Print

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

[anordinaryman]

Eh? This card nets as being a cantrip, but it's a Laboratory now, pay back later kind of deal. No idea how to appropriately price this.

Very weak, I think. But a good idea nonetheless.

I am not so sure. If you can trash out of hand (Sentry, Lookout) or sift, this could be good. Plus, as always with Horse/Snow, Remodel.
The price is definitely correct, at $2 it would be too good.

The Snow-gaining can be less of a drawback in other situations too (and perhaps even desirable in some), e.g. if there are cards in the Kingdom that care about gains (e.g. Destrier, Sheepdog) or TfB where you want enough junk to feed it.  It helps that Snow has a cost of $3 unlike Ruins and Curses.   

I like Arctic Base.

I would be surprised if it were too weak for $4 even. I think it compares pretty favorably to Secret Passage. Although the $3/$4 price difference is fairly small anyways so it doesn't really matter.

I disagree. Would you ever prefer this over Caravan or Advisor?

Games where the only village is Sacrifice I want this over Caravan and Advisor. Games where draw is not too hard, but I want to have lots of cards (Discard for Benefit: Artisan, Artificer, etc. Or Gardens. Or Forge). Games where the only +Buy is salvager so I need something to sacrifice and this prints free snows for me. Tournament games where I badly need to win the first prize, no way I can afford to play Advisor and This gets me my extra card now, rather than waiting for next turn like Caravan.

I don't think these are wild edge cases. I think this card would still have some use as a cantrip snow gainer since many decks can profit over trashing those snows. Making it a lab gives it even more utility. I still think the 3 cost point makes some sense.

[alion8me]

Eh? This card nets as being a cantrip, but it's a Laboratory now, pay back later kind of deal. No idea how to appropriately price this.

Very weak, I think. But a good idea nonetheless.

I am not so sure. If you can trash out of hand (Sentry, Lookout) or sift, this could be good. Plus, as always with Horse/Snow, Remodel.
The price is definitely correct, at $2 it would be too good.

The Snow-gaining can be less of a drawback in other situations too (and perhaps even desirable in some), e.g. if there are cards in the Kingdom that care about gains (e.g. Destrier, Sheepdog) or TfB where you want enough junk to feed it.  It helps that Snow has a cost of $3 unlike Ruins and Curses.   

I like Arctic Base.

I would be surprised if it were too weak for $4 even. I think it compares pretty favorably to Secret Passage. Although the $3/$4 price difference is fairly small anyways so it doesn't really matter.

I disagree. Would you ever prefer this over Caravan or Advisor?

There are pretty common scenarios where I think you would buy this over Caravan/Advisor.

Arctic Base is nicer as a consistency tool than Caravan is because Caravan only does something for you on half of the turns you buy it at most, whereas this can do something every turn. It's not net draw, of course, but the reason you're buying this is to make the chance that you are able to draw your smithy + village or whatever it is together more likely. For Advisor, Arctic Base doesn't fail in the way Advisor can when your deck has a lot of junk. Obviously Arctic Base will also occasionally get trash for benefit synergies as well.

Having said that - I don't believe this is particularly strong for $4 either, and Caravan/Advisor are probably stronger cards in general. But it also wouldn't look out of place at that price to me.

(I realize anordinaryman just responded in a similar vein, but I had finished typing this up before I had realized they posted and I think this is different enough to be worth posting anyways)

[Gubump]

Eh? This card nets as being a cantrip, but it's a Laboratory now, pay back later kind of deal. No idea how to appropriately price this.

Very weak, I think. But a good idea nonetheless.

I am not so sure. If you can trash out of hand (Sentry, Lookout) or sift, this could be good. Plus, as always with Horse/Snow, Remodel.
The price is definitely correct, at $2 it would be too good.

The Snow-gaining can be less of a drawback in other situations too (and perhaps even desirable in some), e.g. if there are cards in the Kingdom that care about gains (e.g. Destrier, Sheepdog) or TfB where you want enough junk to feed it.  It helps that Snow has a cost of $3 unlike Ruins and Curses.   

I like Arctic Base.

I would be surprised if it were too weak for $4 even. I think it compares pretty favorably to Secret Passage. Although the $3/$4 price difference is fairly small anyways so it doesn't really matter.

I disagree. Would you ever prefer this over Caravan or Advisor?

There are pretty common scenarios where I think you would buy this over Caravan/Advisor.

Arctic Base is nicer as a consistency tool than Caravan is because Caravan only does something for you on half of the turns you buy it at most, whereas this can do something every turn. It's not net draw, of course, but the reason you're buying this is to make the chance that you are able to draw your smithy + village or whatever it is together more likely. For Advisor, Arctic Base doesn't fail in the way Advisor can when your deck has a lot of junk. Obviously Arctic Base will also occasionally get trash for benefit synergies as well.

Having said that - I don't believe this is particularly strong for $4 either, and Caravan/Advisor are probably stronger cards in general. But it also wouldn't look out of place at that price to me.

(I realize anordinaryman just responded in a similar vein, but I had finished typing this up before I had realized they posted and I think this is different enough to be worth posting anyways)

I do think it's kind of funny that segura said "would you prefer this over Caravan or Advisor" when both of those cost MORE. You generally prefer more expensive cards over cheaper cards, that's why they're more expensive...

EDIT: Note to self: When there are nested quotes within a comment, actually read all of them before responding.

[alion8me]

Eh? This card nets as being a cantrip, but it's a Laboratory now, pay back later kind of deal. No idea how to appropriately price this.

Very weak, I think. But a good idea nonetheless.

I am not so sure. If you can trash out of hand (Sentry, Lookout) or sift, this could be good. Plus, as always with Horse/Snow, Remodel.
The price is definitely correct, at $2 it would be too good.

The Snow-gaining can be less of a drawback in other situations too (and perhaps even desirable in some), e.g. if there are cards in the Kingdom that care about gains (e.g. Destrier, Sheepdog) or TfB where you want enough junk to feed it.  It helps that Snow has a cost of $3 unlike Ruins and Curses.   

I like Arctic Base.

I would be surprised if it were too weak for $4 even. I think it compares pretty favorably to Secret Passage. Although the $3/$4 price difference is fairly small anyways so it doesn't really matter.

I disagree. Would you ever prefer this over Caravan or Advisor?

There are pretty common scenarios where I think you would buy this over Caravan/Advisor.

Arctic Base is nicer as a consistency tool than Caravan is because Caravan only does something for you on half of the turns you buy it at most, whereas this can do something every turn. It's not net draw, of course, but the reason you're buying this is to make the chance that you are able to draw your smithy + village or whatever it is together more likely. For Advisor, Arctic Base doesn't fail in the way Advisor can when your deck has a lot of junk. Obviously Arctic Base will also occasionally get trash for benefit synergies as well.

Having said that - I don't believe this is particularly strong for $4 either, and Caravan/Advisor are probably stronger cards in general. But it also wouldn't look out of place at that price to me.

(I realize anordinaryman just responded in a similar vein, but I had finished typing this up before I had realized they posted and I think this is different enough to be worth posting anyways)

I do think it's kind of funny that segura said "would you prefer this over Caravan or Advisor" when both of those cost MORE. You generally prefer more expensive cards over cheaper cards, that's why they're more expensive...

I think the reason segura said that is because of my original claim "I would be surprised if it were too weak for $4 even."

[pubby]

[BBobb]

Though not obviously, I feel like this is a little similar to Masquerade. It draws three cards, and puts a snow onto your deck. This is essentially +3 Cards, take your -1 Card Token, or somewhat similar to +2 Cards. It then trashes a card from hand, which is very similar to Masquerade. Though it is slightly more powerful (+3 Card, -1 Card token is more powerful than +2 Cards), it can also be argued that its slightly weaker (no passing cards. I would say passing cards is more of a positive than a negative), so I think it probably could cost .

[Xen3k]

Winter Retreat
Action - Victory
+2 Cards
You may play an Action card from your hand. If it's a Snow, +1VP and Exile this, otherwise gain 1 Snow.
-
1VP

Similar to the much simpler Arctic Base and others posted previously, but with more going on. It is a Lab VP card that can net you an extra VP if it connects with a Snow. The catch is that it is a very useful card that will Exile itself if you do that. If you avoid playing a Snow off of it you will accumulate more Snow to bog down your deck. I think the price is right due to the potential VP it provides, but I am not sure about the number of VP tokens it should give or the number of Snow it should give. Feedback is appreciated.

[segura]

Eh? This card nets as being a cantrip, but it's a Laboratory now, pay back later kind of deal. No idea how to appropriately price this.

Very weak, I think. But a good idea nonetheless.

I am not so sure. If you can trash out of hand (Sentry, Lookout) or sift, this could be good. Plus, as always with Horse/Snow, Remodel.
The price is definitely correct, at $2 it would be too good.

The Snow-gaining can be less of a drawback in other situations too (and perhaps even desirable in some), e.g. if there are cards in the Kingdom that care about gains (e.g. Destrier, Sheepdog) or TfB where you want enough junk to feed it.  It helps that Snow has a cost of $3 unlike Ruins and Curses.   

I like Arctic Base.

I would be surprised if it were too weak for $4 even. I think it compares pretty favorably to Secret Passage. Although the $3/$4 price difference is fairly small anyways so it doesn't really matter.

I disagree. Would you ever prefer this over Caravan or Advisor?

Games where the only village is Sacrifice I want this over Caravan and Advisor. Games where draw is not too hard, but I want to have lots of cards (Discard for Benefit: Artisan, Artificer, etc. Or Gardens. Or Forge). Games where the only +Buy is salvager so I need something to sacrifice and this prints free snows for me. Tournament games where I badly need to win the first prize, no way I can afford to play Advisor and This gets me my extra card now, rather than waiting for next turn like Caravan.

I don't think these are wild edge cases. I think this card would still have some use as a cantrip snow gainer since many decks can profit over trashing those snows. Making it a lab gives it even more utility. I still think the 3 cost point makes some sense.

Discard for benefit doesn’t profit in any way from junk in your deck. It is rather the other way around, discard for benefit wants a lean deck that overdraws.
Are Silver gainers that brilliant with Forge or Exorcist? Not in my experience. You don’t mind to convert a few Silvers into Imps but you certainly don’t want a cantrip that gain Silvers (Silver is the most similar card to Snow in these TfB situations and as there are lots of Silver gainers, we have benchmarks).
I think I would rather run Caravan with Tournament. Duration draw is pretty neat to increase consistency and matching chances for Tournament.

[LibraryAdventurer]

Abominable Snowman
$4 - Action - Attack
+$2.
Each other player discards the top card of their deck, then gains a Snow on top of their deck.

[Gubump]

Abominable Snowman
$4 - Action - Attack
+$2.
Each other player discards the top card of their deck, then gains a Snow on top of their deck.

I think this compares too poorly to Militia. Gaining a Snow onto your deck is very similar to only having a 4-card hand next turn, which means that this is similar to a Militia whose attack is both weaker and delayed.

[segura]

I don’t think that you can easily compare discard Attacks with „draw one less“ type of Attacks like Minion or Relic. Compared to Relic the card looks OK: better as Snow can stack and as it is cheaper, weaker as it is terminal.

[Gubump]

I don’t think that you can easily compare discard Attacks with „draw one less“ type of Attacks like Minion or Relic. Compared to Relic the card looks OK: better as Snow can stack and as it is cheaper, weaker as it is terminal.

You're right, I was making the wrong kind of comparison. It's fine as-is.

[Mahowrath]

Sleighmaker - $4
Action - Reserve

+1 Action. Gain two Snows. Put this on your Tavern mat.
-
When you return a card to its pile, you may call this for +4 cards.

Somewhere between Cavalry and Caravan; a delayed non-terminal draw with Watchtower synergy.

[silverspawn]

Though not obviously, I feel like this is a little similar to Masquerade. It draws three cards, and puts a snow onto your deck. This is essentially +3 Cards, take your -1 Card Token, or somewhat similar to +2 Cards. It then trashes a card from hand, which is very similar to Masquerade. Though it is slightly more powerful (+3 Card, -1 Card token is more powerful than +2 Cards), it can also be argued that its slightly weaker (no passing cards. I would say passing cards is more of a positive than a negative), so I think it probably could cost .

It certainly 'could cost 3$' since virtually every card that costs 4$ could cost 3$, but Masquerade would be one of the strongest (maybe the strongest?) 4$'s in the game if it cost 4$. This card is extremely strong at 3$ or 4$.

[silverspawn]

It kills me that 'mountain pass' is already taken, but alas

[silverspawn]

By the way, the Snow card should have 'Action' capitalized in the text box, the (This is not in the Supply.) should be in italics (this should be done automatically), and it should have the Action type.

[fika monster]

By the way, the Snow card should have 'Action' capitalized in the text box, the (This is not in the Supply.) should be in italics (this should be done automatically), and it should have the Action type.

ooops. ill fix that

[Commodore Chuckles]

[Timinou]

It kills me that 'mountain pass' is already taken, but alas

Cool concept!  It seems like it would be fun to play with.

I’m vacillating between this being a bit too strong or a bit too weak.  You could always play this like a quasi-Library without having to gain any junk, which is OK for $5.  On the other hand, if you choose to discard to draw more cards, the immediate benefit is good but I feel like you’ll wind up trudging through a lot of Snow in the long run.  This reminds me a bit of Rats, where you could easily misplay it.  That said, in multiplayer games, the Snow pile could run out pretty quickly and this could become a beast.

[silverspawn]

Cool concept!  It seems like it would be fun to play with.

I’m vacillating between this being a bit too strong or a bit too weak.  You could always play this like a quasi-Library without having to gain any junk, which is OK for $5.  On the other hand, if you choose to discard to draw more cards, the immediate benefit is good but I feel like you’ll wind up trudging through a lot of Snow in the long run.  This reminds me a bit of Rats, where you could easily misplay it.  That said, in multiplayer games, the Snow pile could run out pretty quickly and this could become a beast.

Thanks

One thing to note is that the card also mitigates how much harm the snow does to you because Snow is close to a cantrip if you draw it together with mountain path.

[spineflu]

how's this interact with Scrying Pool? does SP let you dodge the rule on this, or?

[Meta]

Weekly Design Contest #103: Snow

Hello everyone! You all had some neat ideas for contests, but today i have a bit of hubris,  and it also happens to be snowing in sweden where i live! Henceforth this weeks contest...

Design a Card Or WELP that interacts with 'snow' (ie, this fanmade card)

TYPE: Action
Cost: 3$
+1 action
Return this to its pile.
(This is not in the Supply.)

There are a total of of 30 Snow cards in each game.

Snow is a temporary junk card, that goes away when you play it. You may design any sort of card, sideways card, or WELP that interacts with it. Or, if you want, your own mechanic with it.

My judging criteria for submissions:
1: Is this card Fun? (does it change the game in a fun way? Does it introduce interesting strategies? is it fun to play?)
2: Is this card understandable? (is there grammar or spelling errors? Does it condradict itself? Also, remember to have an english version if you post in another language!)

I hope you all have fun this week. The deadline for card submissions is February 5th, UTC 20/ 8 PM. ill try to have my judging up around February 6th.


Edit 1: fixed some formatting issues with snow as per silverspawns suggestions. i blame my jetlag!

Shouldn't the cost be 3*$ like the spirits and prizes? (As it's also a non-supply card)

[anordinaryman]

Updated Submission

Ice Castle | Action | $5
After playing your next card this turn, trash it. If it's a Treasure, +$2. If it's not, +2 Cards and gain a card costing up to $1 more.
-
When you gain or trash this, each player gains a Snow.

Two changes:
1. Clarify wording that the trashing happens after you play a card. Of course the Stop Moving rule means that if this card moved itself somewhere after playing (snow, for example), you don't get to put the card in the trash, but you still get the benefit  (in this case, +2 Cards and gain a card costing up to $4).
2. Slightly weaken it to +2 cards first before gaining. The symmetry with +$2 is nice, but the important change is this weakens the card in the case that you have already drawn your full deck. You'll need to have extra draw to put the new card in your hand. This also prevents someone from emptying the pile with a single Fortress and Ice Castle in hand. Before you could play Fortress, then Ice Castle, trashing the Fortress to gain an Ice Castle and a snows, then drawing 2 cards and playing a Fortress, allowing you to repeat this, flooding everyone's deck with snows. Now, since the draw happens first, you have a 33% chance for each repeat of the pattern (the fortress has to draw the Ice Castle instead of the Snow), and the turn you fail to repeat you have at least one top-decked snow. So, it's not super strong. Nevermind: this isn't possible because you need to play Ice Castles before your fortress, which means you have to have a Fortress in hand already per time you want to loop. So this loop doesn't really work.


I admit that "gain a card costing up to $1 more" is slightly ambiguous now that I have shifted that clause later. I believe a reasonable reader will correctly assume that the "$1 more" refers to the trashed card. And I think that's a perfect thing to clarify in a simple rulebook. Dominion convention would say to add a clause like "per card drawn" if I wanted it that way, so I think the canonical reading of this is $1 more than the card trashed.

[Gubump]

Before you could play Fortress, then Ice Castle, trashing the Fortress to gain an Ice Castle

Just being pedantic here, but wouldn't you need a 2nd Fortress? You'd need to play the Fortress AFTER the Ice Castle to trash it, not before.

[Meta]

Translation:
-------------------------
Ice Mage

Choose one:
Play an Action card from your hand twice; +3 Cards and +1 Buy; or +2$ and each other player gains 2 Snows.
------
When you gain a card, you may discard this, to exchange that card for a card from the Supply costing exactly $2 more than it.

7$  Action - Reaction - Attack

-------------------------
Updated english Wording according to Gubumps suggestion.
German wording remains unchanged.