Print

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

[popsofctown]

I feel like Duchess is kinda global.

[Nic]

Ooh, good one. I had already considered and rejected Native Village as an edge case, but I didn't think of that one.
. . . and it's even where the wording came from. I would say it's a little different, since new players will already be reading the cards when they want to gain them, and it doesn't apply every single turn.

[ta56636]

This may be a little bit too much off-piste (maybe even a different card): but one possible solution to the never taking the curse off the matt (and possibly make the card more fun) would be to make it an advantage to take the curse.  One possible idea could be:

$4 Action-Attack
Put a card from your hand on the Soothsayer mat.  If you do, each other player gains a curse, putting it on their mat.
-----------
In games using this at the start of your turn you may:
Take a card off your mat, putting it into your hand.  If you do, gain a gold.
Discard a treasure and trash a card from your mat.
(Do nothing)
-----------
At the end of the game put all cards on your mat into your deck
You can look at the cards on your mat at any time

(some of this text (last two sentences) could be on the mat and not the card!)

[SirPeebles]

This may be a little bit too much off-piste (maybe even a different card): but one possible solution to the never taking the curse off the matt (and possibly make the card more fun) would be to make it an advantage to take the curse.  One possible idea could be:

$4 Action-Attack
Put a card from your hand on the Soothsayer mat.  If you do, each other player gains a curse, putting it on their mat.
-----------
In games using this at the start of your turn you may:
Take a card off your mat, putting it into your hand.  If you do, gain a gold.
Discard a treasure and trash a card from your mat.
(Do nothing)
-----------
At the end of the game put all cards on your mat into your deck
You can look at the cards on your mat at any time

(some of this text (last two sentences) could be on the mat and not the card!)

This is barely an attack, and on the whole appears to help your opponent.  I mean, the core of the attack here is that it deals the point reduction of Curses, without the junking effect of Curses.  Frankly, this is as much an attack as Monument.  Then there is all of this confusing auxiliary mat mechanism which only functions to weaken the attack further by giving your opponent further options.  The only place there is any sort of buff is that Soothsayer provides a Gold gaining, controlled Haven effect for the player.  This last effect is cool, but really deserves its own card. 

In summary, this version of Soothsayer is an extremely weak attack, with the Gold-gaining Haven effect being the only real reason to ever buy it.  So why not just chop off the attack portion entirely at this point and just design a card exploring the latter?

[Nic]

If Junk Dealer or Forager are on the board, then not only is the Monument effect is negated, but you're left with 'terminal Haven, you and every other player gain a Gold'.

[ta56636]

Both valid points.  (Although if you do trash a curse with e.g. Junk Dealer - you miss an opportunity to junk an estate or copper).  There is no doubt that it is 'interaction lite' and might need a bit of balance (+1 card, +1 action spring to mind), but surely not every curser needs to be game dominating like Witch?

[eHalcyon]

Both valid points.  (Although if you do trash a curse with e.g. Junk Dealer - you miss an opportunity to junk an estate or copper).  There is no doubt that it is 'interaction lite' and might need a bit of balance (+1 card, +1 action spring to mind), but surely not every curser needs to be game dominating like Witch?

Sure, and not every Curses is. Familiar and YW don't always dominate. But you also don't want your attack to be actively beneficial to opponents a lot of the time. And the changes you propose deviate pretty far from the original.

[ta56636]

Both valid points.  (Although if you do trash a curse with e.g. Junk Dealer - you miss an opportunity to junk an estate or copper).  There is no doubt that it is 'interaction lite' and might need a bit of balance (+1 card, +1 action spring to mind), but surely not every curser needs to be game dominating like Witch?

Sure, and not every Curses is. Familiar and YW don't always dominate. But you also don't want your attack to be actively beneficial to opponents a lot of the time. And the changes you propose deviate pretty far from the original.

You are almost certainly correct that it is too far from the original, however I still don't see it as that weak:

Net benefit/Lose of the options
1) They leave the curse on the mat:
You have a haven effect and gain a gold, they get -1VP
2) They take the curse:
You have a haven effect and they gain a curse (very similar strength wise to Sea Hag?)
3) They discard a treasure:
You have a haven effect, gain a gold, they lose one treasure form their hand

They all seem pretty strong for the attacking player to me... In fact them taking the curse is probably the best option (generally), which returns to the original point of having a scenario where someone actively takes a curse.

[eHalcyon]

Both valid points.  (Although if you do trash a curse with e.g. Junk Dealer - you miss an opportunity to junk an estate or copper).  There is no doubt that it is 'interaction lite' and might need a bit of balance (+1 card, +1 action spring to mind), but surely not every curser needs to be game dominating like Witch?

Sure, and not every Curses is. Familiar and YW don't always dominate. But you also don't want your attack to be actively beneficial to opponents a lot of the time. And the changes you propose deviate pretty far from the original.

You are almost certainly correct that it is too far from the original, however I still don't see it as that weak:

Net benefit/Lose of the options
1) They leave the curse on the mat:
You have a haven effect and gain a gold, they get -1VP
2) They take the curse:
You have a haven effect and they gain a curse (very similar strength wise to Sea Hag?)
3) They discard a treasure:
You have a haven effect, gain a gold, they lose one treasure form their hand

They all seem pretty strong for the attacking player to me... In fact them taking the curse is probably the best option (generally), which returns to the original point of having a scenario where someone actively takes a curse.

SirPeebles already explained why it's weak as an attack. #1is more like a Monument than an attack. #2 is much weaker than Sea Hag because the Curse doesn't go on top of their deck, and the delay in gaining means it could even miss the reshuffle. #3 is like Cutpurse. Altogether it is weaker because opponents gave the choice to deal with it the best way for them. Note that they can choose to leave the Curse until they have a spare Copper to discard, rendering the attack completely ineffective. Yes the card still has bonuses for you, but the attack really doesn't hurt opponents, so why include all that unnecessary complexity? If the terminal haven and delayed gold gaining is interesting, it'll stand on its own. The attack part of the card is just extremely easy to ignore. .

[Witherweaver]

Both valid points.  (Although if you do trash a curse with e.g. Junk Dealer - you miss an opportunity to junk an estate or copper).  There is no doubt that it is 'interaction lite' and might need a bit of balance (+1 card, +1 action spring to mind), but surely not every curser needs to be game dominating like Witch?

Sure, and not every Curses is. Familiar and YW don't always dominate. But you also don't want your attack to be actively beneficial to opponents a lot of the time. And the changes you propose deviate pretty far from the original.

You are almost certainly correct that it is too far from the original, however I still don't see it as that weak:

Net benefit/Lose of the options
1) They leave the curse on the mat:
You have a haven effect and gain a gold, they get -1VP
2) They take the curse:
You have a haven effect and they gain a curse (very similar strength wise to Sea Hag?)
3) They discard a treasure:
You have a haven effect, gain a gold, they lose one treasure form their hand

They all seem pretty strong for the attacking player to me... In fact them taking the curse is probably the best option (generally), which returns to the original point of having a scenario where someone actively takes a curse.

But it's a little weird.  You have the persistent option to discard a treasure, whether there are cards on your mat or not, which could actually be helpful sometimes (you could draw-to-X for better treasure, enable Poor Houses, etc.).

[Ritzy]

Nice card. Here are a few more non-playtested variations on the theme (with the last one being a potential alternative).

Witch Doctor ($4 Action-Attack)
+2 Cards
Each other player gains a Curse, putting it in their hand. Any player that did may set aside a card from their hand onto their Witch Doctor mat. Return the set aside cards to the player's deck at the end of the game.

Summary: a Witch that doesn't clog up your deck. The victim may choose to set aside a non-Curse (or nothing) if they want to try to trash the Curse later.

Inquisitor ($4 Action-Attack)
+2 Cards
Each other player gains a Curse. Any player that did may discard an Action or Treasure from their hand and, if they did, put the Curse on their Inquisitor mat. Return the set aside cards to the player's deck at the end of the game.
---
Any player with cards on their Inquisitor mat at the end of their Cleanup phase may discard an Action or Treasure card from their hand. If they do, then trash one card from the mat.

Summary: two-stage Torturer-style attack. The second discard is after Cleanup to provide some protection from further size reduction attacks.

Extortionist ($4 Action-Attack)
+2 Cards
Each other player gains a Curse, setting it aside on their Extortionist mat. Return the set aside cards to the player's deck at the end of the game.
---
Any player with cards on their Extortionist mat at the end of their Cleanup phase must either:

• discard at least one card from their hand; or
• discard all the cards on their mat.

If they discard from their hand, then trash one card from the mat for every card discarded after the first.

Summary: a postponable Torturer-style attack and closest in style to the original card. Curses don't get trashed automatically to provide play incentives for the attacker even when the 'ransom' is paid.

[eHalcyon]

Inquisitor and Extortionist are way too wordy to fit on a card.

[KingZog3]

Inquisitor and Extortionist are way too wordy to fit on a card.

Native Village has a lot of wording. I'm sure you could tweak the wording to make it fit better.

[eHalcyon]

Inquisitor and Extortionist are way too wordy to fit on a card.

Native Village has a lot of wording. I'm sure you could tweak the wording to make it fit better.

Witch Doctor is about on par with NV. The other two have like twice as much text.

Oh, and that's ignoring the fact that none of these say whether you can look at the cards on your mat, which they  really should.

Edit: I take back the last bit, assuming that these cards are like Island (cards on mat stay face up).  But for comparison -- NV clocks in just under 250 characters.  Witch Doctor is just over 220.  Inquisitor is over 420, not including the separating line.  Extortionist is almost 450, not including the separating line.  I think it's pretty clear that the latter two are way too long.

[Ritzy]

Inquisitor and Extortionist are way too wordy to fit on a card.

Native Village has a lot of wording. I'm sure you could tweak the wording to make it fit better.

Witch Doctor is about on par with NV. The other two have like twice as much text.

Oh, and that's ignoring the fact that none of these say whether you can look at the cards on your mat, which they  really should.

Very good point! Will have a think to figure out if the descriptions can be made significantly shorter, or if Inquisitor and Extortionist are just too complicated.

[Ritzy]

BTW, here's slightly shorter wording for Witch Doctor (based on Island).

Witch Doctor ($4 Action-Attack)
+2 Cards
Each other player gains a Curse, putting it in their hand. Any player that did may set aside a card from their hand. Return it to their deck at the end of the game.

[Ritzy]

This is the shortest I could tweak Inquisitor to. At slightly over 300 characters, it's still a fair bit longer than Native Village/Pirate Ship/etc, and longer than the original Soothsayer card. Extortionist is likely to compress even less. Ah well

Inquisitor ($4 Action-Attack)
+2 Cards
Each other player gains a Curse and may discard a Treasure. Those who discarded set aside the Curse on their Inquisitor mat. Return cards on the mat to the player's deck at the end of the game.
---
After their Cleanup phase, players may trash a card from their Inquisitor mat.  If they do, they discard a card.

[NoMoreFun]

BTW, here's slightly shorter wording for Witch Doctor (based on Island).

Witch Doctor ($4 Action-Attack)
+2 Cards
Each other player gains a Curse, putting it in their hand. Any player that did may set aside a card from their hand. Return it to their deck at the end of the game.

I like this a lot. Compare it to Monument; I think for a similar mechanic (a card that gives you a VP advantage without necessarily junking the opponent's deck) this card is more versatile and more interesting, and doesn't require custom tokens (although maybe it requires a mat, but Island didn't get its mat until late in the picture). I especially like the tough decision of whether to set aside a Curse which means you'll never be able to trash it.