ahh there's two of them! lmao!
these two interact implicitly, but pretty intuitively. oh, patrician is a split pile huh? i bet the bottom one costs.. yup. and for emporium's thing, well, there will always be the 5 patricians at least. they don't immediately look that impressive. patrician looks better than vagrant but vagrant was never really that great to begin with, and emporium looks better (enabled) than duchy, but (reread the comparison to vagrant and modify it in the intuitive way).
well, in practice, these two have treated me pretty well. there is probably some bias to patrician over e.g. vagrant because vagrant's effect is generally good but forgettable, whereas patrician can fish for the card you exactly want because that card probably costs 5 or more. but, well, getting that card is really good, and i've had it kick off a turn more than once. emporium is difficult: it's that same get-vp-but-don't-devalue-your-deck-that-much that distant lands is, but there are also surely plenty of times where $5 peddler is fine and the vp just straight-up puts you ahead of a bm player.
-how much does it hurt emporium (and also, throwback, chariot race) that they try to build while also giving you vp?
-have you encountered a situation where enabling emporium is an issue, in a sort of good stuff deck? or does it just usually mean "this card is inaccessible for a hard-bm deck, and i bet you wouldn't even want it anyway, nerd"
-how much do these cards individually improve because of the fact that the other one is always there? compared to rocks which seem to be about as good as uh rocks without catapult, these both seem very palatable without their other thing.