw the potion each turn after playing your alchemists then why give up drawing all of your cards always? sounds to me like a good deal.

[Titandrake]

This is just all making me think of all the non-intuitive interactions with Potion arising from the fact that it's a Treasure.  You can discard it to Stables and Plaza, it protects you from Noble Brigand, and you can gain it with Hero.  Have any of you ever gained a Potion with Hero?

Back in the days of Iso, I once Mined Gold into Potion because I didn't draw my Potion despite all my Alchemists. I forget if I Mined it back into Gold when I needed the money again, but having the option is cool.

Now I wonder if anyone has gotten +Actions, Taxman-ed Potion into Potion to try to discard the opponent's Potion, then played Alchemist to draw the topdecked Potion. Probably not, because there are so many better things you could be doing if Alchemist and +Actions are in the kingdom.

[J Reggie]

I feel like I'm very bad at playing Alchemist, and knowing when to go for it. I've been beaten by opponents who went for it when there didn't seem to be a good payload and I've been beaten going for it when I saw what I thought was good payload. What makes you want to go for alchemist and what makes you want to ignore it?

[SirSlugma]

I think the general thing with Alchemist is it's slow to get the Potion and then accumulate a big stack of Alchemists, so whatever you're building toward had better be worth it.  Otherwise, you're down 5-0 in Provinces with a deck that can reliably single-Province every turn.  Whoops.

At first, we bought the hell out of Alchemists.  It's a Lab that you can topdeck every turn!  Holy crap, let's buy all of these!  But then I learned about opportunity cost and suddenly a lot of other things seemed better.  I still think they're pretty powerful, but there are plenty of boards with other draw or where going out of your way for the Potion is too much trouble for them to be worth it.

Alchemy is a wonderful set, btw.  I know this board is the last place where people are going to be crapping on the "black sheep" Dominion set, but man, there are three of my all-time super-favorite cards here; I genuinely look forward to their discussion topics here. (If we haven't gotten bored by then.)
Potions provide an intriguing extra decision point to the buy process, and I'm still quite impressed that (Transmute aside), Potion cards can all hold their own when they're the only thing Potion-related on the board.

[Beyond Awesome]

Let's Dicuss has turned into spam honestly.

There's no more discussion to be found here! Go die with the brackets!

We really need a subforum for these Let's Discuss topics.

[traces Around]

I feel like I'm very bad at playing Alchemist, and knowing when to go for it. I've been beaten by opponents who went for it when there didn't seem to be a good payload and I've been beaten going for it when I saw what I thought was good payload. What makes you want to go for alchemist and what makes you want to ignore it?

It would seem counter-intuitive, but I think the uncontested alchemist stack actually shines most when the payload is very weak (think, say, woodcutter or militia, herbalist and margrave are better respectively). In that case, a big engine will be extremely slow to get running, and so the alchemist stack with some big treasures would actually outpace it, whereas the money will either be slowed down enough by the attack or get out-powered by the +buy.

Thing is, +2 cards is draw, but not a lot. An alchemist stack also usually requires a little bit of trashing or good filter, so that is something to watch for. Even trade route gets enough of a job done.
With fast junking alchemist tends to not be worth it if you cannot clean up afterwards for the same reason as the above point.

Also sometimes there is a nice village/payload but it needs draw. +2 cards is draw. Even more convenient when it is non-terminal and always present. Of course same requirements apply as to the stack.

Ignoring is when you can get a village/draw engine up faster (gainers or really strong payload) than the alchemists and with consistency (heavy trashing). But +2 cards is also draw. Even more convenient when it is non-terminal and always present.

[eHalcyon]

I think the more interesting question is: is this a better draw card than Scrying Pool?

If there's no 'engine' payload, Alchemist is better. There was a game I played where I got all the Scrying Pools, and my opponent got all the Alchemists. He wiped the floor with me. I'd say more often than not, Scrying Pool is just insanely better, but Alchemist is strong.

Alchemist draw is so crucial in some Kingdoms, that it is be prudent to pick up a second Potion, just to get a more reliable draw.

I guess a log could clear things up and you might be exaggerating, but it sounds like a slow game if you actually bought out all the SPs and your opponent got all the Alchemists.  On the SP side, I feel like there are diminishing returns there unless you're also doing something like Secret Chambers to discard and then re-draw.  You shouldn't need so many SPs to draw your deck...

As for which is better, I think it's more about action density than payload, since you want that payload either way.  SP has much higher draw potential, obviously.  But even without super high action density, SP can almost match Alchemist's +2 cards since SP includes the Spy-effect.  If you discard junk, you pretty much drew 2 cards there.  And if you reveal an action card, you're drawing at least 2 cards there as well.  So as far as draw goes, I'd say SP is about on par with Alchemist even in a weak use case, and that's without considering its attack.

What Alchemist has over Scrying Pool is slightly higher consistency, but that's dependent on drawing a Potion.  I think I'd rather go with the SP unless I'm really dependent on Treasures for economy.

[AdrianHealey]

I like these, but I second the subforum
Request.

I don't like alchemist. I find it boring design and unfun to play with or against.

[Accatitippi]

I love Alchemist.
It's one of Alchemy's cards that make sense with a Potion cost!
Decks that always draw themselves are fun, but the most interesting case is when you have Alchemists in a nonthinned deck, since you'll be looking for weird ways to find your Potions. (Sifting, Develop, Mine, double Potion...)

I find that Alchemist is worthwile if you have +Buy/gaining letting you improve your deck besides buying an Alchemist per turn. The 3P cost is a bit steep, but you wanted the Potion in hand every turn anyway.

[Davio]

Alchemist + Herbalist is a fun combo.
Herbalist is also in Alchemy.

[luser]

I love Alchemist.
It's one of Alchemy's card that make sense with a Potion cost!
Decks that always draw themselves are fun, but the most interesting case is when you have Alchemists in a nonthinned deck, since you'll be looking for weird ways to find your Potions. (Sifting, Develop, Mine, double Potion...)

I find that Alchemist is worthwile if you have +Buy/gaining letting you improve your deck besides buying an Alchemist per turn. The 3P cost is a bit steep, but you wanted the Potion in hand every turn anyway.

Yes, alchemist deck without second potion and equivalent are usually terrible, you usually need it on second 4 opportunity. Even with two potions building stack tends to bit slow. With only one you spend several turns when you play few alchemists but couldn't topdeck it while with two potions you could usually topdeck all alchemists bought. Once you get stack going second potion wouldn't be that usefull but it becomes critical in endgame as when you miss potion your topdecked alchemist miss shuffle and you have several turns with green hands until you could play alchemists and you will have problem get all of them with potion to restart chain.

Without +buy BM strategy usually beats alchemists as getting one per turn is too slow.

There is great synergy with throne room/kings court as you could buy them earlier because you could almost always play them on alchemist.

Another notable relationship is apothecary where you want get apothecary on first two potion hands even if you hit 3p and dont need second potion.

[Seprix]

I sent a message to Theory regarding the subforum idea. I was getting worried about that myself before it was brought up here, anyways.

[Chris is me]

Let's Dicuss has turned into spam honestly.

There's no more discussion to be found here! Go die with the brackets!

We really need a subforum for these Let's Discuss topics.

Subforum isn't a bad idea, but I think the Base Set is just going to produce bad discussion. Look at this thread! Tons of great discussion here. Lots of long posts and anecdotes and stuff. This is what I want to see on F.ds, even if some people aren't learning much from them others are learning a lot.

[E.Honda]

Let's Dicuss has turned into spam honestly.

There's no more discussion to be found here! Go die with the brackets!

We really need a subforum for these Let's Discuss topics.

Subforum isn't a bad idea, but I think the Base Set is just going to produce bad discussion. Look at this thread! Tons of great discussion here. Lots of long posts and anecdotes and stuff. This is what I want to see on F.ds, even if some people aren't learning much from them others are learning a lot.

Yeah i agree with that i think Base just doesnt have enough interesting cards. Thats why its called Base i like this thread about Alchemist a lot as i feel there are a lot of nuances as to how to play the card well