Print

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

[GendoIkari]

While teaching the game to someone new, she played a thief and started to try and take my trashed Copper into her hand to use immediately. I explained that if she chooses to gain the Copper, it goes into her discard.

But that got me thinking... what if Thief did say that you could gain one of the treasures into your hand? Thief is pretty crappy as it is, so perhaps this version would be better balanced? So, if Thief could gain one of the trashed treasures into your hand, how much better would it be? Would it be still a weak $4? Would it be an average $4? Or would it be an overpowered $4 / should be $5?

My opinion: It would be a slightly below average $4, as opposed to a way below average $4.

[DStu]

Noble Brigand turned out to be a quite good card for BigMoney, if your opponent also goes for it.

Comparing it with it, it starts out about equal (you (may) gain a Copper in hand instead of +$1, which is usually a bit weaker), but getting a Silver or Gold in hand is like an Noble Explorer that gains you money and steals it. And there is no on-buy effect of course.
So I would say that is stronger than NB, who is a above average $4 for BigMoney at least. For engines it's not much stronger than Thief, as for engine gaining things in hand is not so important after all. A good engine maybe can draw gained cards the same turn.

Can't decide if $4 or $5. Stealing an early Silver in hand is a bit scary. On the other hand, if the opponent does not stick to your plan and builds some engine, this card still does not help you much.

[Taco Lobster]

Interesting idea.  Maybe if it proves too powerful at $4, you could reduce the number of cards revealed to 1.

[GendoIkari]

Interesting idea.  Maybe if it proves too powerful at $4, you could reduce the number of cards revealed to 1.

My guess is that that would make it far worse than the current Thief, even with the gain in hand. The odds of hitting a non-Copper treasure are just far too small. Still great if combined with Scrying Pool or Spy, but how often is that?

[WanderingWinder]

Interesting idea.  Maybe if it proves too powerful at $4, you could reduce the number of cards revealed to 1.

My guess is that that would make it far worse than the current Thief, even with the gain in hand. The odds of hitting a non-Copper treasure are just far too small. Still great passably mediocre if combined with Scrying Pool or Spy, but how often is that?

Fixed your post.
One card... would be terrible.
Now, if you go for 3 cards, no other buffs, you get an interesting (possibly pretty darn strong) card for 2p... tremendously overpowered in mutliplayer

[jonts26]

What if thief revealed min(5-n,1) cards where n is the total number of players.

[popsofctown]

Thief should gain to hand.  Donald should errata it.  We need to get him into the idea of doing erratas.  Once we can get him to defile his pristine game once we'll be able to get him to do it again.

[WanderingWinder]

Thief should gain to hand.  Donald should errata it.  We need to get him into the idea of doing erratas.  Once we can get him to defile his pristine game once we'll be able to get him to do it again.

No. Just no.

[O]

As four the 4-cost w/ gaining to hand....

Platinum

/Thread (OK... not really, but just like thief gets better in colony-Platinum BM games, a thief to hand is RIDICULOUSLY op in a game with platinum like that.)

[WanderingWinder]

(OK... not really, but just like thief gets better in colony-Platinum BM games, a ...thief...is RIDICULOUSLY op...

Okay, I realize this is ridiculously out of context, but it's STILL so gosh-darn crazy-sounding (and, moreover, unusual to hear) that I wanted to present it on a silver platter for anyone to stick in their signature.

[Taco Lobster]

3 card thief is a neat idea. 

I suppose 1 card thief into hand might need something extra...maybe if you miss a treasure, opponent must discard a treasure?  Of course, then we're talking about a card that's a better Cutpurse with an extra feature added on, so it's clearly not a $4. 

Still, there's a certain symmetry to it - if I hit a treasure, I get it in my hand and have more coin.  If I don't hit a treasure, I'm down a card that could've produced coin, but so are you.

[O]

3 card thief is a neat idea. 

I suppose 1 card thief into hand might need something extra...maybe if you miss a treasure, opponent must discard a treasure?  Of course, then we're talking about a card that's a better Cutpurse with an extra feature added on, so it's clearly not a $4. 

Still, there's a certain symmetry to it - if I hit a treasure, I get it in my hand and have more coin.  If I don't hit a treasure, I'm down a card that could've produced coin, but so are you.

not +2$, could still theoretically be 4$.

[Taco Lobster]

Duh.  I forgot about the +$2.  Okay, maybe one-card-peek-trash-into-hand-otherwise-discard-thief could work as a $4.

And, that's a catchy name for the card.

[LastFootnote]

Really, the problem with Thief gaining Treasure in hand is that it makes the card even more luck-based than it already is. If you hit Copper, you're probably going to trash it and get no extra coins this turn. If you hit a good Treasure, you gain it AND get to use it this turn? Bad idea, I think.

If I were to try to update Thief, the first thing I'd try is just giving it +$1 like Noble Brigand has. I think that would go a long way toward making it more usable.

EDIT: Alternatively, give it a consolation prize. If you choose not to gain any of the trashed Treasures, +$2. That would probably make the card text too long, unfortunately.

[yudantaiteki]

I have to agree with LastFootnote -- it seems to me the two major problems with the card are that it can completely miss, and that it can help your opponents by trashing their coppers.  Letting you gain the card in your hand doesn't really deal with either of those flaws.

Adding "You may have them trash..." would make it slightly better, but probably still pretty weak.

Another possibility I thought of before is to add both "You may", and then at the end "If you gain no cards in this way, gain a Silver." (or perhaps even just "[You may?] gain a Silver.")  The thief should steal something, even if not from the opponents.  But maybe now that's getting too strong...

[ycz6]

Consider the combo Thief-into-hand/Bank in a 4P Colony game. Holy crap.

[Julle]

...
Adding "You may have them trash..." would make it slightly better, but probably still pretty weak.
...

In finnish version, this is actually what is written on the card. It's a minor error and in the rulebook Thief section is correct.

[Schlippy]

Powered up Thief:

Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck.
They draw one of them which you choose. You may take any or all of the other revealed cards that are not Victory cards.
They discard the other cards.

[Dr Who]

How about this? I would make it cost $5

Each other player reveals two treasure cards from his hand (or reveals a hand containing less than two treasures). You may choose to take one of the revealed treasures into your hand.

Useless at the beginning of the game but later on it could steal your gold. So do you buy gold when you can? Or go for duchies and silver? Or do you buy a theif only after others have bought gold? Or all get theives and steal each others' gold? Or try to build conspirator chains?

[eHalcyon]

How about this? I would make it cost $5

Each other player reveals two treasure cards from his hand (or reveals a hand containing less than two treasures). You may choose to take one of the revealed treasures into your hand.

Useless at the beginning of the game but later on it could steal your gold. So do you buy gold when you can? Or go for duchies and silver? Or do you buy a theif only after others have bought gold? Or all get theives and steal each others' gold? Or try to build conspirator chains?

Stealing it out of their hand and into yours is extremely powerful.  Not only do you have an improved Cutpurse effect (in that you can remove something better than Copper from their hand), but you also potentially get up to +$5 from just this card (if Platinum is in the game).  I think I would price this at $6.

The other thing to worry about is the politics of the card.  I assume you're not allowing this card to steal a treasure from each other opponent, because that could make for ridiculous amount of treasure gains each play.  But without that, you could choose to steal Silver from a specific player who is winning (or that you just don't like) rather than the Gold from your better friend (or the guy who is not as big a threat).  Dominion is designed as a game without politics.  Of course, if you like politics in your games (and I often do), then targeted attacks are fine.

[Davio]

Powered up Thief: "Go play multiplayer or leave me alone."

Did you know...... Dominion can be played with more than 2 players?


Real life Dominion is best with 3 players, otherwise you have too damn little time to shuffle!

[One Armed Man]

Burglar
4 cost
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. If they revealed any Treasure cards, you may choose to trash up to one of the revealed treasures from each player. You may gain any or all of these trashed cards. They discard the other revealed cards. If you gain exactly one of the trashed cards, you may place it on top of your deck.

You can choose not to trash any Coppers. In 2 player or if you happen not to hit more than one Silver or better, you can get it next turn.

[Synthesizer]

Here's an idea, without mucking too much with the basic thief:
what if thief may place one of the revealed cards back on the deck?
That way, you also tack a spy/rabble-ish effect on, which might just make it acceptable.

Or maybe make it mandatory, otherwise it might become too good at $4, when bought mid/late game. Or not. I haven't thought this through very well .

PS: so what I mean: you are still forced to trash coppers but you also get to put a green card on top.

PS2: sorry for reviving this, apparantely I clicked a link in a different thread and ended up in this one, while forgetting about clicking anywhere. Again, sorry.