Print

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

[mxdata]

Zombie Villager
Cost: 3
Type: Action - Zombie
+1 Card
+2 Actions
------
When you gain this card, trash it

Just a fun little idea I had.  It's kind of the opposite of fortress - instead of a card that can never go in the trash, it's a card that can never be taken out of the trash.  Like other zombies, it starts out in the trash, and is only used if the Necromancer is in the game.  But, if you try to gain it from the trash, such as with Lurker, it just goes right back into the trash.  It allows you to use Necromancer as a village, hence the name, and also ensures that the trash will always have at least one card that Necromancer can use.  Lurkers can steal the other zombies, but not this one.  It unfortunately nerfs Rogue, since you can never use the attack part of its abilities, and if this is the only card in the 3-6 price range in the trash, it'll automatically try to gain it, to no avail (but, just as Fortress is still technically trashed, this is still technically gained - so, for example, cards like Devil's Workshop or Monastery that care about how many cards you gained will still count this as a gained card)

[popsofctown]

This makes Necromancer way too strong.  Necromancer is already strong with the ability to choose whether it plays as a terminal or +1 Action card.  Choosing between 0, 1, or 2 actions would be bonkers.

[mxdata]

This makes Necromancer way too strong.  Necromancer is already strong with the ability to choose whether it plays as a terminal or +1 Action card.  Choosing between 0, 1, or 2 actions would be bonkers.

As it is, that can already happen, if a village gets trashed.  Plus, it can only be used that way once per turn, since you can't play the same card twice, so I don't think that would be too much

[Chris is me]

This makes Necromancer way too strong.  Necromancer is already strong with the ability to choose whether it plays as a terminal or +1 Action card.  Choosing between 0, 1, or 2 actions would be bonkers.

I wouldn't call Necromancer "strong" right now. Like it's fine, but not *strong*. Giving it a once a turn Village effect doesn't seem like the end of the world.

[mxdata]

This makes Necromancer way too strong.  Necromancer is already strong with the ability to choose whether it plays as a terminal or +1 Action card.  Choosing between 0, 1, or 2 actions would be bonkers.

I wouldn't call Necromancer "strong" right now. Like it's fine, but not *strong*. Giving it a once a turn Village effect doesn't seem like the end of the world.

Definitely.  Necromancer really only becomes especially strong when there's a lot of trashing that sends good cards to the trash for it to use.  When it's just the zombies, it's a decent, but not particularly strong, card.  This would make it a little stronger,  but not that much stronger

[mxdata]

Zombie Villager
Cost: 3
Type: Action - Zombie
+1 Card
+2 Actions
------
When you gain this card, trash it

Just a fun little idea I had.  It's kind of the opposite of fortress - instead of a card that can never go in the trash, it's a card that can never be taken out of the trash.  Like other zombies, it starts out in the trash, and is only used if the Necromancer is in the game.  But, if you try to gain it from the trash, such as with Lurker, it just goes right back into the trash.  It allows you to use Necromancer as a village, hence the name, and also ensures that the trash will always have at least one card that Necromancer can use.  Lurkers can steal the other zombies, but not this one.  It unfortunately nerfs Rogue, since you can never use the attack part of its abilities, and if this is the only card in the 3-6 price range in the trash, it'll automatically try to gain it, to no avail (but, just as Fortress is still technically trashed, this is still technically gained - so, for example, cards like Devil's Workshop or Monastery that care about how many cards you gained will still count this as a gained card)

Although, it just occurred to me that if I reduce its cost to 2, it would avoid the Rogue-nerfing issue.  There's no real need to have it be the same cost as the other zombies, and the cost is actually rather irrelevant in a card like this, since nothing else that cares about cost can actually interact with it

[GendoIkari]

I don't think the under-the-line text adds much; not enough to justify being there. There are very few ways to gain a Zombie; and any game which has a way to gain stuff from the trash (such as Lurker) also has a way to get good actions into the trash; so it's not like Necromancer is going to be screwed over by allowing this zombie to be gained.

[mxdata]

I don't think the under-the-line text adds much; not enough to justify being there. There are very few ways to gain a Zombie; and any game which has a way to gain stuff from the trash (such as Lurker) also has a way to get good actions into the trash; so it's not like Necromancer is going to be screwed over by allowing this zombie to be gained.

Without that, though, it's just a pretty basic village.  But, also, this was more of a "this would be cute" than a serious strategy-oriented card.  It's a mirror-image Fortress, and also the ultimate non-supply card - not only can it not be gained from the supply, it can't be gained period.  The idea of an ungainable card appeals to me, and making it a zombie just gives it a way to actually be useful

[Jack Rudd]

It can be kept in your deck with the right sort of on-gain shenanigans; Watchtower, Summon, Innovation.

[mxdata]

It can be kept in your deck with the right sort of on-gain shenanigans; Watchtower, Summon, Innovation.

I don't think any of those would actually work.  Summon can't gain from the trash in the first place, so there's nothing it could do with this card in the first place, and in the case of Innovation and Watchtower, the lose-track rule would apply, wouldn't it?  With Watchtower there's two competing on-gain effects "put on deck" and "trash".  If you do "put on deck" first, the card's own "trash this" would still apply - a card can't lose track of itself.  If you trash first, then Watchtower would lose track of it.  With Innovation, the same applies.  If you trash first, then Innovation loses track of the card, if you set aside first, that wouldn't stop the card from trashing itself

[GendoIkari]

If you do "put on deck" first, the card's own "trash this" would still apply - a card can't lose track of itself.

This is wrong. Effects can definitely lose track of the card they are on. Remember that the whole point of lose track, now called stop moving, is that it might be literally impossible to track a card. What if Watchtower also told you to shuffle your deck? There would be no possible way to get the card back since you can’t look through your deck. 

Stop moving rule says that if a card is not where the effect expects it to be; then it can’t be moved. The when-gain effect of Zombie Villager expects it to be on top of your discard pile; so that effect cannot move the card unless that’s where it is.