Print

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

[chwhite]

I have two thoughts on this one.

Granary
Action- $4?

+3 Cards
+1 Action

Discard down to four cards in hand.

OR

Granary
Action- $4?

+2 Cards
+1 Action

Discard down to five cards in hand.

Basically, the idea here is to create a sifter that stacks differently from all other sifters.  With Warehouse/Cellar/Inn etc., each subsequent play decreases your hand size by one, which means you can't just play a whole bunch without losing your whole hand, but they work very well with other +Card sources.  With Granary, you can keep playing them until the cows come home and your hand stays the same size... but don't try it after a long Lab chain!  Another good thing about these cards is that they function as a pretty strong counter to hand reduction: normally you don't want to bother with Warehouse if you're under constant Militia attack, but if you play (the first) Granary on a three-card hand it's basically a Stable where you can discard anything, not just Treasure.

The second variant decreases cycling power but increases hand size, which strikes me as a fair trade-off. 

Thoughts on the mechanic in general?  Think they're over-or-undercosted?  It's not a complicated card, but "draw up to X/discard down to X" is IMO a very interesting design space that I'd like to see filled a little more.

[popsofctown]

I favor the 2 card version.  The other feels like a better Warehouse.  I think Warehouse is strong.

[chwhite]

I favor the 2 card version.  The other feels like a better Warehouse.  I think Warehouse is strong.

I think I do too.  The first version was the first one that came to mind, and I thought of the second as way to balance the first.  I mean, the first does want to cost $4 rather than $3, but there's very little difference between those two price points.  The one thing I like about the first one is that one of them is better at combating hand reduction, a la Library/Militia- and that effect is part of what I'm going for here.

[Voltgloss]

I misread the topic title as "Card Idea: Canary," and came in expecting some sort of weird self-trashing synergy involving Mine.

[chwhite]

I misread the topic title as "Card Idea: Canary," and came in expecting some sort of weird self-trashing synergy involving Mine.

CANARY
Treasure-Victory-Reaction: $3
Worth $1 and 1 VP.  When you play Canary, you may trash a Victory card from your hand.
___________
When you trash Canary from your hand, gain a Gold.

I have edited this way too many times for a joke card.

[LastFootnote]

I really like the mechanic. It's almost like a Warehouse/Minion. Without testing them, I prefer the +3 cards/discard down to 4 version. It seems more interesting. Bigger payoff, but bigger risk too. If it turned out to be too powerful, then I'd try the +2 cards/discard down to 5 version.

[WanderingWinder]

The first GranaryA you play in a turn is just the same as a warehouse. It's more stackable, and it's better against discard attacks, etc. But worse against Governor/Council room.

Just because it's more different from Warehouse, I like B better.

[LastFootnote]

The first GranaryA you play in a turn is just the same as a warehouse. It's more stackable, and it's better against discard attacks, etc. But worse against Governor/Council room.

Just because it's more different from Warehouse, I like B better.

Oh, man. I strongly disagree. Is Type-A often similar to Warehouse? Yes. Does being quite similar to an existing card make it less appealing? Yes. But all other factors I can think of come out in Type-A's favor.

First, Type-A is better against discard attacks. If you have 4 or fewer cards in hand before you play it, Type-B is just a cheap Laboratory. Don't get me wrong, Lab is a decent anti-discard card, but in this case, the Draw 3/Discard 1 effect becomes more interesting. If you play them with 3 cards in hand, they both leave you with 4 cards, but Type-A gives you a bigger selection. You could say that Type-A is more indifferent to discard attacks, and I like that. Granted, if you have two copies of Type-B, you come out ahead, but that brings me to my next point.

You need fewer copies of Type-A to get a bigger effect. Because it costs 4, it's not too tough to load up on copies of Granary, but with Type-A, you need fewer copies to get the benefit it offers. Type-B offers a bigger potential benefit, but you need more copies of the card to achieve it. With Type-A, I have more buys to spare on other cards.

[WanderingWinder]

The first GranaryA you play in a turn is just the same as a warehouse. It's more stackable, and it's better against discard attacks, etc. But worse against Governor/Council room.

Just because it's more different from Warehouse, I like B better.

Oh, man. I strongly disagree. Is Type-A often similar to Warehouse? Yes. Does being quite similar to an existing card make it less appealing? Yes. But all other factors I can think of come out in Type-A's favor.

First, Type-A is better against discard attacks. If you have 4 or fewer cards in hand before you play it, Type-B is just a cheap Laboratory. Don't get me wrong, Lab is a decent anti-discard card, but in this case, the Draw 3/Discard 1 effect becomes more interesting. If you play them with 3 cards in hand, they both leave you with 4 cards, but Type-A gives you a bigger selection. You could say that Type-A is more indifferent to discard attacks, and I like that. Granted, if you have two copies of Type-B, you come out ahead, but that brings me to my next point.

You need fewer copies of Type-A to get a bigger effect. Because it costs 4, it's not too tough to load up on copies of Granary, but with Type-A, you need fewer copies to get the benefit it offers. Type-B offers a bigger potential benefit, but you need more copies of the card to achieve it. With Type-A, I have more buys to spare on other cards.

Ok? You're disagreeing with my opinion? Of which I like? I assure you I like B very mildly more than A. I could be convinced otherwise, but probably only with playtesting. You like A better? That's fine too.
I just don't understand how you 'strongly disagree' with what I said. Though I can understand why you might have a strong preference for A.

[LastFootnote]

Whoa. I don't think my post came across with its intended tone. I wasn't trying to say that your opinion was without merit. I was simply stating that I hold the opposite opinion and explaining some reasons why. That's generally what people mean when they disagree with an opinion.

When I saw that you'd responded, I was kind of hoping you had some interesting insight on my comments, not that you had gotten angry over semantics. Sorry!

[chwhite]

I go back and forth on which one I like better.  The main argument for B, I think, is that option A is too similar to Warehouse: but single-Library is just as similar to single-Smithy, so that shouldn't disqualify it.  I initially thought this was enough to swing me towards Option B, but upon reflection I think I might prefer Option A because it's a stronger counter to discard attacks, which is part of the rationale behind creating a sifting version of Library/Watchtower in the first place.

[popsofctown]

That's not what my argument was.  My argument was that Warehouse is a very strong 3-4$ card, and that granary A is a usually-better version of Warehouse which treads very dangerous territory.

The library-smithy example is perfect.  Library is better than Smithy.  Smithy is pretty dang good at 4$.  So Donald made Library a step above Smithy on the 2-3-4, 5, 6, 7, 8 scale.

[O]

That's not what my argument was.  My argument was that Warehouse is a very strong 3-4$ card, and that granary A is a usually-better version of Warehouse which treads very dangerous territory.

The library-smithy example is perfect.  Library is better than Smithy.  Smithy is pretty dang good at 4$.  So Donald made Library a step above Smithy on the 2-3-4, 5, 6, 7, 8 scale.

But 3 and 4 are still different.. and its only marginally better...

[chwhite]

That's not what my argument was.  My argument was that Warehouse is a very strong 3-4$ card, and that granary A is a usually-better version of Warehouse which treads very dangerous territory.

The library-smithy example is perfect.  Library is better than Smithy.  Smithy is pretty dang good at 4$.  So Donald made Library a step above Smithy on the 2-3-4, 5, 6, 7, 8 scale.

While there isn't much difference between 3 and 4, the difference still exists.  Also, IMO Smithy is only a mid-level $4 and Library is a below-average $5. 

And it's not like Donald X. has been unwilling to make new and usually improved versions of old cards even at the exact same price point before.  See Thief/Noble Brigand and Lab/Hunting Party.