Enchantment are interesting. Since you have to first gain the Enchantment card, then collide it with gaining the card you want to enchant, it can create a pretty high barrier to accomplishing what you want. This is especially true where you get some benefit for playing copies of the enchanted card, as you lose the one that gets enchanted.
Gold Dust: Treasure - Enchantment : $6 $2 - Enchant a non-Treasure card; your copies of it are also Treasures worth $1.
|
A Treasure - Enchantment that makes copies of the card it enchants Treasures (in addition to their original types). There are two obvious sets of uses for this. First, setting aside dead cards (mostly Victory cards, but sometimes Curses), both to take one copy out of your deck, and to make the others into cards you get at least some payload from (in games where the only trashers are Treasure trashers, it could also help you thin the other copies). The second strategy would be to enchant an Action, letting you play it non-terminally during your Buy phase.
At $6 to gain this, the first option isn't all that powerful. The second has some pretty strong potential. It can turn terminal $ into a (possibly more productive) Treasure. That could be a huge benefit with attacks like Militia or Charlatan (which you could put extra copies of in your deck, not needing to worry about drawing them dead). With terminal draw cards, it can be even stronger if you are willing to have those be the only Actions in your deck. Enchanting Smithy lets you play as many copies as you want. But, Lost Arts can do the same thing (at the same price), so I can't say that it's totally busted.
I do have some suggestions about the wording/mechanics. It might be better to say "During your turns, copies of it are also Treasures worth $1." This is how both Inheritance and Capitalism work. There can be some ambiguities created if the same card in a different place (e.g. the Supply/trash versus your hand) have different types. For example, if a card not clear if Sacrifice would give +$2 if you trashed a copy of the enchanted card. It also fixes the ambiguity of whether you could enchant two copies of the same card. Also, I believe official cards are moving away from saying "worth" so you might instead want to say "During your turns, copies of it are also Treasures that give +$1 when played."
Finally, it's a little ambiguous how this would work with, for example an Action card that gives +$. For example, does an enchanted Market give +$1 or +$2 when played?
Overall a fairly interesting submission.
|
|
|
Gargoyle • $3 • Victory - Enchantment 1VP
Enchant an Action card: when you trash a copy of that card, put it in your hand.
|
This is a fun idea that would create some interesting combos, but unfortunately it's irredeemably busted with at least three optional one-shots: Pixie, Mining Village, and Raze. Pixie's the most egregious, as a single copy in hand after enchanting it with Gargoyle gives a player (among other things) unlimited draws, coins, and buys. Ultimately, it allows them to pile the boon deck over and over, which then allows them to buy whatever they want, guaranteeing a win. (They could also pile out the Silvers, Golds, and any pile costing up to $4, but there's no reason to do so since they'd have enough coins + Silvers to win well before). Even in a game with Bandit Fort or Wall, a player could go back through the pile over and over getting The Flame's Gift to trash all of the cards they don't want (although doing so would take dozens of plays of Pixie, which is itself a nightmare). In a Gargoyle + Pixie game, the first player who plays a Pixie after enchanting it always wins; given that this can easily happen turn 4, the combo is completely busted.
An enchanted Mining Village allows a player to draw their deck along with unlimited actions and coins, which is itself totally busted, although not (absent Travelling Fair) an instant win. Raze "only" lets players draw their deck, and trash one card from it.
Ouside of those, it still feels a little on the strong side for a card that costs $3 to both help you out and not clog up your deck. Great Hall was always just a placeholding cantrip, while Mill (giving some benefit) costs $4. Gargoyle does draw dead at least once, but I still think on the whole it is considerably stronger than GH, meaning it should be at least $4.
Unfortunately I don't see any way around the busted nature of this. Even if you made it something like "When you would trash this, return it to your hand" so you don't trigger the optional trashing ability, that would (1) still make Pixie give unlimited draws, and make Mining Village give unlimited draws and Actions, and (2) ruin most of the interesting effects. I guess it might be possible to word it as something like "When you trash a copy of that card, put it in your hand unless it was trashed using an effect from that copy of the card" (if you could actually come up with viable language).
|
|
|
Water Fae • $5 • Action - Enchantment +1 Buy +$2 You may discard a Victory card for +$1
Enchant a Victory card. Copies of that card can exile from your hand for $1.
|
On play, Water Fae is a Woodcutter that can give an extra +$1 by discarding a Victory card. It can also enchant a Victory card to allow the player to Exile copies of that card by spending coins.
It's still not clear to me how the enchantment part of this works. How does a player spend $1 to Exile copies of the card from their hand? Can it be done any time they have $, they just reduce the amount by $1 to Exile the card? Or can only be done during their turn (like Storyteller's ability, but self-triggering), or only during their Buy phase (like an Event)? (This can matter; if you have Festival - Watchtower - Silver - Estate - Estate and can Exile those Estates during your Action phase, you get 2 more cards from Watchtower's dtx). And if it is like an Event, does it cost a buy? I presume not, but that isn't at all clear.
Depending on which version of it you choose, the power level is a lot different. If it costs $1 and a Buy, that isn't all that strong. But if it's the any-time ability, I think that's far too strong. The Victory card you enchant is removed from the game (or, since you're gaining it, it's like getting the VPs without ever having the card in your deck). It's not at all uncommon to have $1 or $2 more than you need to hit the buy you're going for, meaning there is little to no opportunity cost to Exile more copies. I'm not sure it's worth doing to your Estates if there's any decent trashing, but it seems like a no-brainer to do with Provinces, and it's potentially even stronger with Duke or (on the right board) Fairgrounds.
Also, the word "Exile" should be capitalized, even when used as a verb (see Stockpile).
|
|
|
Wayfinder $5 Action - Enchantment Gain a card costing up to $4 --- Enchant an Action card. When you play an Action card, you may choose whether to follow its normal text or to instead play the enchanted card, leaving it there.
|
On play, this is a simple gainer. It can enchant an Action card, to (in effect) turn that card into a Way that you can play in lieu of playing Action cards normally. The card has a natural self-synergy, as you can enchant an Action card you gain using the on-play effect (and, if you have an extra Action and Action card in your hand, immediately play it using the ability).
The biggest issue (and the easiest to fix) is that this allows for the possibility of Command loops. If you enchant a Band of Misfits, then play a Village, you can choose to play BoM, which you can then use to play a Village, and you can repeat endlessly. With the tokens from Adventures this could be the source of an unlimited number of the applicable bonus. Even without the tokens, playing Captain repeatedly on one turn gives you that many play the following turn. This is easily fixed by adding a "non-Command" restriction.
Even with that limitation, this is still extremely powerful. While the easiest thing to do is enchant a card you gained, with no price limitation, you could fairly easily be enchanting a Grand Market or King's Court. But even if you just enchanted a village, you could then buy a bunch of terminal draw cards without ever having to worry about drawing them dead.
Also, the way it is currently worded, it seems as though a player that's enchanted 2 different action cards would have the choice with each, and even if they'd enchanted two useless Ruins, they could still play every Action card twice (choosing "follow its normal text" each time). Given how easy it is to enchant something with these, that's far too low a cost to throne every Action card you play, so the wording should probably be clarified to indicate that only one of the enchanted cards can be played (if that was your intent).
|
|
|
Rumpelstiltskin - $5 Night - Enchantment +2 Coffers ---- Enchant a card costing $4 or more: The first time any other player gains a copy of that card each turn, gain a Gold onto your deck.
|
This is an interesting design, and great flavor. Playable as a Night for 2 Coffers. When an opponent gains a copy of a card it enchants (which has to cost at least $4), you gain a Gold.
It seems all but self-evident that you'd want to enchant a Province (or Colony) as soon as possible. It lets you gain a Province without adding it to your deck, and when players start greening in earnest, it boosts your payload to help you hit the needed price points. The Coffers it gains helps pull this off, and I don't see any scenario (barring a case where you really don't want Golds, either because you have a very efficient engine or Bandit Fort) where a player doesn't gain Rumpelstiltskin as soon as possible, hold on to the Coffers from the first play (or two), then enchant Province (or Colony) as soon as they can. I suppose there might be some strategy in waiting a bit longer to enchant so you can have Rumpelstiltskin longer, but I'm not sure the 2 Night tokens are worth it. While this isn't busted, it feels kind of singularizing.
There are probably some other ways this might get played, but my worry would be that that one play is just too strong and automatic.
|
|
|
Hammer fairy $4 Action - enchantment gain an card costing up to 4. - enchant an action card. When you play that card, gain an card costing up to 4
|
Hammer fairy is a gainer on play, which makes whatever it enchants into a gainer. Again, this provides a self-synergy, as you can enchant the card you gain. The enchantment ability itself is, to be honest, kind of insane. Turning a Hamlet or village or Market Square into a cantrip{+} gainer (which can rush copies of itself before being unleashed on the board) would result in massive gaining. It can also gain you another Hammer fairy, which you can use to turn another engine component into a gainer. However, unless you already have the lead (or unless you're playing a game with Gardens and manage to pile that out as your third), you'll start being forced to gain cards you don't really want.
On the other hand, it still might be worth enchanting a card you'll use less frequently but is still non-terminal/a cantrip and only getting a couple more copies to use more normally. It's also very strong with Way of the Horse (and ) or Experiment. If each copy of your village can gain you 2 Experiments, that is both super-powerful and sustainable.
But in that game, and even stronger strategy is to enchant Experiment itself. After you play it (and return it to its pile), you can then just gain it back again. This makes each copy of Experiment considerably stronger than Lab (as you can use each one an unlimited number of times each turn). This also works with every card and WotH. Thus, you should probably modify the gaining to either happen before the card resolves or to only have it happen if the card is in play.
One note on the phrasing. It should say, "When you play a copy of that card, gain a card costing up to $4."
|
|
|
Magical Researcher • $5 • Action - Enchantment +1 Card +2 Actions Discard a card.
Enchant an Action that doesn't have +Actions in its text: The first time you play it each turn, +2 Actions.
|
Magical Researcher is a sifting Necropolis on play, which gives a player +2 Actions the first time they play a copy of the enchanted card.
In designing enchantments, versions of the tokens from Adventures are a promising options. However, they are potentially hard to balance, as on one hand it is harder to enchant a card than to just buy a Event and move a token, on the other hand you can enchant multiple cards (making, for example, both Moat and Margrave non-terminal).
Here, you've come up with an interesting twist on Lost Arts. Magical Researcher won't make and endless supply of them non-terminal, but it, in effect, guarantees you'll get a single village before the first time you play one. This can take a ton of pressue off engines that have both terminal draw village components. It could also allow for a really tight deck that had just 3 copies of a terminal card (in addition to the enchanted one not in the deck), all of which can be played. I really like this approach.
One note on the phrasing. It should say, "the first time you play a copy of it each turn, +2 Actions."
|