Print

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

[Jfrisch]

ignoring all exchange abilities.

Spoils at 3 is fine. Gold is worth than +1 card +1 action +2 coins and Mining village for the one shot affect is rarely considered OP.
Soldier at 3 is probably reasonable. It's a nice payload if you make it work but spamming them is hard because they're terminal and a single soldier is pretty weak.
Fugitive at 4 is clearly fine. Strong, sure, but way weaker than lab or forum.
Disciple, as mentioned, is crazy. I think it works at 7 where you have to work very hard to get two disciples and thus disciple disciples. 6 would probably be OP.

Treasure hunter I'd guess 4? I don't think opening two of them would be great to allow.
Warrior is probably also 4, they stack well but it takes work to stack them. But you can't have them too cheap because you don't want mass stacking them to be easy with other components.
Hero at 6 is fine, it combos nice with platinum but even with that it's not game destroying.
Champion wants a debt cost so as to not have the "first person who hit's it gets a giant advantage problem". 12 debt is probably enough for it to work in the game but even so it will end up being bought almost every game.

Bag of gold is balanced at 4.
Followers is incredibly strong. It probably works at 5 or 6 but would lead to more oppressive games at 5 so 6 might be better.
Trusty steed is pretty clearly a solid 6. Though it's boring because it self combos really well.
Princess can't exist in unlimited copies.
Diadem can maybe exist in a way similar to fortune. 5/5 debt seems maybe reasonable.

[markusin]

Another thing you can do with the prizes is make them a pile of uniques in a random order to deal with the problem of multiple Princesses, or make them a split pile with a set order like Castles and maybe have two copies of each.

[LibraryAdventurer]

Spoils - might be okay, I think I'd be more inclined to say . Someone compared it to mining village's one-shot ability, but spoils is a treasure for more and it doesn't run out like Mining Village would (if it were used often for the one-shot ability) since it's returned to the supply.
Madman - Most people said this would be broken as a supply pile, but seeing as it's a one-shot, I think it might be okay. maybe ?
Mercenary - Also might be okay at , but better how it is.
Bag of Gold -
Diadem - would need mods to work by itself (at least a cap)
Followers - ugly in any form
Princess - doesn't work on its own as-is, but I use a modded version at . I like the idea of making it the bottom of a split pile, but then we're even more in fan-card territory.
Treasure Hunter -
Warrior - . On it's own, obviously it wouldn't be a traveler, so I guess it would look at a card per Warrior in play?
Hero -
Champion - broken
Soldier -
Fugitive - would need an in-between cost. maybe +2.
Disciple - I agree with traces Around: (with a no self-gaining clause), or maybe
Teacher - The token events are the normal supply version of this.
Will-o'-Wisp - would need modding
Imp - same as Fugitive
Ghost - ?  Still haven't played with it much.
Bat - On its own, it would just be a Night card with "Trash up to two cards." so probably .

[Screwyioux]

At this point there's Secret Passage, so Fugitive would have to be a different card (and that card is Secret Passage) or have a weird cost (like it does).

Dark Ages tried "Gain an Estate, each other player gains a Curse" at $3, back when there was no Cornucopia. It's bad times.

Just curious, why was this bad times? Was it actually strong, or just unfun? My guess is the latter but I'd like to know!

[ipofanes]

Ghost - ?  Still haven't played with it much.

Would be quite aptly placed. I'd rate Golem quite a bit better as playing two random actions is kind of self-stabilising, and this should be justifiably adressed by the difference between and . Other things to consider are the difference to Throne Room variants (always hits something, neglecting the case of "all your actions are in your starting hand", but randomly hit) and to play-and-gainers like Disciple and Procession (which require target being in hand).

[faust]

Ghost - ?  Still haven't played with it much.

Would be quite aptly placed. I'd rate Golem quite a bit better as playing two random actions is kind of self-stabilising, and this should be justifiably adressed by the difference between and . Other things to consider are the difference to Throne Room variants (always hits something, neglecting the case of "all your actions are in your starting hand", but randomly hit) and to play-and-gainers like Disciple and Procession (which require target being in hand).

Ghost is easily better than Golem:
- it can never be terminal
- if you draw your deck, you can pick the action you want to double
- Golem does not give you an extra play, it just gives sifting and a Village effect.

Ghost would still be fine (albeit strong) at $6, but that just illustrates that Golem is pretty weak.

[GendoIkari]

Ghost - ?  Still haven't played with it much.

Would be quite aptly placed. I'd rate Golem quite a bit better as playing two random actions is kind of self-stabilising, and this should be justifiably adressed by the difference between and . Other things to consider are the difference to Throne Room variants (always hits something, neglecting the case of "all your actions are in your starting hand", but randomly hit) and to play-and-gainers like Disciple and Procession (which require target being in hand).

Ghost is easily better than Golem:
- it can never be terminal
- if you draw your deck, you can pick the action you want to double
- Golem does not give you an extra play, it just gives sifting and a Village effect.

Ghost would still be fine (albeit strong) at $6, but that just illustrates that Golem is pretty weak.

In regards to point 2... if you draw your deck, Ghost is just as worthless as Golem, isn't it?

[Awaclus]

Ghost - ?  Still haven't played with it much.

Would be quite aptly placed. I'd rate Golem quite a bit better as playing two random actions is kind of self-stabilising, and this should be justifiably adressed by the difference between and . Other things to consider are the difference to Throne Room variants (always hits something, neglecting the case of "all your actions are in your starting hand", but randomly hit) and to play-and-gainers like Disciple and Procession (which require target being in hand).

Ghost is easily better than Golem:
- it can never be terminal
- if you draw your deck, you can pick the action you want to double
- Golem does not give you an extra play, it just gives sifting and a Village effect.

Ghost would still be fine (albeit strong) at $6, but that just illustrates that Golem is pretty weak.

In regards to point 2... if you draw your deck, Ghost is just as worthless as Golem, isn't it?

Ghost is a Night so it digs for whatever you bought.

[GendoIkari]

Ghost - ?  Still haven't played with it much.

Would be quite aptly placed. I'd rate Golem quite a bit better as playing two random actions is kind of self-stabilising, and this should be justifiably adressed by the difference between and . Other things to consider are the difference to Throne Room variants (always hits something, neglecting the case of "all your actions are in your starting hand", but randomly hit) and to play-and-gainers like Disciple and Procession (which require target being in hand).

Ghost is easily better than Golem:
- it can never be terminal
- if you draw your deck, you can pick the action you want to double
- Golem does not give you an extra play, it just gives sifting and a Village effect.

Ghost would still be fine (albeit strong) at $6, but that just illustrates that Golem is pretty weak.

In regards to point 2... if you draw your deck, Ghost is just as worthless as Golem, isn't it?

Ghost is a Night so it digs for whatever you bought.

Ah ok, I had interpreted "pick the action you want to double" as "anything that's in your deck", as opposed to "anything you choose to buy". The later has restrictions; you need to be able to afford the action you want to double; and sometimes you're buying Victory or Treasure.

[Holunder9]

Keeping in mind that both cards don't draw but dig for Actions I consider the following rough comparisons to be useful:

Ghost is like
+1 Card
+1 Action
Play an Action card from your hand twice.

Golem is like
+2 Cards
+2 Actions

So even if that throned card is a lousy Pearl Diver this makes Ghost similar to +2 Cards +3 Actions which indicates that it is mostly better than Golen.
Yet Golem has two distinctive advantages: it is digging for 2 Action cards instead of just 1 and it is not a Duration so in a (nearly) deck drawing engine you can play it twice as often.

Overall the cards have little in common except for the fact that they dig for Actions and are conditional villages.

[Donald X.]

Dark Ages tried "Gain an Estate, each other player gains a Curse" at $3, back when there was no Cornucopia. It's bad times.

Just curious, why was this bad times? Was it actually strong, or just unfun? My guess is the latter but I'd like to know!

I don't know how strong it was; maybe it was a must-buy, I'm not doing the work to find out. It makes the game be entirely about it; all of our decks are choking on dead cards. Whatever fun was there to be had is gone, replaced by this experience, every time.

[teamlyle]

Keep in mind that Ghost can only be played once every 2 turns if you're drawing your deck. I still think it's way better than Golem, though.

[Commodore Chuckles]

In my experience, absent the other differences between the cards, playing a random card twice is significantly worse than playing two random cards once. Golem has two tries to hit something useful, but there's not much you can do if Ghost hits the Herbalist you only bought for +buy.