Print

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

[somekindoftony]

I was wondering how to price certain cards and thought there's a fun game in this.
Have a go at pricing these cards and add your own simple ideas to be priced as well.
If you want to provide reasons please do and feel free to disagree with others.
If this is already a thread my apologies.

1. A treasure that when played gains you two golds and six debt (but doesn't actually make money itself)
2. An action that gives you +3 cards with the drawback from Contraband (a player nominates a card you cannot buy)
3. An action-attack-duration that says "+1 Action, Each other player can't gain actions while this is in play. At the start of your turn if this is in play trash it and gain a differently named card costing the same or less than this"

[spineflu]

1. A treasure that when played gains you two golds and six debt (but doesn't actually make money itself)

six debt

2. An action that gives you +3 cards with the drawback from Contraband (a player nominates a card you cannot buy)

$2

3. An action-attack-duration that says "+1 Action, Each other player can't gain actions while this is in play. At the start of your turn if this is in play trash it and gain a differently named card costing the same or less than this"

$6. Maybe $7.

[pubby]

1. shouldn't cost debt because it makes money strategies too good (just open with it). Probably fine at $6.

I agree with your other prices, spineflu

[somekindoftony]

I also like $6 for #1, $2 for #2 .
I could be persuaded that 5 or even 3 is justified for the third one. If I had a choice between buying a witch first turn on a 5-2 split or getting this and a witch one turn later it would probably be best to get the witch. This is a pretty brutal attack but only if your opponent actual depends on +Actions which won't be early game so much.

[Jack Rudd]

I'm not letting #3 into my game at any cost. It creates a lot of rules snarls.

[spineflu]

I'm not letting #3 into my game at any cost. It creates a lot of rules snarls.

it's literally just the same as Deluded; I priced it similar to when I was designing a druid-style hex-er.

[Jack Rudd]

I'm not letting #3 into my game at any cost. It creates a lot of rules snarls.

it's literally just the same as Deluded; I priced it similar to when I was designing a druid-style hex-er.

It's not, though. Deluded prevents you from buying Actions, which is fine. The OP's card prevents you from gaining Actions, which interacts oddly with a few cards that force you to gain Actions.

[segura]

I'm not letting #3 into my game at any cost. It creates a lot of rules snarls.

it's literally just the same as Deluded; I priced it similar to when I was designing a druid-style hex-er.

It's not, though. Deluded prevents you from buying Actions, which is fine. The OP's card prevents you from gaining Actions, which interacts oddly with a few cards that force you to gain Actions.

Not really. Suppose you play Exorcist, trash an Silver and then don't gain an Imp. Normally X would happen, now it does not.
This is incredibly simple. Unless you direly want to read rule issue into it, then you can of course construct an obstacle.

[Jack Rudd]

I'm not letting #3 into my game at any cost. It creates a lot of rules snarls.

it's literally just the same as Deluded; I priced it similar to when I was designing a druid-style hex-er.

It's not, though. Deluded prevents you from buying Actions, which is fine. The OP's card prevents you from gaining Actions, which interacts oddly with a few cards that force you to gain Actions.

Not really. Suppose you play Exorcist, trash an Silver and then don't gain an Imp. Normally X would happen, now it does not.
This is incredibly simple. Unless you direly want to read rule issue into it, then you can of course construct an obstacle.

Well, you can make that ruling, but it renders certain cards (Swindler, for example) extremely broken.

[Awaclus]

1. A treasure that when played gains you two golds and six debt (but doesn't actually make money itself)

I wouldn't buy this for free.

[segura]

I'm not letting #3 into my game at any cost. It creates a lot of rules snarls.

it's literally just the same as Deluded; I priced it similar to when I was designing a druid-style hex-er.

It's not, though. Deluded prevents you from buying Actions, which is fine. The OP's card prevents you from gaining Actions, which interacts oddly with a few cards that force you to gain Actions.

Not really. Suppose you play Exorcist, trash an Silver and then don't gain an Imp. Normally X would happen, now it does not.
This is incredibly simple. Unless you direly want to read rule issue into it, then you can of course construct an obstacle.

Well, you can make that ruling, but it renders certain cards (Swindler, for example) extremely broken.

Swindler wants to junk Cursers, Silvers, Duchies and Estates, not Actions. So nothing broken here unless you consider trashing a $4 Action instead of exchanging it for a worse $4 Action a horrible increase in the power level of Swindler.

[Jack Rudd]

I'm not letting #3 into my game at any cost. It creates a lot of rules snarls.

it's literally just the same as Deluded; I priced it similar to when I was designing a druid-style hex-er.

It's not, though. Deluded prevents you from buying Actions, which is fine. The OP's card prevents you from gaining Actions, which interacts oddly with a few cards that force you to gain Actions.

Not really. Suppose you play Exorcist, trash an Silver and then don't gain an Imp. Normally X would happen, now it does not.
This is incredibly simple. Unless you direly want to read rule issue into it, then you can of course construct an obstacle.

Well, you can make that ruling, but it renders certain cards (Swindler, for example) extremely broken.

Swindler wants to junk Cursers, Silvers, Duchies and Estates, not Actions. So nothing broken here unless you consider trashing a $4 Action instead of exchanging it for a worse $4 Action a horrible increase in the power level of Swindler.

I swindle your $5 Action. I choose a $5 Action to Swindle it into. You can't gain it because #3 is in play.

[segura]

Thats irrational, you want to junk a Duchy early on. And in the late game Swindler becomes a trashing Attack without any exchanging.Thats a power buff, not a rule issue.

[somekindoftony]

Just to add to the confusion I had intended no.3 to simply prevent you from gaining actions in the sense that when you play a village you would draw a card and nothing else. So no +actions in your turn.
I suspect nobody got that interpretation from what I wrote.  Soz.

[somekindoftony]

1. A treasure that when played gains you two golds and six debt (but doesn't actually make money itself)

I wouldn't buy this for free.

Now this is the kind of diverse opinion I was hoping this card might provoke. I don't think it's total trash but it's good for one strategy and only for a few plays.

[Jack Rudd]

Just to add to the confusion I had intended no.3 to simply prevent you from gaining actions in the sense that when you play a village you would draw a card and nothing else. So no +actions in your turn.
I suspect nobody got that interpretation from what I wrote.  Soz.

So that would probably be best phrased as "until your next turn, whenever any other player plays an Action that would give them +Actions, it does not do so".

Again, not including that in my game at any cost. It completely shuts down the other players.

[segura]

It completely shuts down the other players.

If they are dumb enough to not play money.

I agree that a temporary Action shut-down card is highly dubious. But I also think that there is potential at a high price, e.g. $6, to not totally prevent engine play. It might be risky to go for an engine but the active shut-down dude has to pay a large price to shut you down. Difficult to evaluate theoretically.

[spineflu]

maybe it'd work better as a project, something like
"Until the end of your next turn, other players can not gain Action cards. 1VP"

Which gives you an action phase (on your next turn) to hit ppl with Swindler (the one VP is so that it's still useful as a project beyond that one turn). Still price it decently high though.

[markusin]

You can save some rules headache with "when another player gains an action, they trash it". However, this still let's one take advantage of trash-for-benefit, on-gain effects, and lose track shenanigans.