• Cards that allow you to pay a Trade token for an effect now use an abbreviated "to" phrasing e.g. "You may pay a Trade token, to draw a card".
This abbreviation sounds weird. Does it really save all that much space? I find it unusual that you continue to call "Actions" and "Treasures" "Action cards" and "Treasure cards" while trying to save space.
• Dignitary's reaction has been reworked to avoid the (admittedly unlikely) infinite Fortress loop. Now you can discard it when another player plays an Attack to trash a card from your hand and then draw a card. Yes, you might draw another (or the same) Dignitary. Eventually you won't, though. You could effectively cycle infinitely with a Golden deck that includes Fortress, but that's just a case of you wasting everybody's time, not of a literal infinite code loop where the game can't progress no matter what you do. Long story short, I hope this version works out.
Why was this change necessary? Its previous wording ("trash down to 4 cards in hand") was pretty easy to work with, even if it couldn't stack (excepting
Fortress, which is a loop that only lets you trigger
Market Square without actually trashing a card). I think I'll find myself reluctant to use this Dignitary's Reaction because I'll lose the use of its strong Action effect.
• Conscripts is the new version that only returns to the pile and gives out Curses if you match it up with another Attack in hand. I'm trying it with Barracks and Recruiter as they are. Probably they were too strong before and maybe this nerf is enough to get them to a manageable power level.
I liked the idea of changing Recruiter and Barracks with the massive overhaul of Conscripts that took place. At the same time, I liked the original idea of Barracks.
I'd like to see that $4 Recruiter that gains 2 Conscripts and pulls Attacks and Reactions from your discard pile in response to Attacks and a Barracks that can do something like either gain a Conscripts with some other vanilla benefit or non-terminally hunt for an Attack (maybe make it a splitter when digging for an Attack? Would that be interesting?).
• I need a 25th Kingdom card. Should cost $5 or maybe $6. Maybe an Attack. I could test Conquest, but I already have two trashing Attacks. Hmm…
• Probably I have too many $3 cards. Perhaps I could change one to cost either $2 or $4.
The cost distribution is overall a bit low because of the number of $3 cards. Getting a $6 card will help that. I'm not crazy about some of the off-theme $3 cards you have like Refurbish and Auction, so I wouldn't be too sad for them to be cut.
You are pretty heavy on non-terminal cards in general. There is not a particularly fast way to trash (save Gambler\Gambler which is always a... you know) within your set, though you have quite a few trashers.
• Vendor is kind of unexciting. I'd like to perhaps replace it with a cooler card. Either its replacement or the 25th card (or both) should have +1 Buy.
Vendor occupies a kind of similar space as Gambler since they both have the same effect when trashed, but I actually prefer Vendor.
While Gambler is thematic with both itself and the set, as well as strong, Gambler is a very strong card that is not very much fun to use. The decision to trash the card you look at or draw it is really a non-decision, but trashing the Gambler almost always feels bad because you wished it would have stuck around to trash more.
Trashing is a strong effect that is mildly uncommon and monumentally useful, so with Gambler being a cheap non-terminal trasher, it is nearly impossible to pass on any non-rush board. While cards that are nearly necessary to buy aren't necessarily unhealthy for the game (see
Chapel,
Witch,
Goons), Gambler does not create an unusual game-state the way those games do. All Gambler does is push the game more towards luck as some players will get lucky with the trashing.
Where Gambler is easy to use and always useful, Vendor is hard to use and situational.
Trashing Vendor rarely feels bad because it feels much more like a choice. Its sifting is unusual and only useful if you can get a weird sort of Action deck going that pushes past its Coppers to get to its meaty Actions (though it is utterly neutered by Cursers). And then when your deck starts greening, all your Vendors turn into one-shot
Laboratories.
Maybe this will not be a common opinion among those who have played with the cards, but I find Vendor and Gambler to be stepping on each other's toes, and between the two, I like Vendor because it is a card with a higher skill cap and more interesting decisions.
• Playtest more! Especially the newer cards.
Hear, hear!