Print

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

[LastFootnote]

On the subject of making cards simpler, can you summarize the concept of Money Trick? There's got to be a simpler version of that card.

EDT: Also, what is a "Money Trick"? There may be a better English name for the card, depending on what it's meant to be.

Thanks for your help, LastFootnote.

About Money Trick:

Mechanics – I started this with the idea of a card that you would better react with than play. So I think about a card which produces money when discarded and I think play actions could be an interesting trigger, they would be a kind of Peddlers not played which you can use even after terminals and even can use more than once per turn if you manage to do it. To it have some use on play, I made it a Treasure with + Buy, so sometimes you may want to play it for the +Buy. The Exile part came when I saw it could lead to an infinite loop if you already draw your deck when use it. Finally, I add a bonus when Exiling.

Theme – As it produce a money that, from play area point of view, comes from nothing, it reminds me coin tricks magicians do. This card preexists to this set and previous version was named Coin Trick. I didn’t find a good picture of a woman doing a coin trick, so I changed to “Money Trick”, which seems to me to be a name magicians do use to tricks with money. I don’t know, maybe there’s a better name.

Cost – Many comments were that it maybe would cost , so I think I will change it to this cost.

Art – One problem with the art of this card is, as it is a Treasure, Card Generator puts a big coin symbol, so there’s not much space for text. Now I made this version in Corel, with text in bigger font. I also fixed the colors order.

I’ll be very happy if you show me a simpler solution or wording for this idea.

Unfortunately, I would urge you to abandon the premise of "money from nothing" altogether. In a long turn, it's difficult to track how many coins your Money Tricks made, especially if you can use each one multiple times. In general this concept of "invisible money" is one Donald X. avoids these days. I believe he'd redo Mining Village if he could, shifting the trashing decision to the start of your Buy phase. That's the other thing: if invisible money is created in the buy phase, that's way less bad, since you're about to spend it. But Money Trick creates all this invisible money throughout your turn. It seems like it's just asking for trouble.

I was hoping there was some way to keep the card's core concept without the invisible money, but since the concept is invisible money, I'm not sure what to suggest.

[Carline]

On the subject of making cards simpler, can you summarize the concept of Money Trick? There's got to be a simpler version of that card.

EDT: Also, what is a "Money Trick"? There may be a better English name for the card, depending on what it's meant to be.

Thanks for your help, LastFootnote.

About Money Trick:

Mechanics – I started this with the idea of a card that you would better react with than play. So I think about a card which produces money when discarded and I think play actions could be an interesting trigger, they would be a kind of Peddlers not played which you can use even after terminals and even can use more than once per turn if you manage to do it. To it have some use on play, I made it a Treasure with + Buy, so sometimes you may want to play it for the +Buy. The Exile part came when I saw it could lead to an infinite loop if you already draw your deck when use it. Finally, I add a bonus when Exiling.

Theme – As it produce a money that, from play area point of view, comes from nothing, it reminds me coin tricks magicians do. This card preexists to this set and previous version was named Coin Trick. I didn’t find a good picture of a woman doing a coin trick, so I changed to “Money Trick”, which seems to me to be a name magicians do use to tricks with money. I don’t know, maybe there’s a better name.

Cost – Many comments were that it maybe would cost , so I think I will change it to this cost.

Art – One problem with the art of this card is, as it is a Treasure, Card Generator puts a big coin symbol, so there’s not much space for text. Now I made this version in Corel, with text in bigger font. I also fixed the colors order.

I’ll be very happy if you show me a simpler solution or wording for this idea.

Unfortunately, I would urge you to abandon the premise of "money from nothing" altogether. In a long turn, it's difficult to track how many coins your Money Tricks made, especially if you can use each one multiple times. In general this concept of "invisible money" is one Donald X. avoids these days. I believe he'd redo Mining Village if he could, shifting the trashing decision to the start of your Buy phase. That's the other thing: if invisible money is created in the buy phase, that's way less bad, since you're about to spend it. But Money Trick creates all this invisible money throughout your turn. It seems like it's just asking for trouble.

I was hoping there was some way to keep the card's core concept without the invisible money, but since the concept is invisible money, I'm not sure what to suggest.

Maybe I could set it aside when reacts, so it would act as a mark. This way it also won't need exile part.
 

[gambit05]

One could make the invisible money visible by using Coffers. However, I don’t like the Reaction part. It doesn’t seem interesting to react to playing an Action card in your own Action phase (in the majority of the cases). What if it reacts to other Money Tricks of any player and uses Coffers for tracking the money? E.g.:

Money Trick $? – Treasure - Reaction +1 Coffers +1 Buy -----------------------    When any player plays a Money Trick,    you may play this from your hand. If you do, draw a card, revealed. If it’s a Money Trick, +1 Coffers.

[Carline]

One could make the invisible money visible by using Coffers. However, I don’t like the Reaction part. It doesn’t seem interesting to react to playing an Action card in your own Action phase (in the majority of the cases). What if it reacts to other Money Tricks of any player and uses Coffers for tracking the money? E.g.:

Money Trick $? – Treasure - Reaction +1 Coffers +1 Buy -----------------------    When any player plays a Money Trick,    you may play this from your hand. If you do, draw a card, revealed. If it’s a Money Trick, +1 Coffers.

It seems interesting. I think there's no need of the last "if" clause, as you can react with the Money trick you draw.

[gambit05]

One could make the invisible money visible by using Coffers. However, I don’t like the Reaction part. It doesn’t seem interesting to react to playing an Action card in your own Action phase (in the majority of the cases). What if it reacts to other Money Tricks of any player and uses Coffers for tracking the money? E.g.:

Money Trick $? – Treasure - Reaction +1 Coffers +1 Buy -----------------------    When any player plays a Money Trick,    you may play this from your hand. If you do, draw a card, revealed. If it’s a Money Trick, +1 Coffers.

It seems interesting. I think there's no need of the last "if" clause, as you can react with the Money trick you draw.

It depends what you want. I kept it as close to your original version as possible. However, giving less Coffers would be much better and simpler:

Money Trick $? – Treasure - Reaction +1 Coffers +1 Buy -----------------------    When any player plays a Money Trick,    you may play this from your hand. If you do, +1 Card.

[Carline]

One could make the invisible money visible by using Coffers. However, I don’t like the Reaction part. It doesn’t seem interesting to react to playing an Action card in your own Action phase (in the majority of the cases). What if it reacts to other Money Tricks of any player and uses Coffers for tracking the money? E.g.:

Money Trick $? – Treasure - Reaction +1 Coffers +1 Buy -----------------------    When any player plays a Money Trick,    you may play this from your hand. If you do, draw a card, revealed. If it’s a Money Trick, +1 Coffers.

It seems interesting. I think there's no need of the last "if" clause, as you can react with the Money trick you draw.

It depends what you want. I kept it as close to your original version as possible. However, giving less Coffers would be much better and simpler:

Money Trick $? – Treasure - Reaction +1 Coffers +1 Buy -----------------------    When any player plays a Money Trick,    you may play this from your hand. If you do, +1 Card.

What about this version?

[gambit05]

I like it! I think it should cost $3.

[Aquila]

What about this version?

When it reacts outside of turn it's Mouse-Baker, a strong effect; and with a lean deck it can be redrawn to produce 2 Coffers per turn. When it reacts in turn, the draw will be more useful with a multi-type Action, but a chain of Money Tricks will be effective for big money strategies, like several Markets (except the first doesn't draw) but more flexible with its Coffers.
So I feel $4 is probably right, and it is much simpler. Is it interesting? Fun maybe, but strategically too useful too often?


Flame Keeper - Conspirator triggering with small hand size that can be discard-for-benefit to get there. The discard-for-benefit mode is weaker than Mill from a 5-card hand, but in exchange for this and the 1VP it gets to be stronger than it afterward. So it feels balanced.
Interesting? It rewards small hands, which calls for specific building since payload from Treasures with it will be little. And now (some of) those non-drawing Villages are more justified, since they combo nicely with this. Definitely a good one!

Nymphs - cheap payload that rewards a lot of investment into it. Two played is $1 more and 1 Buy less than two Woodcutters, so generally better, especially if further Nymphs give further Buys. At $3 cost they're easy to collect, but maybe balanced for the work needed to make them pay off.
It's quite interesting in being virtual $ easy to add to the deck but needing support to work. But it may not be worth it that often.

Four Seasons - they progressively build up in power and have high potential, Summer especially, but what they give you is quite random depending on what season is drawn when. You can't rely on Winter as a Village, so for the most part it's all about Spring and Summer, and they're the reason you'd invest in the set. So the ideal most of the time is having a perfect cycle of all 4 seasons to play a Spring and Summer last each turn, or if you get 2 of each even better; and then Fall and Winter become a Village and some Buys, so handy.
In terms of interest: there's no denying the thematic appeal, but I think for mechanics and strategy the way shuffle randomness can affect their play order could be an unappealing setback. Players could get a little more flexibility over how they get them as well, and I'm thinking turn the Four Seasons card into an Event.

Gravedigger - Salvage something in play start of next turn, with the option of gaining a cheaper card from the trash. So in terms of uses it's often all about the $ payload or being a slow Copper trasher that makes up the economy loss. Temporary-use cards or when-trash triggers are other niches.
So you'll use it, it's decently interesting, but maybe it can be $3.

Guildmaster - so it rotates around being: +2 Cards give Curses and they may trash from hand; +2 Cards they cheapen card in hand and draw replacement; +1 Buy +1 Coffers give Curses and they may trash from hand; or +1 Buy +1 Coffers they cheapen card in hand and draw replacement. They should each sit fine on a $4 card. Players themselves decide how the effects change around, whether the bonus they get or the Attack of choice; that interaction should be interesting. Switching away from +2 Cards is quite a drastic change, as that affects how often the Attack can be launched as well as general engine play, so players may choose to keep Young Smith face up and flip the Attack each time; the Attacks are similar in trashing from hand and gaining Curses, but trashing to Young Sorceress can give fewer options to Young Saboteur's forced trash, so heavy use of Guildmaster in this way could really hurt. At $4 cost it won't be too hard to collect several as a deck strategy.
Overall, it is creative and interesting with it, but maybe unpleasant to play against. See if the pair of Attacks can be made to hurt a little less, and maybe make Young Trickster just + $2 to be more symmetrical to Smith and a closer power level (from an expansion perspective, there are a lot of cheap +buys already).

Hidden Pond - Each gain most likely lets it be worth 1 more, at least up to 3VP by setting aside Copper, Estate, Hidden Pond. You could get a fair bit more with Heirlooms. After 3, they're worth the same as a Duchy, and one could keep gaining these and setting a Hidden Pond in hand aside for 3 free VP. After collecting a good number of Ponds, eating your deck may become worth it. Trashing them will only yield more VP if you have 2 more Ponds than different cards on the mat, and a different card in hand to put on the mat. Unless you can get them back from the trash (*looks at Gravedigger* - Gold gaining and trashing could work).
Is it interesting? The 3VP case is easy to reach and provides some thinning with it, so it's always relevant. As a heavy alt VP strategy, it's greatly tamed by the on-gain being the way to increase their value, and regaining from the trash will need to be available to make them really shine. But this can imply not putting more than one Pond on the mat and holding more of them in the deck to make them score more. So it should be nice to play.

And that will do for this time. 

[Timinou]

I like the idea of changing the Seasons card to an Event.

[BBobb]

If I have no other text, it means that that is how you should word it. Otherwise, its more of my personal preference. Bolded things are the things that I would change from the card text. Though I didn't bold the vanilla bonuses, they should still be bolded on the cards.
 

Faithful Knight: I would say that the wording for the exchanging should probably be something else. Currently, if you read it out loud, it sounds very awkward. I would phrase it as "Remove any number of tokens. For each token removed choose one: +1 Action; or +". I'm not sure if you need to say that you may choose the same one multiple times since it says for each removed.


Small Village: Maybe someone else already said this, but if you Throne this, then you get the +1 Card twice. Is this what you intended or did you mean, "If this is the first time you played a Small Village this turn" instead? Also, via the wording of Crossroads, I think that you should replace the colon with a comma and make the +1 Card on the same line as the text.


Flame Keeper:
+
You may Discard any number of cards. If you hand has at most If you have at most 2 cards in your hand, (remove line break from this) +1 Card and +1 Action
See Chapel for first change. For second, see Madman. For third, see Conspirator.

Horse Lady:
+1 Action
Gain a Horse
Exile The next time you play a Horse this turn, Exile it. Horse you play this turn.
See Kiln for changes.

Minstrel:
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. Put an Action card into your hand (if any), topdeck put an Action card onto your deck, and discard the rest.
See any card that puts cards back onto your deck e.g. Courtyard, Mandarin.


Morning: This one isn't technically wrong, but I would probably word it differently. The "once per turn" text looks slightly weird. I would say "At the start of cleanup, if you have at least 2 Mornings in play, you may put one of them onto your deck." Hopefully this wording will only allow for one to go onto the deck, though I'm not sure. At minimum, though, I would use "at least" instead of "more than" just because Dominion cards use at least.


Nurse: I would make it "at the end of this turn". See River's Gift, Way of the Squirrel. Though some Dominion cards use "at the end of turn", I think it sounds and looks kind of ugly. Feel free to keep the wording as is, though, since it is technically correct. Also, just wondering, why didn't you make this a Duration? It seems like a better fit for a Duration instead of as "at the end of turn".


Nymphs:
+
If you have more than 1 at least 2 Nymphs in play, (remove line break) +1 Buy, +
See Conspirator for changes.

EDIT: Thanks to Gubump, I realized that this wouldn't work the same way. Ignore this part about Sisterhood.
Sisterhood: This is just personal preference (though it might not be), but I would make it "any of your unused Actions" instead of "each".
EDIT: Thanks to Gubump, I realized that this wouldn't work the same way. Ignore this part about Sisterhood.


Tiara: Is it intentional that you have to trash a Silver if possible? Though you could always play the Silver after, there are some edge cases where you can't (e.g. Storyteller plays Silver, drawing a Tiara and 2 other things).


Valkyries:
Gain 2 Horses.
Put one of them onto your deck.
______________________________________________
When another player plays an Attack card, you may discard this or topdeck put this from your hand onto your deck . If you did, to gain a Horse to your hand.
For topdecking, see e.g. Courtyard, Mandarin etc.
For the second change, see Fool's Gold.


Four Seasons:
Gain a Season of your choice.
See Exorcist


Gravedigger:
Set aside a non-Duration card you have in play. You may gain a cheaper card from the trash.
At the start of your next turn, trash the set aside card. (remove line break) + per it costs; + if it costs If it costs , +. Otherwise, + per it costs
See Rogue, Menagerie


Guildmaster:
Flip one Novice card over. Play both faced up Novice cards in any order, leaving them there.
______________________________________________________________________________
Setup: Set aside the Novice cards with Young Saboteur and Young Smith face up.
See Necromancer


Hidden Pond:
Worth 1 per differently named card on your Hidden Pond mat.
____________________________________________________
When you gain or trash this, you may put a card from your hand onto you Hidden Pond mat.
See Island


Immolator:
Trash up to 2 cards from your hand. + per trashed card trashed.
See Opulent Castle, Shepherd


Secret Place:
Put a card costing up to that you don't have on your Secret Place Mat onto it.
There are no real cards I can base this wording off of, but it seems more natural.


Warrioresses:
At the start of your next turn, +1 Card and +1 Action.Until then the start of your next turn, the first time each other player plays a non-duration Action card on their turn, they first Exile it. At the start of your next turn, +1 Card and +1 Action.
For the change of where the "at the start of your next turn" is, see Swamp Hag.
For the second one, I put first in there just so people would know e.g. Play Workshop, Exile it, gain Workshop, can I discard the Workshop I just played.


Tale-Teller:
Pay any amount of . For each paid, draw an extra card for your next turn for each paid.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Overpay stuff
See Storyteller for the wording.


Circus Camp:
+2 Actions
You may discard a card . If you do, for +2 Cards.
See Baron


Crusader:
+3 Cards
You may discard any number of Actions cards, revealing them revealed, for + each.
Though you can use revealing them (e.g. Shepherd), the newer wording is just revealed (e.g. Hostelry, Silos)


Golden Spoils:
+1 Buy
If this is the first time you played Golden Spoils played this turn, + and you may gain a Golden Spoils
Otherwise, + and return this to the Supply.
This is how things are usually worded (e.g. Crossroads). Though unlikely to matter, it could (Bob plays a Witch, his opponent Billy, gains a Curse, reacting with Sheepdog. He plays Sheepdog with Way of the Mouse, whose card is Black Market. With Black Market, Billy plays a Crown, which plays a Golden Spoils twice from Billy's hand. Now, if Bob plays a Golden Spoils, it won't be the "first played this turn") edge cases


Magic Library:
Discard up to 2 cards. Draw until you have 5 cards in your hand.
__________________________________________________________
Stuff about other people playing attacks
Probably just a typo on your side.


Maneuver:
Choose one: (remove line break) +3 Cards; (remove line break) +.
First error is just a typo. When you have multiple choices, you don't separate them with lines (see Steward)


Marketplace:
+1 Card
+1 Action
Choose one: (remove line break) +1 Action; +1 Buy,; or +
Same thing as the last card (see Steward)


Nightmare:
+
Each other player discards a card from their hand. After that, They gain a card from the Supply you choose to their hand.
Discarding from hand is implied (See Soldier). Gaining from the Supply is implied (See any gainer)


Tavern Nights:
Above line stuff
__________________________________
At the start of your Buy phase, you may call this . If you did, to discard any number of Treasures from your Tavern mat for each.
This is just general stuff again (see things like Coin of the Realm, and many other cards)


Fruits:
Choose one: (remove line break) +; or +1 Coffers
Again, no line break when there is a choose one and have a semicolon between choices (see Steward)


Young Saboteur:
Each other player trashes a card from their hand, gains a cheaper card, and draws a card. Each player who didn't gain a cheaper card gains a Curse.
This is just a simple fix (probably a mistype).


Secret Place Mat:
At the end of your turn, instead of drawing your next hand, you may put the cards from here into your hand.
Again, probably a mistype.


Coin of Honor:
Put Topdeck up to 2 cards from your hand [/b]onto your deck[/b] for + each.
Again, the same topdecking wording problem (see Mandarin, Courtyard)


Blessed Gems:

+ for each per card you've trashed this turn.
I'm not sure this is necessary, but I think its better.


Joy:
Choose one: Trash a card from your hand; or put a card from your hand onto your deck.
I know this makes it a lot wordier, but I think its is necessary. If not, you at least need to change the topdecking wording.


Lending:
+1 Buy. If you don't have no Treasures in play……
I didn't put the rest of the card since I'm too lazy. See Alms for changes.


Bride Wait: Though there's nothing wrong with it, I would probably make it non-victory. Otherwise, buying Duchies for and having them hopefully miss the shuffle? Probably too powerful.


Calmness:
Draw an extra card for your next hand
Each other player puts their -1 Card Token on their decks.
Just a small change (see Relic, Raid)


Restrain:
Once per turn: +2 Buys
Each other player discards an Action card (or reveals a hand with no Actions)


Birth of Venus:
Draw your deck Put all cards from your deck into your hand. Discard a card. Trash your hand.
Just following wording from Donate. If you want to draw discard pile too, you can see Donate.


Way of the Birdwoman:
Gain a card costing less than this.
Sorry. I'm pedantic. There is an extra space between card and costing.


Way of the Mermaid:
+1 Action
Look at the two bottom two You may put one of them on top.
See any cards that look at cards from the top of your deck (e.g. Lookout)


Gargoyle:
Each player (including you) reveals the top two cards of their deck, discards any number of them that you choose, and puts the rest back in any order.
Just some simple typo fixes.


EDIT: Thanks to Gubump (again), I've realized that this was the old wording for Rabble. Ignore this part about She-Wolf.
She-Wolf:
Each other player reveals the top 3 cards of their deck, discards the revealed Actions and Treasures, and puts the rest back in any order they choose.
See Rabble
EDIT: Thanks to Gubump (again), I've realized that this was the old wording for Rabble. Ignore this part about She-Wolf.


Season's Grace:
At the start of your turn, flip over turn your Journey token over. Then if it's face up, +2 Cards
Unless there is some reason for you to say draw 2 cards, I'd make it +2 Cards. For the first part, see Pilgrimage, Ranger, Giant


Great Cathedral: Is it intentional that if you only have Treasures cards on your mat that you can just keep them there with no penalty (choose 2nd option, fail to do it).


Barony: each differently named
Just probably a typo.


Domain When scoring, 3 for per set you have of Province - Duchy - Estate
See Palace


Phew, done. That took almost an hour and a half.

[Gubump]

Sisterhood: This is just personal preference (though it might not be), but I would make it "any of your unused Actions" instead of "each".

That has a different function from what Carline intends. "Each" and the intended function of Sisterhood only allow all-or-nothing. "Any" would not be all-or-nothing. This matters because of Diadem and cards that return to your Action phase, like Villa and Cavalry.

Also, 2nd edition Rabble does not say "revealed" Actions and Treasures:

[BBobb]

Sisterhood: This is just personal preference (though it might not be), but I would make it "any of your unused Actions" instead of "each".

That has a different function from what Carline intends. "Each" and the intended function of Sisterhood only allow all-or-nothing. "Any" would not be all-or-nothing. This matters because of Diadem and cards that return to your Action phase, like Villa and Cavalry.

You're right. I'll edit my post.

Also, 2nd edition Rabble does not say "revealed" Actions and Treasures:

Again, you're right. I'll change that in my post too. I was looking at the wiki's list of cards, which for some reason still has the revealed part from 1st ed (though I am going to change it right now). (first ed is better than second according to my brother, because he thinks the best card in the game is THIEF (I'm not joking about this))

[Something_Smart]

My thoughts:

Healer - seems pretty good, I like the interaction with junking and discarding attacks.
Mirror - possibly confusing to track if you play a Mirror on another Mirror, balance-wise probably a little weak but not too bad as it's only a $2.
Small Village - seems pretty weak, the first one's a cheap village though I suppose, and probably not worth getting more than one of unless it's the only village or the only +buy.
Taverner - pretty reasonable. Given things like Pearl Diver exist the lower bound for $2 cantrips is essentially nothing.
Wanderer - compares poorly to Loan, which is already a pretty bad trasher. I doubt I would go for this in the absence of good Estate trashing like Hermit or Jack.
Flame Keeper - I like this better than the last time I saw it in the discord. It's pretty powerful now, and quite interesting.
Horse Lady - Tracking's a little weird; does the Horse get exiled before its effect takes place? It must, but that's not super clear; I might word it like Kiln ("the next time you play a Horse this turn, first exile it). Balance-wise this looks really strong to spam, probably a bit too strong compared to other Lab-'s for less than $5 (Advisor, Wishing Well, Caravan).
Maid - seems a bit weak but the flexibility might make up for that.
Minstrel - "Topdeck" isn't an official keyword; you should say "put an Action card on top of your deck (if any)". It looks very good, like a Border Guard but with a lower risk of skipping important things.
Morning - I feel like there's probably a simpler way to word this, though I can't think of one off the top of my head. I like the effect, a lot actually; it's not clear whether going for these is right, though it does seem like the right number to get is almost always 0 or 2.
Nurse - Feels kinda weak compared to Cargo Ship. Maybe the topdecking and sifting makes up for it though.
Nymphs - Seems like quite an annoying way to get +buy, but I guess if your engine needs +buy, this will do. Probably on the level of Herbalist in terms of how desperate for +buy I need to be to get it-- and I need to have a good enough engine to reliably play two of them.
Sisterhood - seems pretty fine. DXV doesn't like stuff that can really go crazy with +buys, and this is on the edge of that, but you do need to put in a significant amount of work to get a ton of buys out of this.
Tiara - A way to add payload in a pinch, I guess. I don't see myself trashing a Silver with this often. Like most Silver gainers, probably only useful in money or in a really strong engine.
Valkyries - See "topdeck" comment from before. Seems very weak in the absence of an attack, and even then, it's probably not worth it without a way to reliably make sure you can have it in your hand.
Workers - Villagers are good. Seems pretty strong.
Amazon - Looks kinda nuts. It's a bit slow to get started, but once you have a bunch of these they're all Lost Cities, plus they can enable gain-and-play stuff super easily.
Emissary - A Priest that junks instead of its other hard-to-use bonus? Seems very good.
Faithful Knight - looks quite underwhelming. Neither "+1 Card, +1 Villager" nor "+1 Card, +1 Coffers" would be worth $4 (I doubt I'd buy that second one at any price), and the flexibility in treating your tokens as one or the other is canceled out by only being able to do so when you play a Faithful Knight.
Four Seasons - interesting concept. Looks pretty strong; eventually you get a ton of these, and then they become consistent. Might be a nightmare to track irl; I don't know. But the idea's neat.
Gravedigger - Seems pretty slow, and I'm probably not feeding it anything besides Coppers. The +$2 is nice but as a duration it's going to miss a lot of shuffles (which is a big deal for trashers) so probably not super good.
Guildmaster - Interesting idea. Young Saboteur seems like it will help your opponent most of the time, so I imagine I'm just flipping back and forth between Smith and Trickster. I would definitely recommend making Saboteur stronger. Smith/Trickster dichotomy seems fine.
Hidden Pond - this seems uh quite powerful. It's probably almost trivial to get it to 3 VP-- Copper, Estate, Hidden Pond. At that point, you can just start grabbing them and setting aside whatever, particularly if you have a gainer. If your opponent doesn't stop you, you can probably outscore Provinces fairly easily.
Immolator - looks insanely strong. In terms of tempo, it's maybe a little slower than Masquerade, but it can't draw stuff dead... and it trashes twice as fast.
Jewelry - seems very hard to use effectively. At best, it can gain you one $5 action per turn, if you get lucky and draw it early enough. In rare cases, you might both want Golds from this and be able to get them.
Money Trick - looks like a Market-Baker for cheap if there's any other dual-type engine part on the board. If it wasn't meant to trigger off of your own plays, you should reword it "when any other player plays a card with 2 or more types on their turn, ..."
Sacred Hall - has a similar dynamic to other cards that care about the trash (like Forager and Necromancer). If you take the time to pump up the value of this, both players can benefit from it equally. It seems like a very bad Estate trasher, but with a strong enough engine, I might take it anyway. But I'm almost never going to be trashing other victory cards with this (unless I'm doing some kind of golden deck).
Secret Place - interesting. Extraordinarily slow, but you get to stack your deck to make up for that. It's probably too slow, given that you probably need to put at least 3 cards on there to make sure your turn where you draw them isn't awful, and probably at least one of them needs to not actually cost $5 which makes this less attractive as a $5 gainer.
Warrioresses - this is an exiling attack that's even less threatening than Gatekeeper. Though its vanilla bonuses are a little better than Gatekeeper's, I still think it's extraordinarily weak. Usually the first action card someone is playing on their turn is one that they want a lot of anyway and won't mind gaining another copy of.
Wishing Fountain - Seems quite good-- get a bunch of these, name Treasure and Victory to thin, and then have a bunch of mostly-labs in your deck.
Tale-Teller - I like this. It's really hard to tell how good it is; my first intuition was that it was weak, but now I'm thinking it might be amazing. I might want to test this out, especially with a Silver gainer; if your deck is full of Silvers and Golds, this seems incredibly powerful. Regardless, it's a very cool card.

To be continued.

[Something_Smart]

Blessing - feels a bit weak. + VP is generally not a great benefit early-game (sure, it's better than nothing, but it doesn't help your deck at all). The ability to swap it for a Wish when you're done trashing is useful but slow given that you have to spend a terminal action and don't see the Wish until next shuffle.
Buffoon - seems generally incredibly strong. Almost every action card that's worth having in your deck is strong to play twice for $5. Having to have actions left lest your opponent reveal a terminal is a downside, but probably not that good of one. I don't see myself using the gain option or the junking option often, either.
Circus Camp - seems strong, probably not overpowered, but a Fugitive-Village hybrid is pretty nice a lot of the time.
Crusader - probably a bit weak, the discarding seems more like a consolation prize for dudding than anything. You can use it to turn engine parts into payload like Storeroom but it's a lot less flexible than Storeroom is.
Dangerous Ground - I think this is crazy. As long as you play an even number it's just a consequence-free Hunting Grounds, and even if you do have to take Curses occasionally, your draw is probably strong enough to make up for it.
Golden Spoils - seems like pretty good payload. You get one, it gains you another, and then you keep just the two (gaining one and returning one each turn) and they're effectively Golds with +buy.
Hands of Gold - I don't see the Gold option coming up much. Probably not bad to pick up one of these for the consistency. Having this as the only village would be a major headache; without tons of cantrips you basically have to pitch a turn to activate the first one.
Librarian - it's a weaker Wharf that requires an Estate to activate, mostly. Maybe you use it on Silvers occasionally. Seems like a decent source of duration draw for extra consistency, probably not good as primary draw. Overall probably not that strong.
Madame - We talked about this one a bit in the Discord. This version looks okay, if not very interesting.
Magic Library - seems overpriced at $5. The sifting is nice, but unimpressive. The reaction is also nice, but not that impressive except against discard attacks, plus you have to have it in your hand for it to matter.
Maneuver - seems pretty fine. Not something I'd exactly be thrilled to draw with, but not the worst $5 Smithy variant.
Marketplace - probably not super great. If this is the only village then you're basically buying a Village for $5. If it isn't, then you'd probably be better off just getting a village if you need one or some other kind of payload card if you don't.
Nightmare - a curser with a very mild extra effect (discard one card is not that bad most of the time) whose gimmick is that you can junk them with other cards or use it to empty piles. Probably not very strong; terminal silver for $5 kinda sucks.
Shipmaster - seems very good. It's effectively a Lost City that provides consistency too.
Tavern Nights - the Miser combo has arrived! I'm honestly probably never discarding any treasures with this (except on like the last turn). Just using it as Copper thinning. The Coin of the Realm interaction is also funny.
Distant Island - cards with two dividing lines should probably be avoided if at all possible, since they don't look very good and they're often too complicated. Discard from exile bonus is probably not one I'm making use of very often, but I guess it's nice as a faster Island.
Paladin - very good. Probably on par with Hunting Party.
Fruits/Fruit Mix - Fruits is a Silver+ for $4 so I guess you take it whenever you would take Silver with $4. Otherwise I probably wouldn't. On the kind of board where Fruit Mix is uncovered (moneyish), you probably don't want it.

Joy - seems decent. Extraordinarily sad with no +buy.
Lending - very niche. There are very few action cards that are worth taking on 5 extra debt (I can't imagine you ever use this on less than a $5). Maybe if you have an incredible dud (like $1-2).
Burnish - again, seems pointless without +buy (barring Black Market/Storyteller). With +buy, maybe a slight incentive to keep my Coppers, nothing major.
Footbridge - seems incredibly good, not really centralizing though.
Bride Wait - I like this one. I don't particularly see why it costs debt rather than $, but it seems good either way.
Calmness - probably only gonna be bought on weak boards where consistency is a big issue. I think it's decent, though.
Burning - mostly just an expensive Bonfire, I think. Maybe you can use it to get Provinces as well.
Restrain - annoying for both players if it's the only source of +buy. The attack can be debilitating early, but it's kinda debilitating for both players. Potentially brutal when combined with discard attacks or hand inspection (like Cutpurse).
Cursed Land - a more narrow version of Desperation. I think Desperation makes this redundant.
Doubling Power - fine, I guess, if you happen to want the cards that it gives you. Seems not terribly different from Ball, except that it can gain $5's.
Birth of Venus - a more annoying Donate. Seems more luck-based than Donate, too, because if your opening cards don't collide then it will be hard to keep the cards you want.

Way of the Birdwoman - kinda weak, but not awful.
Way of the Centaur - seems like a stronger variant of Way of the Pig, which is already very strong.
Way of the Mermaid - seems pretty weak. Kinda like Way of the Mule, you probably only play it in a collision.
Way of the Werecat - weaker variant of Way of the Pig, but can help with consistency. Decent with gainers.
Way of the Beast - Gargoyle and Sphynx seem like slow attacks of the type that DXV has generally tried to avoid. Sphynx is probably too strong to be on a Way. Medusa is also too strong to be on a Way, Quimera is lol. She-Wolf and Harpy are probably okay.

Veil of Protection - very good attack defense, potentially makes some interesting decisions if you want to buy something but also want to be protected. Maybe this would be better as an Event?
Phoenix - seems incredibly good with any enabler.
Divination - balance-wise it's probably okay, but this seems so slow and annoying to resolve.
Season's Grace - probably a bit weak, but worth getting on boards where drawing is hard. More draw than Sinister Plot, but a lot less flexibility.
Great Cathedral - this seems kind of insane in how easy it is to make a golden deck with it. Can you not just like buy it turn 1, exile all your Estates, buy two Golds and maybe an action card or two, and then start buying Provinces?
Land Grant - this is a super cool idea. It doesn't seem terribly balanced, but it doesn't have to be, because the skill is mostly in knowing when to buy this rather than in knowing which landmark to pick (I feel like usually there will be one or two obvious choices). Of the landmarks themselves, only Yards seems to be clearly stronger than the rest.

[Carline]

Thank you very much Something_Smart, Aquila and BBobb! I apreciated so muych your help. I'm reading carefully to all comments and I will do the changes needed to fix the issues, weakness and wording mistakes you pointed. 

[BBobb]

Thank you very much Something_Smart, Aquila and BBobb! I apreciated so muych your help. I'm reading carefully to all comments and I will do the changes needed to fix the issues, weakness and wording mistakes you pointed. 

No problem! I will give you my analysis of the cards some time in the next week.

[Carline]

Merged Path and Madame into one card (Path) and added other terminal money, a Harvest variant (better than it I hope).

     

And 3 cards to have more non attack players interactions: A Wishing Well with a kind of reverse Gladiator bet, a Throne Command with a bit of the kindness of a Duchess and a Black Market gainer with Advisor condition.

          

[LittleFish]

Merged Path and Madame into one card (Path) and added other terminal money, a Harvest variant (better than it I hope).

     

And 3 cards to have more non attack players interactions: A Wishing Well with a kind of reverse Gladiator bet, a Throne Command with a bit of the kindness of a Duchess and a Black Market gainer with Advisor condition.

          

Gambler should end "you may reveal a copy of it from your hand for + 1 card" so there isn't trust issues

[Carline]

Gambler should end "you may reveal a copy of it from your hand for + 1 card" so there isn't trust issues

I think with the wording you suggested you could reveal the same copy many times until you draw your deck.

Added "Reveal your hand" to avoid trust issue. Thank you. 

[Gubump]

Gambler should end "you may reveal a copy of it from your hand for + 1 card" so there isn't trust issues

I think with the wording you suggested you could reveal the same copy many times until you draw your deck.

The text is only followed once. Same reason Mountebank doesn't let opponents just discard any number of Curses for draw-to-X purposes, and Vault doesn't let opponents do the "discard 2 cards to draw one" thing multiple times, etc.

Why would "you may reveal a copy of it from your hand for +1 Card" be followed any number of times when it only allows it once?

Generally, cards don't reveal multiple cards when there's no reason to. For example, Gladiator only has your opponent reveal one card even though it could have them reveal their hand, because it only cares about that one card. Likewise, there's no reason for Gambler to reveal your whole hand when it only cares about one card in it. It would also be less wordy to only reveal one card:

The player to your left reveals a card from their hand. You may reveal a copy from your hand for +1 Card.

This is only 21 words (counting the +1 Card as one word) versus your wording's 26 words.

[Carline]

Gambler should end "you may reveal a copy of it from your hand for + 1 card" so there isn't trust issues

I think with the wording you suggested you could reveal the same copy many times until you draw your deck.

The text is only followed once. Same reason Mountebank doesn't let opponents just discard any number of Curses for draw-to-X purposes, and Vault doesn't let opponents do the "discard 2 cards to draw one" thing multiple times, etc.

Why would "you may reveal a copy of it from your hand for +1 Card" be followed any number of times when it only allows it once?

Generally, cards don't reveal multiple cards when there's no reason to. For example, Gladiator only has your opponent reveal one card even though it could have them reveal their hand, because it only cares about that one card. Likewise, there's no reason for Gambler to reveal your whole hand when it only cares about one card in it. It would also be less wordy to only reveal one card:

The player to your left reveals a card from their hand. You may reveal a copy from your hand for +1 Card.

This is only 21 words (counting the +1 Card as one word) versus your wording's 26 words.

Of course the wording you both are suggesting is better. Yesterday I posted this card on Discord exactly with this text. I don't know why, after that, when I posted here, I thought it could lead to reveal a card more than once, so I changed it. Maybe it's because I remembered reading something in the forum about the possibility of an infinite loop revealing Secret Chamber undefinitely (and the same with Moat for a useless loop), but now I see that in their case, if it happens, it's because they are Reactions and reveal themselves.

[segura]

Heiress is too good. Double BoM/Overlord without any cost restriction is extremely powerful and not compensated by the Exiling. A TR that first drew a card would be very strong at $5 and this TR draws a virtual card that is whatever you wish it to be.

[Carline]

Heiress is too good. Double BoM/Overlord without any cost restriction is extremely powerful and not compensated by the Exiling. A TR that first drew a card would be very strong at $5 and this TR draws a virtual card that is whatever you wish it to be.

It would be more well balanced if they gain the card instead of Exile?

[segura]

The problem is not the power level of the compensation but that the effect is far too good to be counterweights by anything. Just imagine Heiress in a Kingdom with Mountebank. Alice plays Heiress as Double Mountebank, Bob gains 2 Curses, 2 Coppers and a Mountebank.

[Carline]

The problem is not the power level of the compensation but that the effect is far too good to be counterweights by anything. Just imagine Heiress in a Kingdom with Mountebank. Alice plays Heiress as Double Mountebank, Bob gains 2 Curses, 2 Coppers and a Mountebank.

Would this version work?