Print

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

[rinkworks]

This will probably be one of the hardest challenges in this series, but I'm sure we're all up to it.

--

Submission Rules

* Submit no more than one card per person per challenge.  You do not need to submit for all challenges if you don't want to, but of course you can't win if you don't compete.
* Submit your cards to me via this forum's messaging system.  Submissions made after each week's deadline cannot be accepted.
* Each card you submit must have a name, a cost, a list of types, and the exact wording that should appear on the card.  Also include a brief description of any special design considerations (e.g., Stash having a unique back), but do NOT include any other information, such as strategic commentary or examples about it would play.
* Although you must submit names for each of your cards, the names will not be listed on the voting ballots, so make sure your card's appeal does not depend on your choice of name.
* I will accept revisions to your contest entries provided they are submitted to me before the deadline.  If you submit a revision to an entry you have previously submitted to me, resubmit your revised card(s) in their entirety.  That is, don't tell me "Oh, can you make that +2 Cards say +3 Cards instead?"  Just resubmit the full card.
* Only submit cards that are your own design.
* You may submit cards that have been previously posted here in this forum, including those that have been refined by the community as a whole, provided you can still claim that the central conceit of the card -- and the majority of its final version -- is yours.  This applies to cards previously posted, however -- if your submissions aren't already posted on his board, please refrain from doing so until after the results have been announced.
* A single card might conceivably qualify for multiple challenges within this series.  However, you may not submit the same card for more than one challenge.
* Do not disclose your submissions publicly, either in this thread or elsewhere

--

The deadline for this week's challenges is Monday, July 30, at 10am EDT.

--

Challenge #8 - Non-Attack Interaction

Objective: Design a card that is not an Attack card but that, when played by one player, allows or requires at least one other player to act.  The card may not be "targeted" in the sense that it allows the player to choose which opponent(s) are affected.

Official Examples: Cards that only affect the player to the left:  Tribute, Envoy, Contraband, Possession.  Cards that affect all other players:  Council Room, Masquerade, Bishop, Vault, Tournament, Governor, Duchess.

Official Non-Examples: All Attack cards, because they are Attack cards.  Smugglers, because it allows you to do something based on what another player did, rather than allowing other players to act at the time you play it.  All the official Reaction cards, for the same reason.  Embassy and Ill-Gotten Gains, because they only allow other players to act when someone buys it rather than when someone plays it.   City and Trade Route, because although those cards can affect other players, they don't allow other players to act when played.

--

The Ballot
The Results

[popsofctown]

Your post implies that IGG would qualify if it was on play, not on gain, I presume because the curse would trigger Trader and Watchtower.  Does that mean Tribute qualifies because it can trigger Tunnel?

[rinkworks]

Your post implies that IGG would qualify if it was on play, not on gain, I presume because the curse would trigger Trader and Watchtower.  Does that mean Tribute qualifies because it can trigger Tunnel?

Embassy and Ill-Gotten Gains would only qualify because other players would have to gain something, not because they might trigger a Reaction card in some way.  If a Reaction card does get triggered, it's really the Reaction card that's the active  agent there, while whatever triggered it is merely a catalyst.  But if a non-Attack card causes other players to gain something on play (as is the case with Governor's Gold/Silver option), that counts.

(Of course, in the case of Ill-Gotten Gains, moving the Cursing effect from on-gain to on-play would probably necessitate it having an "Attack" type, which would disqualify it on those grounds.)

[Grujah]

Smugglers don't qualify I guess?

[rinkworks]

Smugglers don't qualify I guess?

No, but it's worth adding to the list of non-qualifying cards and explaining why.  Good catch.

[WanderingWinder]

I'm a little confused. Gaining cards counts as 'acting'? So all the cursers would qualify if you took the attack type off? (which of course, you wouldn't want to do). So, but then, what cards is this going to work for? Like, if I force you to gain a curse, that ought to be an attack. If I force you to gain a province, it need not be. Smugglers doesn't count, because you are the one gaining. What about an anti-smugglers that makes the opponent gain something I have gained or I will gain? Or something that gains us the same card somehow? Is this an attack, or not? You could sort of use it as a curser, depending on how you word it?

Also, tribute counts? Their mere having to flip cards off their deck is acting? I mean, there is definite interaction in how we sculpt our decks, if a tribute-like card is available, and I get stuff based on what you have done, but that doesn't seem to play differently from smugglers, in the interaction sense. I guess it's a little vague to me, particularly what gets rejected based on these grounds, just out of hand, and what gets tossed to the voters. Like, if I submit witch, without the attack type, are you going to reject that, or is it down to the voters to say 'gee, that really ought to be an attack'. Because this is a really interesting challenge to me, but I am not quite sure where the boundaries lie.

Also, just throwin' it out there - tribute encourages mirrors; I would love to see a card that encourages diverging strategies...

[Powerman]

So the card has to be played differently because your opponents are there?  So a card like this would "qualify":

Tough Love
$2
The player to your left chooses.  You gain any number of provinces; or you gain any number of golds and +10 Buys.

[rinkworks]

I'm a little confused. Gaining cards counts as 'acting'? So all the cursers would qualify if you took the attack type off? . . . Like, if I submit witch, without the attack type, are you going to reject that, or is it down to the voters to say 'gee, that really ought to be an attack'.

I'd accept it and would leave it up to the voters to weed out things like that.

Also, tribute counts? Their mere having to flip cards off their deck is acting? . . . but that doesn't seem to play differently from smugglers, in the interaction sense. . . . this is a really interesting challenge to me, but I am not quite sure where the boundaries lie.

Tribute counts, and you're right that it's probably not less interactive than Smugglers.  But I had to pin down in the clearest terms possible what would count and what wouldn't, and the simplest way to do that was to only look at on-play behavior.  So Smugglers becomes ineligible not because it doesn't achieve the level of interaction I'm interested in but because the clearest rules I could come up with to zero in on that level of interaction happens to exclude Smugglers anyhow.  Or you can look at it the other way:  Tribute might NOT achieve the level of interaction I'm looking for, but the clearest rules I could come up with had to include it.

The bottom line is it's a lot easier to distinguish between opponents "acting" and not acting, than it is to distinguish between opponents "receiving a benefit" or not.  I mean, Council Room might cause an opponent an unwanted reshuffle, while Tribute might skip a pair of green cards, so who am I to decide what's a benefit and what isn't?  There's too much gray area.

It might help if I back up a step and tell you why I wanted to pose this particular challenge.  In a nutshell, it's because I enjoy interaction -- but in Dominion you get a lot of games where all players are doing things relatively independently of each other, and the game is a simple race to see who can cross the finish line first.  Ok, so actually it's rarely "simple," but you get what I mean:  players act roughly independent of each other until the game ends.  It's a testament to how great a game Dominion is that that kind of game can be screamingly fun.  But it is often even more fun in games where that independence is broken.

Attack cards are the most common way this happens.  Every Dominion set has a few attacks in it, and that ensures that many if not most games have at least that much interactivity happening.  This set will be no exception:  we've already got a Curser, and there may be other attack cards around the corner as well.

But some of my favorite cards are the ones that benefit opponents (Bishop, Council Room, Vault) or at least require them to be awake and alert during their turn (Tribute, Envoy).  One of the best live games I ever played was the kingdom where we purposely chose all of these type of cards -- pretty much the whole list of eligible cards listed in the original post.  There was no waiting for the other player to take his turn.  All players were active all the time.  Moreover, the strategy space was considerably wider than it is in many Dominion games, because no matter what you bought, you had to consider how it would affect your opponents, or at the very least (as with Tribute and Possession) how their strategies would affect you.

That's the design space I was trying to zero in on.  Doesn't mean the submissions have to be in that kind of spirit, or that people have to vote with my goals in mind, though!  I've distilled my intentions into the simplest, clearest words I can, and now all that counts is the letter of those rules.

I'm sure there will be cards that come along that challenge me to make a difficult decision about eligibility.  I'll be permissive about edge cases, as I have so far, and let people know if they submit a card I have to rule ineligible, so they can submit something else instead.

[Polk5440]

But some of my favorite cards are the ones that benefit opponents (Bishop, Council Room, Vault) or at least require them to be awake and alert during their turn (Tribute, Envoy).

I am right there with you!

[Morgrim7]

What will you be judging by? Creativity?

[zahlman]

What will you be judging by? Creativity?

As usual, it's up to the community to vote on them.

[Morgrim7]

What will you be judging by? Creativity?

As usual, it's up to the community to vote on them.

What will the community judge on?

[zahlman]

That's for everyone to think they know, and everyone to find out.

[NoMoreFun]

Cards like Trade Route and City don't count, right?

[rinkworks]

Cards like Trade Route and City don't count, right?

Right, although if I don't get tired of running these before I get the various challenges done that I want to, maybe a separate contest for a card like this would be a good idea.

[eHalcyon]

Does each play of the card have to have interaction, or can it be part of a choice?  For example, Pirate Ship doesn't interact (beyond reactions) when you choose +$.  From the current rules, it sounds like that wouldn't be allowed.

[rinkworks]

Does each play of the card have to have interaction, or can it be part of a choice?  For example, Pirate Ship doesn't interact (beyond reactions) when you choose +$.  From the current rules, it sounds like that wouldn't be allowed.

I think I have to rule on the stricter side of this one, ruling out cards where the player decides whether or not to choose an option that allows interaction.  So Governor only qualifies because all three choices allow the opponents to act.  But it's worth pointing out two related things that ARE allowed:

(1) It's okay if the opponent gets to decide whether to act or not.  (Vault, Bishop)
(2) It's okay if the opponent can't act due to some required circumstance out of the original player's control.  (Tournament, in the case where no opponent has a Province to reveal; Tribute, in the case where the left opponent has no cards to draw.)

[rinkworks]

I have an amusing story to tell regarding the design of an "opponent gets a benefit" card.  My brother had an idea for a card where all players get some amount of filtering capability, but the player gets more.  We went back and forth on how many cards each player would get to rotate in or out, and we changed our minds a couple times about whether or not the opponents would get a Warehouse-style "draw, then discard" or a Cellar-style "discard, then draw."  Ultimately we came up with the following:

Tavern
$3 or $4 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Action
Discard a card.
Each other player draws a card and discards a card.

Spotted the problem yet?  Seeing it written out like that, we might have noticed.  But we were just trading ideas back and forth, finally came to a verbal agreement on what we'd test, and then played through a couple games.  In one game, my brother bought the majority of them, so he got a feel for the player's benefit and I got a feel for the opponent's benefit.  The opponent's benefit seemed super strong, much more than you might think.  In the second game, I experienced more of the player's side, and I was thinking, well, okay, that's pretty strong too.  So maybe this card will be fine!

But as we talked out our experiences with the card, only then did we realize the design flaw.  It is, namely, that if you remove the "cantrip" portion of the player's benefit -- the +1 Card and +1 Action that replace itself in your hand and restore the Action you spent on it -- the player and opponent benefits are identical.   You would therefore never want to buy it, since you'd be burning cash and a buy on a card that kept the scales even.

So we were amused.   We figured next time we'd test a corrected version, like "+3 Cards, discard 2" for the player and maybe more of a Cellar-style benefit for the opponent instead of a Warehouse-style benefit.  Or whatever.  The moral of the story:  sometimes even playtesting results (especially with a limited number of games) don't tell you everything you need to know.

[popsofctown]

You wouldn't never want to buy it, you just very rarely would want a symmetric effect like that. 

[rinkworks]

You wouldn't never want to buy it, you just very rarely would want a symmetric effect like that.

I didn't mean "never" literally, but I think I'm roughly comfortable making it literal for me.  I get what you mean, though:  in one of our test games, my brother made a heavily-trashed, slim, power engine deck, while I skipped trashing in favor of filtering effects.  In that instance, our new card was much more beneficial to me on average, as I tended to have junk to skip over, and he didn't.

On the other hand, that window of divergent utility vanished quickly, because when he started greening, the green cards choked him up a lot more than me, as each green card diluted a higher percentage of his deck.  It wasn't long before our card stopped being an advantage to me and possibly even became a hindrance.  That being the case -- the card not being enough of an advantage over a simple Silver even with such unusually divergent decks -- I can't conceive of me ever wanting to buy the card.  I suppose if I'd been running Conspirators too, while my opponent abstained from them, that might have been enough to tip the scales.  But it would be just about the most narrow card ever.

[popsofctown]

I'd put it on the same plane as Scout.

[qmech]

I'd put it on the same plane as Scout.

Hopefully the plane's to somewhere really remote, like Norfolk.

[zahlman]

I'd put it on the same plane as Scout.

Hopefully the plane's to somewhere really remote, like Norfolk.

Well, of course you send the Scout to the remote regions first. Gotta check if it's safe for everyone else!

[popsofctown]

Like a Norfolk Estate

[rinkworks]

Here is the ballot for Challenge #8!

--

Voting Rules:

Each person may cast votes as follows:  For each Challenge, you may fill your ballot out in one of two ways:

(1) Award 3 points to one entry.  Award 1 point to any number of other entries.
(2) Award 2 points to each of two entries.  Award 1 point to any number of other entries.

Submit your votes via PM to me by Monday, August 6, 2012, 10am EDT in the following format:

Challenge 1

3 CardName
1 AnotherCardName
1 StillAnotherCardName
1 AnotherCardNameGoesHereToo

Challenge 2

2 CardName
2 AnotherCardName
1 StillAnotherCardName

Please use the above format!  One card per line, with the number of votes given before it, and no extra punctuation or anything.  This will make it easy for me to copy-and-paste your votes into the format my vote-counting script needs it to be in.

Do not submit votes for your own cards.  (If you do, my script will catch you anyway.)

By submitting vote(s) for a challenge, you will automatically earn 1 point for your entry in that challenge.  This is to incentivize contestants to submit votes.  (My script does this automatically, so don't worry that I'll forget to do this.)

Note that the supplied card names are for discussion/identification only -- they are not the card names that were submitted to me.  The proper card names will be revealed when the results are announced.  Whenever card text says "[This Card]" it means the submitted text says the card's own name there.

Inclusion on the ballot means that the card was deemed eligible for the contest.  You therefore do not need to consider eligibility when voting.  In some cases, this may mean a pretty loose interpretation of the eligibility requirements.  I tried to be fair but also forgiving when a submission came in that twisted the rules in a way I hadn't foreseen.

As a voter, you may use whatever criteria you wish in determining what your votes will be.  Be as forgiving or particular as you like concerning conformance to standard Dominion terminology.   For all winning cards, there will be a chance to tweak the wording as a community, if necessary, before they are canonized.

--

Apple
$5 - Action
+$1
Trash a card from your hand.
Draw up to 5 cards in hand.
Each other player may put a card from their hand on top of their deck.


Orange
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
Name a card. Each other player reveals the bottom card of his deck. If the named card is revealed, +1 Action, +$1.
--
(Rules clarification: After the reveal, the card is returned to the bottom of his deck.)


Strawberry
$5 - Action
+3 Cards
Reveal your hand and trash two Copper cards. If you do, gain a Silver, putting it into your hand. Each other player may trash a Copper from their hand or gain a Copper, putting it into their hand.


Pear
$5 - Action
The player to your left chooses one for you to receive:
+$4, +1 Buy
+2 Cards, +1 Action
+2 VPs


Banana
$3 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain a card costing up to $6, placing it on top of your deck.
Each other player may gain a copy of the card you gained.


Plum
$5 - Action
+2 VP
Discard down to 2 cards in hand. Gain a Silver, putting it in hand.
Each other player may trash up to two cards in hand.


Apricot
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Discard any number of cards from your hand. Draw until you have 5 cards in hand.
Each other player with at least 5 cards may discard his hand and then draw 5 cards.


Grapefruit
$3 - Action
+$2
You may trash all the cards in the [This Card] mat.
Each player (including you) chooses one: put a card from his hand into the [This Card] mat; or gain a card from the [This Card] mat and put it into his hand
--
(Rules clarification: All cards on the [This Card] mat are visible to all players at all times.  There is a single communal [This Card] mat, rather than individual ones.)


Honeydew
$6 - Action
+2 Cards
You may trash 3 random cards from your hand. If you do, gain a Province, putting it on top of your deck.
Every other player may trash two random cards from their hand. If they do, they gain a [This Card], Duchy, or Gold of their choice.


Blueberry
$5 - Action
+$4
While this is in play, Victory cards cost +$1 and each other player gains a copy of the first non-Victory card you buy during your Buy step.


Fig
$2 - Action
+1 Action
Each player puts a Victory token on a non-empty Supply pile.
You may trash a card from your hand. If you do, +1 VP per Victory token on that card's pile and remove those tokens from that pile.


Grape
$3 - Action
Each player may trash up to 2 cards from his hand. +$1 per 2 cards trashed in total, rounded down.


Raspberry
$2 - Action
+1 Card
+$1
Each other player may trash a Treasure from his hand. You gain all of these trashed cards; put them into your hand. If no player trashes a treasure this way, +$1.


Cantaloupe
$3 - Action
Choose one: +2 Cards; or +$2; or the player to your left chooses +3 Cards or +$3.
Each player (including you) may trash a card from their hand.  If no one does, each player gains a Silver, placing it on top of their deck.


Peach
$3 - Action
Trash a card. Gain a card costing up to twice the cost of the trashed card.
Each opponent may gain a card costing up to the cost of the trashed card.


Clementine
$5 - Action
+5 Cards
+1 Action
Reveal your hand.  The player to your left chooses a card to discard from your hand, then the player to your right does the same.


Boysenberry
$5 - Action
Draw one fewer card than last turn during Cleanup this turn.  Take an extra turn after this one.  During that: Players see all you see.  If you may play a card, do so.  If you may buy or gain a card, do so, selecting one with the highest cost in coins.  The player to your left makes all decisions for you.


Tamarind
$3 - Action
+1 Buy
+$1
You may discard 2 cards from your hand. If you do, gain a Treasure costing up to $3, putting it into your hand.
Each other player may discard a card. Each player who does gains a Silver.


Lemon
$3 - Action
Name an Action card. The player to your left either reveals the named card, or reveals a hand with no such card. If he revealed the named card, you play it. At the start of Clean-up, return the card to the player's hand. If he did not reveal the card you named, you get +1 Card, +1 Action, and gain a Curse.


Lime
$5 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.
The player to your left chooses 1 for you to receive: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.


Pomegranate
$2 - Action
+1 Action
+$1
Each other player may discard his hand and draw four cards. If any do, you do too.


Guava
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each player (including you) may trash a card from his hand, then draw a card if he does.
If any other player trashes a card this way, +1 Card.


Cherry
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each other player may reveal a copy of [This Card] from his hand. If no one does, +$2.


Tangerine
$3 - Action
Choose to draw between 2 and 5 cards.  Discard from your hand 2 less cards than you drew.  Your opponents draw and discard a number of cards equal to what you discarded.


Blackberry
$4 - Action
The player to your left names two cards (the two cards are allowed to be the same). Reveal the top 5 cards in your deck, and pick one: put all instances of cards the player to your left named into your hand, or put all cards that the player to your left did not name into your hand. Discard the rest.


Watermelon
$5 - Action
+2 Cards
+$3
+1 Buy
When you play this card, each other player may exchange a card costing more than $2 from their hand for a copy of a card that you have played this turn, including this one. You may either gain the exchanged cards or trash them.


Date
$2P - Action
The opponent to your left chooses two: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +$2 and +P.


Currant
$4 - Action
Trash any number of cards from your hand.  +$1 for each card trashed this way.
Each other player may trash up to two cards from his hand.
Gain the trashed cards.


Kiwi
$5 - Action
+$2
Each other player may reveal an Estate.  If no Estates are revealed, +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1.


Gooseberry
$5 - Action
You may discard up to two cards. If you discard a Treasure, +4 Cards, +1 Action.  If you discard two cards, +1 Buy.
Each other player may discard a Treasure. If he does, he draws 2 cards.


Mango
$5 - Action
Each opponent may choose one: gain a Copper in hand, or gain an Estate in hand.
Choose three of the following: +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1, +1 Buy.  (The choices don't have to be different.)
--
(Rules clarification:  Like with Pawn, you have to choose all three before drawing any cards.)


Nectarine
$3 - Action
The player to your left reveals two cards costing more than $0 from his hand. Name one.
Gain a card of the same price as the named card.
--
(Rule clarification: If he have less than two cards costing more than $0, he reveal his hand, and you gain no benefit.)


Pineapple
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Each other player may trash a card from his hand. If anyone does, +$3. If no one does, you may trash a card from your hand, +$2 if you do.


Elderberry
$3* - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card
Each other player may trash a card from hand.  If a [This Card] is in play, +1 VP for each card trashed.
--
If another card that allows trashing on play is in the kingdom, this card costs $6.


Dragonfruit
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
Each other player may trash a card from his hand.


Papaya
$5 - Action
Gain a Gold in hand. Discard 2 cards. Every other player may gain a Silver in hand.


Kumquat
$5 - Action
+$3
Each other player may gain 2 coppers, putting one into their hand.


Huckleberry
$6 - Action
+$2
+1 Buy
+$1 per differently named action card you have in play (including this).
When you play this card, each other player may place a card on top of his deck, or gain a Copper, putting it into his hand.


Carambola
$4 - Action
+$3
Clockwise starting from the player on your left, each player chooses one: +1 VP; +1 Card; gain a Silver; trash a card from hand. No player may choose the same option as any previous player.

[Drab Emordnilap]

Carambola
$4 - Action
+$3
Clockwise starting from the player on your left, each player chooses one: +1 VP; +1 Card; gain a Silver; trash a card from hand. No player may choose the same option as any previous player.

This card is weird in a 5 or 6 player game. ._.

[Graystripe77]

I didn't find as many good cards in this one as I did in others. I think rinkworks was right, this is the hardest challenge.

[A Drowned Kernel]

For clarification, for Strawberry can a player choose to do neither?

Edit: Same for Huckleberry and Mango.

[WanderingWinder]

Apple: Weak. Yes, yes, it's like Jack. But... it doesn't give you silver, it costs more, and it gives your opponents a (albeit incredibly mild) benefit. In exchange, you get one money, the trashing happens before the drawing, and you can trash copper. Oh, the trashing is mandatory. This costs $5? It could cost 3, and I still don't think it would be great. I mean, no silver gain is HUGE.
Orange: A moat that can be a lab+peddler. Moat is not THAT bad, lab+peddler is astounding. If you can work a way to play multiples of these, success is guaranteed, too. Too good.
Strawberry: A 5-cost smithy variant, that helps the other player with a... how big is that benefit? Probably it is pretty good, since they can do either. I'm guessing this is strong, but I like it.
Pear: Strictly worse than Lab (okay, weird fringe cases like fairgrounds, possession), this is off the table.
Banana: Interesting. You get to topdeck what they only get to gain. Okay... seems the main use would be to end out a pile, or with a lead, to get the penultimate of something. Wait no, the main use is in like every non-mirror. I love it, though it may not get bought so much. Huge strategic impact, sorta like embargo can have.
Plum: How do these things fit together? Discard to 2 is pretty severe... really severe... and then extra benefit to opponent... still, I don't like 2 vp chips at once.... seems incredibly weak, except when it's broken. I hate it.
Apricot: A sifter that lets your opponent cycle their whole hand? Maybe marginally better than scout... maybe. Pass.
Grapefruit: This lets both you and your opponent basically trash whatever you want, 1 card at a time. And if unopposed, you get to... use it as a semi-indefinite haven? As a terminal silver? Seems a little wonky, and also should most of the time be as good for your opponent as you, without the opportunity cost. Pass.
Honeydew: I'm already worried about the nightmares choosing a 'random' card, let alone 3, can have. The 'of their choice' is the wrong wording - "I want the one in your discard pile". And then this seems soo gambly swingy. Just weird, and I don't like it at all.
Blueberry: Wait, is there a by step in your buy phase? Weird phrasing. This seems... pretty weak, actually. With +buy, you can give something crappy and then get something good, and I guess it's also good for non-mirrors, but I don't so much like it.
Fig: It's weird to have the tokens on piles and not gain them if you gain the card they're on. Also, why do you not have to choose a non-empty? Cursers, I guess. Mostly, this looks like you are getting a VP for a non-terminal trash, and your opponent does... basicall nothing, unless they mirror, in which case they might reap an extra few tokens. Meh.
Grape: Interesting, but seems a bit weak. Still going to be a pretty dead card after very long, and does it really help your buying that much early? I doubt it. Potentially much better (i.e. actually relevant) in like 4-player.
Raspberry: Now this is interesting too, but... okay, the biggest problem is that it scales so weirdly with players. However, it's probably actually fairly good, because you are often getting terminal silver plus a card, and usually gaining a copper. Okay, that is not soo good, but I *think* I like it.
Cantaloupe: Too much going on. And too strong for BM - smithy or terminal gold is too good for a 3-cost.
Peach: Interesting. 0->0 is less than worthless, 2->4 is PROBABLY quite good (depends on 2s on board; well, 4s too, I guess), 3->6 good-ish for engines, not for BM, 4->8 is boss, 5+ up is not so good. Really depends on what else is on the board I guess.
Clementine: Well, choosing any from your hand is steep, but... well, how often is this not going to be zanily good? You are denied your two best cards, but very quickly, your deck minus two is drawn (often you can get those anyway), and that is usually good enough for at least a province. Needs to be fewer cards, I'm afraid. Or terminal, though then it is too weak.
Boysenberry: I thought this was spelled with an 'I'? Now that is an interesting and novel card. So, this is (pretty) good for big money, but not BM-draw. And can have some pretty massive drawbacks, if there is bad stuff available at the wrong costs. Almost impossible to build an engine with this though, and +buy is veeerrrrrry dangerous.
Tamarind: So, if you don't take the option, it's a gimped woodcutter, if you do, it's a HT that gains a silver, and everyone else can in any case drop a card to gain silver? Seems weak.
Lemon: Another one I think I like. Great once curses are gone. But before, you aren't going to have enough info to justify the steep penalty. It is too steep.
Lime: This looks strong at first, but I think it is weak. Thing is, they almost always give you the buy, and then this is woodcutter but more expensive, worker's village without the card, 2 cards and a buy (which would cost 4 and not be strong there - this-turn wharf), or buy and VP chip, which does little other than make it possible for an endless game. None of these things warrant $5, and your opponent can even give you something else that's WORSE, in the right situation (say, give you cards if you've drawn your whole deck already).
Pomegranate: A copper that gives your opponents the choice to minion. Okay? Not great.
Guava: Totally symmetric, except you can draw one if they trash. Fine card.
Cherry: This is dumb - in 2-player, you have to both go for this really hard; in multiplayer, one person going for this wins, while two lose to the guy(s) who do(es)n't.
Tangerine: Symmetric sifting, except you get to moat yourself first. Think I like it.
Blackberry: So this is sorta like a Magic card whose name I can't recall (fact or fiction maybe?). The issue is, you always get the one card you want, basically, or four cards which are, together, better. Yeah, yeah, might be 2 and 3, but if there are 2 you want, they'll almost always be better than 3. I am curious how well this and copperflood would be.... prolly not terribly great. Interesting card though.
Watermelon: Wording is confusing, I don't know what they mean by exchange. And there are a thousand rules issues. But they will like ALWAYS take this thing, it is SO good. I dunno, weird, but in a bad way.
Date: Interestingly, these cards are killed by the more different things they can do. And +p kills this.
Currant: So, uh, interesting. It nets both of you trashing two, usually, and you getting +$4. And then later, it is not quite as useless as chapel. Probably. And then it's terrible in multiplayer.
Kiwi: Terminal silver that can swingily be a cantrip gold, and is way worse with more players? Naw.
Gooseberry: uber-powered for you. I mean, stables with an extra card, or stables with a buy (or rarely a naked buy). And then everyone else can... half-stables? Hmmm, I guess this is too good.
Mango: Okay, this seems sorta attack-y to me. And more important, it can be: lab, village, smithy, peddler, woodcutter, silver, terminal gold, or a host of other things, which is way too good for $5, maybe even for $6 (though maybe not), and then the other part is on average probably bad for your opponent. This is too strong.
Nectarine: This will frustrate you when you gain estates, most often probably get you silvers, and only very rarely gain you something better. Seems a touch weak, but reasonable.
Pineapple: So they trash, and this is gold, or they don't, which lets you trash to make this silver. Pretty nice card.
Elderberry: Ooooh, can't stand the alternate cost. I also don't understand why it is there.
Dragonfruit: Very like pineapple, but basically better.
Papaya: This, plus your two worst, gives you a gold in hand... not that good, really. Opponents can get silver IN HAND - I am pretty sure this would be better for opponents than the guys with this card, even discounting opportunity cost.
Kumquat: Terminal gold with a drawback. Well, they won't want it so often, but in the endgame...... Balanced but pretty boring.
Huckleberry: At least terminal gold with a buy, most often a good bit more, this is excellent for engines, and the drawback is pretty small. But 6 is sorta a lot, I guess?
Carambola: The first fruit I've never heard of! So, I don't like how this works in multiplayer. Also seems a bit too good for $4, well, depending on the number of players I guess. But in 2-player, yeah, for sure it's too good.

[rinkworks]

For clarification, for Strawberry can a player choose to do neither?

Edit: Same for Huckleberry and Mango.

That's how I read all three cards, yes.  One of them came with rule clarifications clarifying that, yes, other players can do neither.  I omitted that clarification from the final ballot.

[rinkworks]

Can the person who submitted Huckleberry send me a PM and let me know?  I seem to have lost my record of who submitted that one.

[Powerman]

Ok, lots of very unique ideas.  There is a LOT of unexplored interaction, so I'm really looking forward to going through them.  To me the important things are A) What benefit YOU get B) What benefit your opponent gets and C) How easy is it to exploit the benefits.  Council Room gives your opponent a big benefit, but you can easily take it away (Militia).  Bishop gives your opponent a lesser benefit, but it can't be taken away.  With that, off we go!

Apple
$5 - Action
+$1
Trash a card from your hand.
Draw up to 5 cards in hand.
Each other player may put a card from their hand on top of their deck.

This wants to be JoaT so badly.  But it isn't.  Yes you can trash coppers as well as the estates (and trash before drawing) but +$1 is so much worse than the silver.  Plus I don't like the feel of the interaction, as it seems irrelevant to the rest of the card.

Orange
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
Name a card. Each other player reveals the bottom card of his deck. If the named card is revealed, +1 Action, +$1.
--
(Rules clarification: After the reveal, the card is returned to the bottom of his deck.)

Wow a card made to counter Pearl Diver, incredible.  Anyway, really good in multiplayer where you have a good shot at getting it right at least once, but otherwise it's wishing well with a different benefit / penalty.  Could work.

Strawberry
$5 - Action
+3 Cards
Reveal your hand and trash two Copper cards. If you do, gain a Silver, putting it into your hand. Each other player may trash a Copper from their hand or gain a Copper, putting it into their hand.

Is this supposed to be mandatory trashing for you?  If it is I don't like it.  If it isn't, I do.

Pear
$5 - Action
The player to your left chooses one for you to receive:
+$4, +1 Buy
+2 Cards, +1 Action
+2 VPs

These benefits all seem really strong.  Your opponent gives you a +$4 (strong) a lab (strong but worth $5) or +2 VP.  Almost always will get the lab.

Banana
$3 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain a card costing up to $6, placing it on top of your deck.
Each other player may gain a copy of the card you gained.

Bleh.  I guess it's good if there are cards you need more than your opponent, but... then you are still giving them to your opponent for the benefit of putting it on your deck.  Eh.

Plum
$5 - Action
+2 VP
Discard down to 2 cards in hand. Gain a Silver, putting it in hand.
Each other player may trash up to two cards in hand.

This card would need a lot of testing, because I can't tell if it's over or under powered, but I'm sure it's not balanced.  +2VP is a big deal.  Basically it's discard 2 cards and gain a silver.  Which means it's tough to get a province, but easy to get a Duchy.  eh...

Apricot
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Discard any number of cards from your hand. Draw until you have 5 cards in hand.
Each other player with at least 5 cards may discard his hand and then draw 5 cards.

Weak, and boring.  In general it's one card better than a cellar, but your opponent gets a potential benefit.  I like it at $3.

Grapefruit
$3 - Action
+$2
You may trash all the cards in the [This Card] mat.
Each player (including you) chooses one: put a card from his hand into the [This Card] mat; or gain a card from the [This Card] mat and put it into his hand
--
(Rules clarification: All cards on the [This Card] mat are visible to all players at all times.)

Bleh.  I mean, it's nice in some situations, but I feel as if it would be absolutely massacred by a Gardens strategy.  Or by Ambassador.  Or by Masquerade.  Or Trading Post.  Or Vault.  Etc.

Honeydew
$6 - Action
+2 Cards
You may trash 3 random cards from your hand. If you do, gain a Province, putting it on top of your deck.
Every other player may trash two random cards from their hand. If they do, they gain a [This Card], Duchy, or Gold of their choice.

It costs $6 so it can't be used as an early game trasher.  And then trashing 3 cards, let alone trashing 3 not of your choice means it can't be used in mid to late game.  So... when can it be used?

Blueberry
$5 - Action
+$4
While this is in play, Victory cards cost +$1 and each other player gains a copy of the first non-Victory card you buy during your Buy step.

For buying Victory cards, this is terminal Gold which is about at $5 so ok.  The other part... again, if there are cards you want that your opponent doesn't (say Silver if they go SP / Minion) than ok, otherwise it's too much of a benefit to them.

Fig
$2 - Action
+1 Action
Each player puts a Victory token on a non-empty Supply pile.
You may trash a card from your hand. If you do, +1 VP per Victory token on that card's pile and remove those tokens from that pile.

It costs $2 so it should be bleh.  I actually like the bottom part of it, but I think the +1 action is not a good benefit for it.  I'd like +1 (or even 2?) cards more, or +$1.

Grape
$3 - Action
Each player may trash up to 2 cards from his hand. +$1 per 2 cards trashed in total, rounded down.

Weak.  Weak.  In 2P, you'll get +$1 or +$2, and when you've trashed 2 cards from your hand chances are you aren't buying anything anyway.  I guess it could be good in 4P.  But also bad, because I feel like if 1 person just ignored buying it they would kill the other 3.

Raspberry
$2 - Action
+1 Card
+$1
Each other player may trash a Treasure from his hand. You gain all of these trashed cards; put them into your hand. If no player trashes a treasure this way, +$1.

Wow I actually like this card.  But I think it's too strong.  If no one else trashes, it's +1 card +$2 which is quite obviously too strong for a $2 card.  And if they do... well, it's not MUCH worse.  Plus it kind of cutpurses them (kind of).

Cantaloupe
$3 - Action
Choose one: +2 Cards; or +$2; or the player to your left chooses +3 Cards or +$3.
Each player (including you) may trash a card from their hand.  If no one does, each player gains a Silver, placing it on top of their deck.

This card raises consistency VS strength.  If you choose, you're getting a very weak card.  If your opponent chooses, you get a very strong card... but you're probably getting the one you don't want.  Probably better at $4?

Peach
$3 - Action
Trash a card. Gain a card costing up to twice the cost of the trashed card.
Each opponent may gain a card costing up to the cost of the trashed card.

Obviously you want to trash $3s (silvers mainly) and $4s (for provinces).  I don't like this card though.

Clementine
$5 - Action
+5 Cards
+1 Action
Reveal your hand.  The player to your left chooses a card to discard from your hand, then the player to your right does the same.

Ok so this is Envoy.  But with an action.  And a MUCH harsher discard penalty.  It ends up being + 3 cards / + 1 action which is strong, but with the discard it isn't too bad.  Could be good.

Boysenberry
$5 - Action
Draw one fewer card than last turn during Cleanup this turn.  Take an extra turn after this one.  During that: Players see all you see.  If you may play a card, do so.  If you may buy or gain a card, do so, selecting one with the highest cost in coins.  The player to your left makes all decisions for you.

So basically a cross between Possession and Outpost?  Which are already 2 of my least favorite cards.  Soooo pass.

Tamarind
$3 - Action
+1 Buy
+$1
You may discard 2 cards from your hand. If you do, gain a Treasure costing up to $3, putting it into your hand.
Each other player may discard a card. Each player who does gains a Silver.

Why so weak?  If you don't discard it's a worse pawn.  If you do, it's a HT that's worse + doesn't react.  So again, pass.  But, I'd like it at $2!

Lemon
$3 - Action
Name an Action card. The player to your left either reveals the named card, or reveals a hand with no such card. If he revealed the named card, you play it. At the start of Clean-up, return the card to the player's hand. If he did not reveal the card you named, you get +1 Card, +1 Action, and gain a Curse.

Wow a card that combos with Bureaucrat and Cutpurse, incredible.  Good if you have a good chance of guessing right, bad if you don't.  And even if you do have a good chance, your opponent has to have something good in hand.  Because playing a Pearl Driver isn't too special.

Lime
$5 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.
The player to your left chooses 1 for you to receive: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.

I would like this soo much better if you chose after your opponents.  The way it is now, it is much too weak (without village support for sure, maybe even with village support).  Why?  Well, if you play this first with other action cards in hand, you have to chose +2 Actions, and then your opponent can choose +2 Actions (+4 actions is really not that good) or the Buy/VP.  And if you don't choose actions, they won't either so it becomes a terminal draw.  So engines are iffy.  And in a bm-style deck, they'll choose actions, so it's weak there too.

Pomegranate
$2 - Action
+1 Action
+$1
Each other player may discard his hand and draw four cards. If any do, you do too.

If anyone's played against minion before, they'll know how often they WANTED to discard their hand.  So basically this is a copper that can be played in your action phase.  Bleh.

Guava
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each player (including you) may trash a card from his hand, then draw a card if he does.
If any other player trashes a card this way, +1 Card.

Slight benefit to you as the player which is good, but still maybe too weak.  I think it'd be fine with +$1.

Cherry
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each other player may reveal a copy of [This Card] from his hand. If no one does, +$2.

Tough to balance / play with.  Because if you go for this hard and your opponent(s) don't you (should) coast to an easy victory.  Now if your opponent(s) go for it, both of you are likely to be left with a deck that can't do much.  There's a reason Tournament reveals provinces and not tournaments.

Tangerine
$3 - Action
Choose to draw between 2 and 5 cards.  Discard from your hand 2 less cards than you drew.  Your opponents draw and discard a number of cards equal to what you discarded.

Yeah, it's probably priced right and reasonably strong.  You can choose to make it a cheap Embassy, but then your opponent can play best 5 of 8 which is HUGE for them too.  So, I'm not sure if this card is too weak.

Blackberry
$4 - Action
The player to your left names two cards (the two cards are allowed to be the same). Reveal the top 5 cards in your deck, and pick one: put all instances of cards the player to your left named into your hand, or put all cards that the player to your left did not name into your hand. Discard the rest.

This seems too strong.  At a minimum you either get 2 good cards, or 3 not so good cards.  But you should (with some diversity) be getting 4 cards most of the time.  And if they somehow whiff with their 2 guesses, it's +5 cards.  So... I think it's too strong.

Watermelon
$5 - Action
+2 Cards
+$3
+1 Buy
When you play this card, each other player may exchange a card costing more than $2 from their hand for a copy of a card that you have played this turn, including this one. You may either gain the exchanged cards or trash them.

It's amazing as a last turn enabler, but past that it seems weird.  Like a masquerade played during a possession turn.  And I don't like that.

Date
$2P - Action
The opponent to your left chooses two: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +$2 and +P.

Wait, is it they can choose either the +P or the +$, or are those two together?  If they're together, fine good card.  If they're separate, this is a very bad card.

Currant
$4 - Action
Trash any number of cards from your hand.  +$1 for each card trashed this way.
Each other player may trash up to two cards from his hand.
Gain the trashed cards.

Since you gain the trashed cards, isn't it discard for you?  And isn't discarding for +$1 the same as Secret Chamber.  And doesn't Secret Chamber cost $2 and come with a reaction?  Doesn't this give your opponent a huge benefit that's likely to hurt you?  And isn't Secret Chamber already a weak $2?  So... I think this might be the weakest card ever created.  Sorry

Kiwi
$5 - Action
+$2
Each other player may reveal an Estate.  If no Estates are revealed, +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1.

Eh... possibly alright.  It encourages opponents not to trash which IMO is good for a card.  But, even still... it seems off balance.

Gooseberry
$5 - Action
You may discard up to two cards. If you discard a Treasure, +4 Cards, +1 Action.  If you discard two cards, +1 Buy.
Each other player may discard a Treasure. If he does, he draws 2 cards.

This is to Stables as Governor's +Draw is to Lab.  And we rarely take Governor's +Draw.  So I suspect the opponent's benefit is too strong here as well.

Mango
$5 - Action
Each opponent may choose one: gain a Copper in hand, or gain an Estate in hand.
Choose three of the following: +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1, +1 Buy.  (The choices don't have to be different.)
--
(Rules clarification:  Like with Pawn, you have to choose all three before drawing any cards.)

The first part, your opponent will rarely want them so it's not a drawback until they do want them where it's a big drawback.  So I don't like it as the drawback.

Nectarine
$3 - Action
The player to your left reveals two cards costing more than $0 from his hand. Name one.
Gain a card of the same price as the named card.
--
(Rule clarification: If he have less than two cards costing more than $0, he reveal his hand, and you gain no benefit.)

It's a cross between workshop and smugglers.  That in itself is enough for a pass.

Pineapple
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Each other player may trash a card from his hand. If anyone does, +$3. If no one does, you may trash a card from your hand, +$2 if you do.

This seems strong.  A non-terminal gold (assuming someone trashes) is strong for $5.  And if you trash yourself, +$2 for a non-terminal trasher is strong.

Elderberry
$3* - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card
Each other player may trash a card from hand.  If a [This Card] is in play, +1 VP for each card trashed.
--
If another card that allows trashing on play is in the kingdom, this card costs $6.

I really don't like this card.  At all.  Sorry

Dragonfruit
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
Each other player may trash a card from his hand.

I like this.  It matches up nicely with Contraband / Cache as Gold for $5 with drawback.  I also like that the drawback is on play rather than on-gain.

Papaya
$5 - Action
Gain a Gold in hand. Discard 2 cards. Every other player may gain a Silver in hand.

This is Horse Traders.  But without a +Buy.  And you give your opponent +$2.  And you don't get a reaction.  Can you say W-E-A-K.  Basically you get $3 for three cards (3/3 = $1 per card), and your opponent gets $2 that doesn't take up a slot in their hand.  Passsss.

Kumquat
$5 - Action
+$3
Each other player may gain 2 coppers, putting one into their hand.

I like this card.  But then again, I like all cards dealing with copper that are not named Mountebank.

Huckleberry
$6 - Action
+$2
+1 Buy
+$1 per differently named action card you have in play (including this).
When you play this card, each other player may place a card on top of his deck, or gain a Copper, putting it into his hand.

Reallllllly good.  I mean KC-This guarantees +$12, which is (as far as I know) the best yet.  And the draw back is pretty so-so.  Putting a card back to leave you with 4 cards is more than often bad for them (see - ghost ship) and gaining a copper is alright, but not super strong.

Carambola
$4 - Action
+$3
Clockwise starting from the player on your left, each player chooses one: +1 VP; +1 Card; gain a Silver; trash a card from hand. No player may choose the same option as any previous player.

Yeah, I don't like the feel of this card.  But it might work out to be balanced, just too much going on to tell without playing it.

[Polk5440]

Gooseberry: uber-powered for you. I mean, stables with an extra card, or stables with a buy (or rarely a naked buy). And then everyone else can... half-stables? Hmmm, I guess this is too good.

It's a full Stables for your opponents, right? They don't have to play the Stables card. When you play Stables, then discard a Treasure you are down 2 cards, then draw 3, netting 1 card. Here you don't have to play Stables, just discard a Treasure and draw 2, netting 1 card.

[nopawnsintended]

Apple
$5 - Action
+$1
Trash a card from your hand.
Draw up to 5 cards in hand.
Each other player may put a card from their hand on top of their deck.

Trade of all Jacks?  The interaction seems a little weak on most boards.  I'm not sure this is worth $5.

Orange
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
Name a card. Each other player reveals the bottom card of his deck. If the named card is revealed, +1 Action, +$1.
--
(Rules clarification: After the reveal, the card is returned to the bottom of his deck.)

Not a fan of the reveal the bottom card of the deck.  Also, what happens in multiplayer?  Do you get the bonus for each named card?  Still seems weak.

Strawberry
$5 - Action
+3 Cards
Reveal your hand and trash two Copper cards. If you do, gain a Silver, putting it into your hand. Each other player may trash a Copper from their hand or gain a Copper, putting it into their hand.

Smithy meets Trading Post, but only on Coppers.  This could be an interesting reaction to itself.  I could see playing a mirror where my opponent does this and I'm short a copper, gain a copper in hand to make it into silver.  These things tend to work out better in my mind than in practice though...

Pear
$5 - Action
The player to your left chooses one for you to receive:
+$4, +1 Buy
+2 Cards, +1 Action
+2 VPs

This is fun.  It might be even more fun if there were just two options.  I'd prefer the $4, +1 Buy versus +2 VP.

Banana
$3 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain a card costing up to $6, placing it on top of your deck.
Each other player may gain a copy of the card you gained.

A super Feast where everyone eats.  Topdecking rather than just gaining seems a little too symmetric for my taste.

Plum
$5 - Action
+2 VP
Discard down to 2 cards in hand. Gain a Silver, putting it in hand.
Each other player may trash up to two cards in hand.

I'm not sure how to think about this one.  Lots of silvers end up in deck with repeated play, but discarding down to 2 + a Silver seems pretty harsh.  Plus, the externality is strong.

Apricot
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Discard any number of cards from your hand. Draw until you have 5 cards in hand.
Each other player with at least 5 cards may discard his hand and then draw 5 cards.

Possibly too strong pairing with Minion where the externality won't help.

Grapefruit
$3 - Action
+$2
You may trash all the cards in the [This Card] mat.
Each player (including you) chooses one: put a card from his hand into the [This Card] mat; or gain a card from the [This Card] mat and put it into his hand
--
(Rules clarification: All cards on the [This Card] mat are visible to all players at all times.)

I don't see what is exciting about this.

Honeydew
$6 - Action
+2 Cards
You may trash 3 random cards from your hand. If you do, gain a Province, putting it on top of your deck.
Every other player may trash two random cards from their hand. If they do, they gain a [This Card], Duchy, or Gold of their choice.

I'm not a fan of the "random" trashing.  Feels like chaos.

Blueberry
$5 - Action
+$4
While this is in play, Victory cards cost +$1 and each other player gains a copy of the first non-Victory card you buy during your Buy step.

This seems unnecessarily complicated.  Why make Victory cards more expensive?  I understand $4 is a lot of money, but that's a strange mechanic.

Fig
$2 - Action
+1 Action
Each player puts a Victory token on a non-empty Supply pile.
You may trash a card from your hand. If you do, +1 VP per Victory token on that card's pile and remove those tokens from that pile.

Seems like lots of work for everyone getting the same benefit.

Grape
$3 - Action
Each player may trash up to 2 cards from his hand. +$1 per 2 cards trashed in total, rounded down.

Interesting, but underpowered in 2P.  Compare to Silver.  Your opponent could just trash one card, and you get +$1 after trashing two from your own hand.  That doesn't seem like enough buying power to compensate for the opportunity cost of forgoing a Silver... not sure though.

Raspberry
$2 - Action
+1 Card
+$1
Each other player may trash a Treasure from his hand. You gain all of these trashed cards; put them into your hand. If no player trashes a treasure this way, +$1.

Goes with the Copper theme, and in 4P, you could end up with a boatload of copper.  Once the copper runs out (if?), it's still a terminal Silver.  Not bad.

Cantaloupe
$3 - Action
Choose one: +2 Cards; or +$2; or the player to your left chooses +3 Cards or +$3.
Each player (including you) may trash a card from their hand.  If no one does, each player gains a Silver, placing it on top of their deck.

Lots of independent moving parts.  Not sure I like it.

Peach
$3 - Action
Trash a card. Gain a card costing up to twice the cost of the trashed card.
Each opponent may gain a card costing up to the cost of the trashed card.

Why is this $3?  Just compare to Remodel.  2-cost: Peach an Estate into a $4, and your opponent can un-Swindle (OK, that's weaker than Remodel, but slightly). 3-cost: Peach an Silver into Gold/Goons... opponent can still un-Swindle (probably about like Remodel's power).  4-cost: Peach a Sea Hag into a Province?  Crazy.  5-cost: Peach a Trading Post into a Province?  Crazy.  6+ cost: Peach a Gold into a Province... could do that with Remodel anyway.  I suppose this would be weaker if Peddler is on the board, but that's one card.

Clementine
$5 - Action
+5 Cards
+1 Action
Reveal your hand.  The player to your left chooses a card to discard from your hand, then the player to your right does the same.

Seems bad by itself (worse than Envoy by draw/discard), but it is chainable, which makes it strong.

Boysenberry
$5 - Action
Draw one fewer card than last turn during Cleanup this turn.  Take an extra turn after this one.  During that: Players see all you see.  If you may play a card, do so.  If you may buy or gain a card, do so, selecting one with the highest cost in coins.  The player to your left makes all decisions for you.

Feels like a Zombie version of Possession where you inflict it upon yourself because you gain the cards.  I'd be afraid to play this.

Tamarind
$3 - Action
+1 Buy
+$1
You may discard 2 cards from your hand. If you do, gain a Treasure costing up to $3, putting it into your hand.
Each other player may discard a card. Each player who does gains a Silver.

Seems weak to me.

Lemon
$3 - Action
Name an Action card. The player to your left either reveals the named card, or reveals a hand with no such card. If he revealed the named card, you play it. At the start of Clean-up, return the card to the player's hand. If he did not reveal the card you named, you get +1 Card, +1 Action, and gain a Curse.

This would be good in games with topdecking as long as the player to your left topdecks good actions, but I don't see myself gambling on what is in my buddy's hand unless there's no cost.  Once curses are out, OK, but that's a while to wait.  Maybe should cost $2 so you can pick it up with an extra buy late game after the curses are out?

Lime
$5 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.
The player to your left chooses 1 for you to receive: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.

Seems very weak for $5.  Aside from the +1 Buy/VP option, this is like Tribute where your opponent gets to choose which one you get.  Tribute never seems to work out for me, and I'd expect it would be worse if I left half of it up to a conscious choice of an opponent rather than chance... especially if they get to choose after me.  This would be much stronger if they chose first, then you get to choose.

Pomegranate
$2 - Action
+1 Action
+$1
Each other player may discard his hand and draw four cards. If any do, you do too.

I guess this is priced at $2 for a reason.  Minion thyself.  I'm not sure if I like it.

Guava
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each player (including you) may trash a card from his hand, then draw a card if he does.
If any other player trashes a card this way, +1 Card.

I'm not excited about this for some reason.  Seems too symmetric to me.

Cherry
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each other player may reveal a copy of [This Card] from his hand. If no one does, +$2.

An activated Conspirator if no one contests.  Seems like others would contest, and the rents are competed away.  3P feels silly too.

Tangerine
$3 - Action
Choose to draw between 2 and 5 cards.  Discard from your hand 2 less cards than you drew.  Your opponents draw and discard a number of cards equal to what you discarded.

Hate to be the grammar nazi, but this should be "2 fewer"... To the content, at the top end, this is an Embassy with no "on gain" penalty, but an on play penalty... at the bottom end, it is a Moat without the reaction.  The flexibility is valuable too.  Even with the penalty, this seems stronger as you draw more cards.  Not sure how much I like it.

Blackberry
$4 - Action
The player to your left names two cards (the two cards are allowed to be the same). Reveal the top 5 cards in your deck, and pick one: put all instances of cards the player to your left named into your hand, or put all cards that the player to your left did not name into your hand. Discard the rest.

Cumbersome wording ("instances of cards the player to your left named"), and strange middle-ground interaction.  So, would I name all of the Villages so my opponent draws a bunch of Terminals and no way to play them all?  Not sure how to "proscribe" cards... if that's the right word.

Watermelon
$5 - Action
+2 Cards
+$3
+1 Buy
When you play this card, each other player may exchange a card costing more than $2 from their hand for a copy of a card that you have played this turn, including this one. You may either gain the exchanged cards or trash them.

I'm not sure how strong this is.  Seems strong, but then again, I'm confused.

Date
$2P - Action
The opponent to your left chooses two: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +$2 and +P.

Not a fan, but to clarify, there are three options here?  +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +$2P... I guess this could be a decent way to pick up valuable alchemy cards like Golem and Possession.

Currant
$4 - Action
Trash any number of cards from your hand.  +$1 for each card trashed this way.
Each other player may trash up to two cards from his hand.
Gain the trashed cards.

This is silly, no?  As written, "Gain the trashed cards" applied to any cards trashed.  So, you have trasher that doesn't actually get rid of cards in your deck, and you gain your opponent's garbage.  I don't think this is the card's intent, but maybe I'm wrong.

Kiwi
$5 - Action
+$2
Each other player may reveal an Estate.  If no Estates are revealed, +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1.

This is swingy and I like it.  I don't usually like cards that are swingy, but I bet this one gets better as the game goes along because Estates get lost in big decks or get trashed for deck thinning.  That said, opponents may be unwilling to trash Estates if this is on the board... (maybe?) and that's an effect of the card.

Gooseberry
$5 - Action
You may discard up to two cards. If you discard a Treasure, +4 Cards, +1 Action.  If you discard two cards, +1 Buy.
Each other player may discard a Treasure. If he does, he draws 2 cards.

Each other player gets a Stables effect (note they didn't have to play the card), and you get a super Stables with a buy option.  I like it.  It's like Council Room meets Stables and Horse Traders.

Mango
$5 - Action
Each opponent may choose one: gain a Copper in hand, or gain an Estate in hand.
Choose three of the following: +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1, +1 Buy.  (The choices don't have to be different.)
--
(Rules clarification:  Like with Pawn, you have to choose all three before drawing any cards.)

Flexible.  If you opponent wants a Copper in hand, he can gain it.  Otherwise, no gain, right?  Chaining these could leave your opponent with loads of copper ... but then again, it is so strong you might come away with loads of Provinces...

Nectarine
$3 - Action
The player to your left reveals two cards costing more than $0 from his hand. Name one.
Gain a card of the same price as the named card.
--
(Rule clarification: If he have less than two cards costing more than $0, he reveal his hand, and you gain no benefit.)

Not an early game card.  Seems limited without major draw ability.

Pineapple
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Each other player may trash a card from his hand. If anyone does, +$3. If no one does, you may trash a card from your hand, +$2 if you do.

Somewhat interesting interaction.  Late game, I see this card dying... but maybe not.  Seems like this wouldn't trash the bad stuff very quickly.

Elderberry
$3* - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card
Each other player may trash a card from hand.  If a [This Card] is in play, +1 VP for each card trashed.
--
If another card that allows trashing on play is in the kingdom, this card costs $6.

A trash for benefit amplifier!  You could pile up the Victory chips with one of these and a Forge.  Chapel gets a VP benefit with this, too.  That's probably why there is a dual cost.  I like it.

Dragonfruit
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
Each other player may trash a card from his hand.

Interesting take on gimping a Gold.  I like it.

Papaya
$5 - Action
Gain a Gold in hand. Discard 2 cards. Every other player may gain a Silver in hand.

This seems way too weak for $5.  Either Discard 2 cards or the others' Silver gain would work to offset, but not both.

Kumquat
$5 - Action
+$3
Each other player may gain 2 coppers, putting one into their hand.

Copper theme.  A terminal Gold + the option for your opponents to gain copper.  It's an interesting idea.  Not sure if opponents will go along with it though...

Huckleberry
$6 - Action
+$2
+1 Buy
+$1 per differently named action card you have in play (including this).
When you play this card, each other player may place a card on top of his deck, or gain a Copper, putting it into his hand.

Synthetic money to the max + a buy?  This seems really strong.  Perhaps too strong.

Carambola
$4 - Action
+$3
Clockwise starting from the player on your left, each player chooses one: +1 VP; +1 Card; gain a Silver; trash a card from hand. No player may choose the same option as any previous player.

It would be great if this didn't terminate until someone chooses to trash a card from hand.  Dominion Roulette!  Not sure I like the mechanic.

All in all, there are some interesting cards.

[eHalcyon]

Looking at everything!  One of them is mine.

Apple
$5 - Action
+$1
Trash a card from your hand.
Draw up to 5 cards in hand.
Each other player may put a card from their hand on top of their deck.

Agree with WW and Powerman that this is too weak.

Orange
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
Name a card. Each other player reveals the bottom card of his deck. If the named card is revealed, +1 Action, +$1.
--
(Rules clarification: After the reveal, the card is returned to the bottom of his deck.)

Too stackable!  My suggested change would be that each player can choose to leave the card on the bottom or move it to the top.

Strawberry
$5 - Action
+3 Cards
Reveal your hand and trash two Copper cards. If you do, gain a Silver, putting it into your hand. Each other player may trash a Copper from their hand or gain a Copper, putting it into their hand.

This is kind of like Trading Post, but with +cards and a restriction to only trashing Copper.  Seems decent.  I like that this card is on theme, focusing on Copper.

Others read this as allowing opponents to choose neither, but I don't think that's clear.

Pear
$5 - Action
The player to your left chooses one for you to receive:
+$4, +1 Buy
+2 Cards, +1 Action
+2 VPs

Unlike WW, I don't think this is strictly worse than Lab.  It is definitely far less reliable.  But all the choices are pretty strong for you, making it a tough choice for the other player.

Banana
$3 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain a card costing up to $6, placing it on top of your deck.
Each other player may gain a copy of the card you gained.

I have no idea how this card would play.  In games with more than 2 players, you could easily pile out Banana by gaining and topdecking itself 2-3 turns in a row.  Even easier if you can KC or draw the newly topdecked Banana.

Plum
$5 - Action
+2 VP
Discard down to 2 cards in hand. Gain a Silver, putting it in hand.
Each other player may trash up to two cards in hand.

The unbounded +2VP makes combos like KC-KC-Plumx3 a very possible degenerate state.  It's made even more likely in that it lets other players trash down very quickly.

Apricot
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Discard any number of cards from your hand. Draw until you have 5 cards in hand.
Each other player with at least 5 cards may discard his hand and then draw 5 cards.

This is Cellar with the benefit that your hand won't be reduced by 1 when you play it.  But the trade off is that if your hand was bigger more than 5 cards, Apricot is strictly WORSE than Cellar.  The benefit to opponents makes this even weaker.

Grapefruit
$3 - Action
+$2
You may trash all the cards in the [This Card] mat.
Each player (including you) chooses one: put a card from his hand into the [This Card] mat; or gain a card from the [This Card] mat and put it into his hand
--
(Rules clarification: All cards on the [This Card] mat are visible to all players at all times.)

It doesn't specify what happens at the end of the game.  Do the cards return to the deck, or are they permanently gone?  The only real benefit you get over your opponents when playing the card is the option to trash everything on the mat.  However, that's not really a big deal.  The only time this is helpful is when you can drop a lot of Curses on the mat.  Otherwise, this is far more useful to Island away Victory cards and to Haven cards for another time.  Without the benefit to opponents, I think this is too strong for $3.  With the benefit, it is far too weak.

Honeydew
$6 - Action
+2 Cards
You may trash 3 random cards from your hand. If you do, gain a Province, putting it on top of your deck.
Every other player may trash two random cards from their hand. If they do, they gain a [This Card], Duchy, or Gold of their choice.

Too random!

Blueberry
$5 - Action
+$4
While this is in play, Victory cards cost +$1 and each other player gains a copy of the first non-Victory card you buy during your Buy step.

Issue 1: I feel that this is verging on Attack territory in that you can buy a Curse to make everyone else gain one.  Sure, you hurt yourself that way, but it can be worth it.  Maybe you have a Trader in hand!

Issue 2: If you can get multiples of these in play, it is absolutely an attack.  Say you have two in play.  You buy one Curse, everyone else gains two.

Issue 3: If you are buying a VP card, this is a terminal Gold.  +$4, VP cost $1 more.  Terminal Gole for $5 is not so balanced.

Fig
$2 - Action
+1 Action
Each player puts a Victory token on a non-empty Supply pile.
You may trash a card from your hand. If you do, +1 VP per Victory token on that card's pile and remove those tokens from that pile.

What order do the players put down tokens?

If you plan to trash a card at all, there is no real choice for you -- the only correct move is to put your token on the card you plan to trash.  There is no benefit to waiting until later.  I guess if there is nothing you want to trash in your hand, you'll try to set it on something you'll trash later.  So there's that.

I think it may be interesting for introducing some mind games, but in the end I think it would be easy for non-mirroring opponents to beat this mini-game.  First easy thing is to put a few tokens on something you wouldn't want to trash.  Province, maybe Duchy.  Key cards.  Then, they can put tokens on cards you don't have and probably won't buy.  Unwanted Kingdom cards.  Curse, if there are no Cursers.  Maybe eventually there will be enough tokens on that pile that you'll want to buy the card to try to trash it... but that takes up a buy, and then you have to wait for the reshuffle, and then you have to collide that card with your Fig.

I think this is a neat idea, but it needs tweaking to make it work.

Grape
$3 - Action
Each player may trash up to 2 cards from his hand. +$1 per 2 cards trashed in total, rounded down.

Pretty strong early-game card with more than 2 players.  With only 2p, I think this is still decent.  It would probably be fine at $2 though.  Maybe if it let you trash up to 4 cards?

As is, I think you can usually still buy Silver after trashing.

Raspberry
$2 - Action
+1 Card
+$1
Each other player may trash a Treasure from his hand. You gain all of these trashed cards; put them into your hand. If no player trashes a treasure this way, +$1.

More Copper shenanigans!

Cantaloupe
$3 - Action
Choose one: +2 Cards; or +$2; or the player to your left chooses +3 Cards or +$3.
Each player (including you) may trash a card from their hand.  If no one does, each player gains a Silver, placing it on top of their deck.

The first part is too strong.  It's unlikely that the other player will be able to determine whether it is worse for you to get cards or coin, and it's probably not a huge difference either way.  The second part is superfluous and doesn't tie into the first part at all.

Peach
$3 - Action
Trash a card. Gain a card costing up to twice the cost of the trashed card.
Each opponent may gain a card costing up to the cost of the trashed card.

I like this, though I wonder if the benefit to opponents benefits the potentially huge benefit to you.  $4->$8 is amazing, and your opponents only get a $4 card.  $3->$6 is pretty great too.

Clementine
$5 - Action
+5 Cards
+1 Action
Reveal your hand.  The player to your left chooses a card to discard from your hand, then the player to your right does the same.

I think this card is fine.  It's an Envoy-Embassy-Stables hybrid.  It needs high quality cards with good deck density to shine.  Non-terminal is not a huge deal if your best actions are discarded.  I think it matters a lot that your opponents choose from your entire hand.

Boysenberry
$5 - Action
Draw one fewer card than last turn during Cleanup this turn.  Take an extra turn after this one.  During that: Players see all you see.  If you may play a card, do so.  If you may buy or gain a card, do so, selecting one with the highest cost in coins.  The player to your left makes all decisions for you.

I am a little confused.  This card gives instructions on what to play and buy, but then it says the player to your left makes decisions.  I assume that these decisions are only for things not specified by the card.  So you must play actions in hand; if there are multiple, the player to your left picks which one.  If the card you play involves a choice, player to your left decides.  During the buy phase you buy the costliest card you can afford; if there are multiple at the same cost, player to your left decides.

If my reading of the card makes sense, I really like this card.  It is super dangerous to play, more so if your Boysen-possessor is skilled.  The funniest thing is if multiples of these get played (probably on those subsequent turns).  You could take 5 turns in a row, with the last few turns resulting in you buying Curses.

It might need to say "but not less than 0 cards".  If your opponent makes you play KC-Boysenberry...

Tamarind
$3 - Action
+1 Buy
+$1
You may discard 2 cards from your hand. If you do, gain a Treasure costing up to $3, putting it into your hand.
Each other player may discard a card. Each player who does gains a Silver.

I can't envision the intended strategy to this card.  As worded, your opponents always have the opportunity to gain the Silver, no matter what your choice is.  That's a huge benefit to opponents.  Without this, I could maybe see this as a flexible way to leverage extra Silver out of a poor hand, and otherwise get some +buy if you are desperate.  But the benefit to opponents is too much.

Lemon
$3 - Action
Name an Action card. The player to your left either reveals the named card, or reveals a hand with no such card. If he revealed the named card, you play it. At the start of Clean-up, return the card to the player's hand. If he did not reveal the card you named, you get +1 Card, +1 Action, and gain a Curse.

I'm not a fan of this one.  I'm not sure how easy it would be to guess correctly, but it's still unreliable.  If you guess wrong, this card is a cantrip self-curser, eep.  Even if you guess right, it's really only worth it if the card you pulled cost $5 or more.  $3 or less, you could have just bought that card yourself.  $4, you probably still could have bought it yourself.

Lime
$5 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.
The player to your left chooses 1 for you to receive: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.

I would have thought this strong, but WW makes a good point about it.

Pomegranate
$2 - Action
+1 Action
+$1
Each other player may discard his hand and draw four cards. If any do, you do too.

This actually sounds OK for a $2 card, especially if your deck is mostly cantrips.  The worry is that an opponent will Minion you when you don't want to lose your hand, but you can build your deck to take advantage of it.  And you can always make it a mind-game.  I like it.

Guava
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each player (including you) may trash a card from his hand, then draw a card if he does.
If any other player trashes a card this way, +1 Card.

This seems a little too strong to me.  It is like Upgrade, except you draw an extra card instead of gaining something.  In the case of Copper/Curse trashing, this is stronger.  Yes, the card gives a benefit to opponents, but that comes with another bonus for you.  Not sure if it's too strong for $4 or if it would be good at $5.

Other than that, I like it.

Cherry
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each other player may reveal a copy of [This Card] from his hand. If no one does, +$2.

I agree with WW on this.

Tangerine
$3 - Action
Choose to draw between 2 and 5 cards.  Discard from your hand 2 less cards than you drew.  Your opponents draw and discard a number of cards equal to what you discarded.

Grammar nitpick: it should be "2 fewer cards".  (ninja'd on this while still writing up this post.)

WW points out a simpler wording that is equivalent though.  Make this "+2 cards, draw up to 3 cards and discard the same number; every other player does the same".

This can be an Embassy that gives your opponents huge sifting.  Not sure if the benefit to others  offsets how strong this card is for you.  Games with this will probably be super fast.  I think this should cost $4.

Blackberry
$4 - Action
The player to your left names two cards (the two cards are allowed to be the same). Reveal the top 5 cards in your deck, and pick one: put all instances of cards the player to your left named into your hand, or put all cards that the player to your left did not name into your hand. Discard the rest.

Hmm... at first read, I liked this mini-game.  I am not sure now.  I think I'd like it better if the cards were revealed before the player named the cards, because you should be able to get what you want anyway.

Watermelon
$5 - Action
+2 Cards
+$3
+1 Buy
When you play this card, each other player may exchange a card costing more than $2 from their hand for a copy of a card that you have played this turn, including this one. You may either gain the exchanged cards or trash them.

So, they can't get any Treasure from you unless you played Black Market.  What order do the players make the exchange?  If it's a 4p game and you only play this card, only one player can exchange?  Do the other players put their new card into their hands?  Does it count as a gain for them?  Can you decide whether to gain or trash each exchanged card one by one, or is it all or nothing?

I think this would create a lot of rules confusion, and could also be a tracking nightmare.  It's one thing to remember how many MVs you've trashed this turn.  Its another to have all of your played cards disappear.

Date
$2P - Action
The opponent to your left chooses two: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +$2 and +P.

Always +2P.  Well, maybe +4 actions sometimes.

(Powerman points out that it looks like the +$2 and +P are together.  That makes this card better, but still not great... It'll probably be +4 Actions always.)

Currant
$4 - Action
Trash any number of cards from your hand.  +$1 for each card trashed this way.
Each other player may trash up to two cards from his hand.
Gain the trashed cards.

This seems really bad to me.  Assuming that you don't gain the cards you trashed yourself (because if you do, that's horrid), sure, you can trash 4 cards and get +$4.  With three players, you could gain just as many cards as you trash.  With four, your trashing just ends up junking your deck more.

Kiwi
$5 - Action
+$2
Each other player may reveal an Estate.  If no Estates are revealed, +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1.

I think this card is interesting, but it swings a lot depending on the board.  If there is trashing available and your opponents trash Estates, this card is AMAZING.  It is GM with an extra +$1 instead of +buy, for $5 without Copper-restriction.  If your opponents don't trash, then it's just swingy.  I think the bonuses need to be moved around to make the differences less drastic.

Gooseberry
$5 - Action
You may discard up to two cards. If you discard a Treasure, +4 Cards, +1 Action.  If you discard two cards, +1 Buy.
Each other player may discard a Treasure. If he does, he draws 2 cards.

In this case, I think the bonus to opponents balances out the balance you get, as powerful as it is.  The only thing is that Militia, Ghost Ship, Goons, etc. would erase a large part of the benefit to opponents, wow.

Mango
$5 - Action
Each opponent may choose one: gain a Copper in hand, or gain an Estate in hand.
Choose three of the following: +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1, +1 Buy.  (The choices don't have to be different.)
--
(Rules clarification:  Like with Pawn, you have to choose all three before drawing any cards.)

I assume the opponent can choose neither, since it says "may choose one".  Otherwise, it is an attack.

The AP potential here is hair-raising.

Nectarine
$3 - Action
The player to your left reveals two cards costing more than $0 from his hand. Name one.
Gain a card of the same price as the named card.
--
(Rule clarification: If he have less than two cards costing more than $0, he reveal his hand, and you gain no benefit.)

Weaker than Smugglers, I think.  Probably still OK, but I personally don't like Smugglers.

Pineapple
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Each other player may trash a card from his hand. If anyone does, +$3. If no one does, you may trash a card from your hand, +$2 if you do.

Interesting card.  I have no idea how this would play.

Elderberry
$3* - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card
Each other player may trash a card from hand.  If a [This Card] is in play, +1 VP for each card trashed.
--
If another card that allows trashing on play is in the kingdom, this card costs $6.

(Nitpick: +Card comes before +Action.)

This seems really weak to me.  You have to play 2 to get any benefit.  Probably what happens is that your opponents will trash something on the first play and then nothing on the second play.  Net result is that you let everyone else trash a card for no benefit to yourself.

Or maybe they have 2 Curses in hand, so they do trash the second time.  You get +1VP, they also get +1VP and one less junk card in their deck.

Maybe the intention was that it would be +1VP for each card trashed this turn, including on the first play of the card and other trashers.  That might be the reason for the alternate cost?  If so, it needs to be reworded:

"While any [This Card]s are in play, +1VP for each card trashed."

This preserves what appears to be an intention to disallow stacking multiples of these.  Otherwise, just "while this is in play" will suffice.  I'd prefer it if a single cost was made, because the alternate cost is weird.  Maybe put it at $5 or $6 and let the one who played it trash cards too.

Dragonfruit
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
Each other player may trash a card from his hand.

Seems OK to me.

Papaya
$5 - Action
Gain a Gold in hand. Discard 2 cards. Every other player may gain a Silver in hand.

Like HT, but with Gold gain, no +buy and a big benefit to opponents.  Seems not that bad to me, though the benefit to others is iffy.  It shouldn't gain to their hands.  I still think this is decent because gaining the Gold is often better than simple +$3.

Kumquat
$5 - Action
+$3
Each other player may gain 2 coppers, putting one into their hand.

Seems OK, and is on the Copper theme.

Huckleberry
$6 - Action
+$2
+1 Buy
+$1 per differently named action card you have in play (including this).
When you play this card, each other player may place a card on top of his deck, or gain a Copper, putting it into his hand.

This gives too much coin, doesn't it?  I'm not sure.  I don't like the benefit to opponents -- should pick one thing and stick to it, rather than giving the choice.

Apparently people are interpreting this such that the player can choose neither, but I don't read this one that way.

Carambola
$4 - Action
+$3
Clockwise starting from the player on your left, each player chooses one: +1 VP; +1 Card; gain a Silver; trash a card from hand. No player may choose the same option as any previous player.

Terminal gold at $4 is too good.  And yeah, weird in games with more than 4p... also, with less than 4, do you continue around the circle until all options are taken?

[yudantaiteki]

Pear
$5 - Action
The player to your left chooses one for you to receive:
+$4, +1 Buy
+2 Cards, +1 Action
+2 VPs

I was thinking of submitting an idea very similar to this but I just couldn't figure out how to make it work; it always seemed Contraband-ish in that it would be very hard to use.

WW: Can you explain what you mean that this is "strictly worse" than lab?  It seems to me that would only be true if +$4/+1 buy and +2 VPs were both worse than lab 100% of the time, which doesn't seem to me to be the case.

Grapefruit
$3 - Action
+$2
You may trash all the cards in the [This Card] mat.
Each player (including you) chooses one: put a card from his hand into the [This Card] mat; or gain a card from the [This Card] mat and put it into his hand
--
(Rules clarification: All cards on the [This Card] mat are visible to all players at all times.)

And this is another idea I wanted to pursue that I couldn't figure out -- some card with a communal mat where cards would be put and taken away by all players.

also, with less than 4, do you continue around the circle until all options are taken?

I don't see why that would be the case; every other card that has "each player" only has each player do something (or have something done to them) once.  There's no extra wording on this card that would suggest going around again.  (In 5 or 6 player games the standard "do everything you can" rules would suggest to me that the 5th and 6th players gain nothing.)

[eHalcyon]

Grapefruit
$3 - Action
+$2
You may trash all the cards in the [This Card] mat.
Each player (including you) chooses one: put a card from his hand into the [This Card] mat; or gain a card from the [This Card] mat and put it into his hand
--
(Rules clarification: All cards on the [This Card] mat are visible to all players at all times.)

And this is another idea I wanted to pursue that I couldn't figure out -- some card with a communal mat where cards would be put and taken away by all players.

Wait, it's a communal mat?  Weird... if that's the case, I don't see why anyone would ever choose to trash everything.  Also, this might have to be considered an attack.  Even though it happens to everyone, it could still force the other player to either put down a good card or gain a crappy one.  Though maybe it's like Masquerade enough that it's not an attack... hm.  In this case, I don't know.

[yudantaiteki]

Maybe I misinterpreted it; if it's not a communal mat I would have expected "your mat" instead of "the mat".

[dnkywin]

Pear
$5 - Action
The player to your left chooses one for you to receive:
+$4, +1 Buy
+2 Cards, +1 Action
+2 VPs

I was thinking of submitting an idea very similar to this but I just couldn't figure out how to make it work; it always seemed Contraband-ish in that it would be very hard to use.

WW: Can you explain what you mean that this is "strictly worse" than lab?  It seems to me that would only be true if +$4/+1 buy and +2 VPs were both worse than lab 100% of the time, which doesn't seem to me to be the case.

Well, this is assuming that the person to your left never wants to help you, but the person to your left can always pick the lab option. (Just like how a card that says, "Pick One: +2 Cards +1 Action, or discard a card" is strictly better than lab, even though discarding a card is almost always inferior to a lab.)

Hmmm, as a general comment about the cards, many of the other-player interactions look forced (e.g. Apple)

[eHalcyon]

Maybe I misinterpreted it; if it's not a communal mat I would have expected "your mat" instead of "the mat".

I think you are reading it right.

[yudantaiteki]

Pear
$5 - Action
The player to your left chooses one for you to receive:
+$4, +1 Buy
+2 Cards, +1 Action
+2 VPs

I was thinking of submitting an idea very similar to this but I just couldn't figure out how to make it work; it always seemed Contraband-ish in that it would be very hard to use.

WW: Can you explain what you mean that this is "strictly worse" than lab?  It seems to me that would only be true if +$4/+1 buy and +2 VPs were both worse than lab 100% of the time, which doesn't seem to me to be the case.

Well, this is assuming that the person to your left never wants to help you, but the person to your left can always pick the lab option. (Just like how a card that says, "Pick One: +2 Cards +1 Action, or discard a card" is strictly better than lab, even though discarding a card is almost always inferior to a lab.)

Sorry, maybe I'm being stupid this morning, but I still don't get it.  If the left player always picks the lab, then it's exactly equal to lab.  If they pick the other options, it's only "strictly worse" if the options are 100% worse than the lab option...right?

[zahlman]

Commenting on some later cards (my card is before this point):

Peach
$3 - Action
Trash a card. Gain a card costing up to twice the cost of the trashed card.
Each opponent may gain a card costing up to the cost of the trashed card.

Why is this $3?  Just compare to Remodel.  2-cost: Peach an Estate into a $4, and your opponent can un-Swindle (OK, that's weaker than Remodel, but slightly). 3-cost: Peach an Silver into Gold/Goons... opponent can still un-Swindle (probably about like Remodel's power).  4-cost: Peach a Sea Hag into a Province?  Crazy.  5-cost: Peach a Trading Post into a Province?  Crazy.  6+ cost: Peach a Gold into a Province... could do that with Remodel anyway.  I suppose this would be weaker if Peddler is on the board, but that's one card.

When you Peach the Sea Hag into a Province, opponent gains an Island. When you Peach the Trading Post, opponent gains a Duchy. So really your net gain is 3VP for the Trading Post, 4 for the Hag (except that opponent might actually get to play the Island and improve his deck by -2 greens). If you Bishoped the Trading Post, you'd get +$1 in addition.

So I'm not so sure it's that crazy. But yeah, overall it's probably comparable enough to Remodel to justify a $4 price tag. And yeah you obviously wouldn't want to use it on Gold in a Province game (and it wouldn't necessarily be stellar in a Colony game either).

Clementine
$5 - Action
+5 Cards
+1 Action
Reveal your hand.  The player to your left chooses a card to discard from your hand, then the player to your right does the same.

Seems bad by itself (worse than Envoy by draw/discard), but it is chainable, which makes it strong.

My naive analysis: Clementine : Lab :: Envoy : Smithy, roughly, so it should be balanced.

Boysenberry
$5 - Action
Draw one fewer card than last turn during Cleanup this turn.  Take an extra turn after this one.  During that: Players see all you see.  If you may play a card, do so.  If you may buy or gain a card, do so, selecting one with the highest cost in coins.  The player to your left makes all decisions for you.

Feels like a Zombie version of Possession where you inflict it upon yourself because you gain the cards.  I'd be afraid to play this.

This is just so hard to like and so hard to imagine planning a strategy around.

Lime
$5 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.
The player to your left chooses 1 for you to receive: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.

Seems very weak for $5.  Aside from the +1 Buy/VP option, this is like Tribute where your opponent gets to choose which one you get.  Tribute never seems to work out for me, and I'd expect it would be worse if I left half of it up to a conscious choice of an opponent rather than chance... especially if they get to choose after me.  This would be much stronger if they chose first, then you get to choose.

Opponent is only choosing half the benefit, and furthermore you no longer risk drawing 2 identical cards. Good point about the order of choice, but with the opposite order, it's practically a Trusty Steed.

Cherry
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each other player may reveal a copy of [This Card] from his hand. If no one does, +$2.

An activated Conspirator if no one contests.  Seems like others would contest, and the rents are competed away.  3P feels silly too.

But you have to buy it if others do in order to have a chance of contesting it, and it's way too strong if uncontested. Some people like this kind of prisoner's dilemma mechanic.

Tangerine
$3 - Action
Choose to draw between 2 and 5 cards.  Discard from your hand 2 less cards than you drew.  Your opponents draw and discard a number of cards equal to what you discarded.

Hate to be the grammar nazi, but this should be "2 fewer"... To the content, at the top end, this is an Embassy with no "on gain" penalty, but an on play penalty... at the bottom end, it is a Moat without the reaction.  The flexibility is valuable too.  Even with the penalty, this seems stronger as you draw more cards.  Not sure how much I like it.

I think it has too many moving parts. A simplified equivalent would be something like

+2 Cards
Choose a number between 0 and 3 inclusive. Each player, including you, draws that many cards, then discards that many cards.

But that still sounds really awkward by Dominion standards.

Date
$2P - Action
The opponent to your left chooses two: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +$2 and +P.

Not a fan, but to clarify, there are three options here?  +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +$2P... I guess this could be a decent way to pick up valuable alchemy cards like Golem and Possession.

That was my understanding of the card. It seems weak without another good P-cost card on board, since opponent would always include the $2P option - which just lets you pick up a free Date if you have the +buy; it'd be hard to play multiples of this without a real engine that doesn't need support from Date anyway. If Golem/Possession is available, this suddenly becomes ridiculous, because opponent suddenly either has to help you get a bunch of those nasty cards, or let you play a Trusty Steed for the price of an Apothecary - call me crazy, but I think that's a damn good deal.

Currant
$4 - Action
Trash any number of cards from your hand.  +$1 for each card trashed this way.
Each other player may trash up to two cards from his hand.
Gain the trashed cards.

This is silly, no?  As written, "Gain the trashed cards" applied to any cards trashed.  So, you have trasher that doesn't actually get rid of cards in your deck, and you gain your opponent's garbage.  I don't think this is the card's intent, but maybe I'm wrong.

I'm assuming the intent is that you only gain cards that were trashed by opponents. But even then it seems kinda wonky.

Kiwi
$5 - Action
+$2
Each other player may reveal an Estate.  If no Estates are revealed, +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1.

This is swingy and I like it.  I don't usually like cards that are swingy, but I bet this one gets better as the game goes along because Estates get lost in big decks or get trashed for deck thinning.  That said, opponents may be unwilling to trash Estates if this is on the board... (maybe?) and that's an effect of the card.

A cantrip Gold is an amazing benefit when it activates. When it doesn't - well, I'm pretty sure there's a reason Tournament gives you the +Action unconditionally.

That said, I do kinda like the idea of a card that (a) adds the "threat is stronger than the execution" principle to the game, by making players unwilling to trash Estates early just by being in the kingdom; (b) is a power-$5 that's stronger later on except perhaps in really desperate alt-VP rushes (Estate/SR etc.).

Gooseberry
$5 - Action
You may discard up to two cards. If you discard a Treasure, +4 Cards, +1 Action.  If you discard two cards, +1 Buy.
Each other player may discard a Treasure. If he does, he draws 2 cards.

Each other player gets a Stables effect (note they didn't have to play the card), and you get a super Stables with a buy option.  I like it.  It's like Council Room meets Stables and Horse Traders.

Can't really explain why, but I don't like it. Maybe I'm finding it too complicated.

Mango
$5 - Action
Each opponent may choose one: gain a Copper in hand, or gain an Estate in hand.
Choose three of the following: +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1, +1 Buy.  (The choices don't have to be different.)
--
(Rules clarification:  Like with Pawn, you have to choose all three before drawing any cards.)

Flexible.  If you opponent wants a Copper in hand, he can gain it.  Otherwise, no gain, right?  Chaining these could leave your opponent with loads of copper ... but then again, it is so strong you might come away with loads of Provinces...

I previously proposed this as a $6 without the externality. I'd want to make it weaker, something like: "Each opponent may gain a card costing up to $2, putting it in his hand".

Nectarine
$3 - Action
The player to your left reveals two cards costing more than $0 from his hand. Name one.
Gain a card of the same price as the named card.
--
(Rule clarification: If he have less than two cards costing more than $0, he reveal his hand, and you gain no benefit.)

Not an early game card.  Seems limited without major draw ability.

The clarification seems just plain wrong per the usual principles of Dominion. If opponent has no nonzero-cost cards, sure. But if he has exactly one, then by the "do all you can" principle, he should show it, compelling you to name it.

Anyway, the obvious comparison is to Workshop. At first glance, it's obviously weaker early and stronger late. But I think overall it is too weak. On BM boards, it will probably just gain Silver almost always. On boards that build strong draw-your-deck engines, it'll probably still get Silver (or, like, Village) most of the time. If it's the kind of board that admits engines that hate Silver, then sure it'll get a lot of engine components, but it'll still be pretty rare that it gets a $5 card. I could see desperately buying this on a board with GM and heavy trashing, though, hoping to luck out.

Pineapple
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Each other player may trash a card from his hand. If anyone does, +$3. If no one does, you may trash a card from your hand, +$2 if you do.

Somewhat interesting interaction.  Late game, I see this card dying... but maybe not.  Seems like this wouldn't trash the bad stuff very quickly.

Might be political. In what order do the opponents make their decision?

Elderberry
$3* - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card
Each other player may trash a card from hand.  If a [This Card] is in play, +1 VP for each card trashed.
--
If another card that allows trashing on play is in the kingdom, this card costs $6.

A trash for benefit amplifier!  You could pile up the Victory chips with one of these and a Forge.  Chapel gets a VP benefit with this, too.  That's probably why there is a dual cost.  I like it.

I share the objection to the alt cost, just why. Also, checking for "cards that allow trashing on play" sounds tedious. Also, I have no idea how the "if an Elderberry is in play" part could possibly not be satisfied, given that you just played one.

Dragonfruit
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
Each other player may trash a card from his hand.

Interesting take on gimping a Gold.  I like it.

I do too.

Papaya
$5 - Action
Gain a Gold in hand. Discard 2 cards. Every other player may gain a Silver in hand.

This seems way too weak for $5.  Either Discard 2 cards or the others' Silver gain would work to offset, but not both.

Agreed. It seems to be combining aspects of Explorer and Governor and looking pretty awful in comparison.

Kumquat
$5 - Action
+$3
Each other player may gain 2 coppers, putting one into their hand.

Copper theme.  A terminal Gold + the option for your opponents to gain copper.  It's an interesting idea.  Not sure if opponents will go along with it though...

I like it. It seems like the general consensus is that a vanilla terminal Gold is slightly too strong for $5, and this is a slight nerf: opponents have an option to take a key coin now in exchange for bloating their deck with two Coppers.

Huckleberry
$6 - Action
+$2
+1 Buy
+$1 per differently named action card you have in play (including this).
When you play this card, each other player may place a card on top of his deck, or gain a Copper, putting it into his hand.

Synthetic money to the max + a buy?  This seems really strong.  Perhaps too strong.

It's hard to build an engine that uses several different cards. And it's a $6. That said, it's at least a terminal Gold+buy for you, and fairly easy to pump up to terminal Platinum. As for the externality, it seems pretty rare that opponents would want to topdeck something from hand (though Treasure Map comes to mind); the copper option is nicer than the one on Kumquat, but still not a huge boon to opponents.

I'd rather take the base $2 down to $1 or even $0, and then re-assess what the cost should be.

Carambola
$4 - Action
+$3
Clockwise starting from the player on your left, each player chooses one: +1 VP; +1 Card; gain a Silver; trash a card from hand. No player may choose the same option as any previous player.

It would be great if this didn't terminate until someone chooses to trash a card from hand.  Dominion Roulette!  Not sure I like the mechanic.

As someone else noted, doesn't work so well in 5-6 player games. Also, as written, you get to choose an option as well, which would make this too strong; unless there's a real difference in value between the options (and taking into consideration that different players will value them differently), you're basically getting a terminal Gold for $4. I'm pretty sure "each player chooses one" was intended to be "each other player chooses one".

[zahlman]

Sorry, maybe I'm being stupid this morning, but I still don't get it.  If the left player always picks the lab, then it's exactly equal to lab.  If they pick the other options, it's only "strictly worse" if the options are 100% worse than the lab option...right?

A card that says "You choose: Lab, or something else" is strictly better than Lab because of the choice: it can never be a worse thing to have in hand than Lab (because if Lab is preferable to "something else" at that moment, you just choose Lab), and it can sometimes be a better thing (because if "something else" is preferable, you can choose it).

By the same logic applied in reverse, a card that says "Your opponent chooses: Lab, or something else" is strictly worse than Lab (assuming that your opponent has the goal of making the card as bad as possible for you, which is a pretty safe assumption).

Wait, it's a communal mat?  Weird... if that's the case, I don't see why anyone would ever choose to trash everything.

I don't see why either, and that's enough reason for me to pass on the card, really.

Also, this might have to be considered an attack.  Even though it happens to everyone, it could still force the other player to either put down a good card or gain a crappy one.  Though maybe it's like Masquerade enough that it's not an attack... hm.  In this case, I don't know.

I don't think it's really an attack. I do think it's the only thing that makes the card interesting. Other than that, it's just a dumping ground for everyone to trash starting Coppers and Estates at the same rate... or put another way, a terminal Silver version of Bishop. And, you know, the VP really go a long way towards making Bishop interesting.

I hope the true name for this card is "Commons" (as in tragedy of).

[WanderingWinder]

Some comments.
Orange, you only get the benefit once in multiplayer. Why would you get it more than once?
Strawberry is clearly supposed to have the mandatory trashing. Why not? It is too strong with optional.
Pear is still strictly worse than lab guys. I mean, oh, they give you lab most of the time. Well, if they always give you lab, it's lab. If you get to the point where lab is clearly better than another option, they give you that. But because they have the option to make it lab, OR something else, it must be at best lab, and possibly worse. I mean, you could have it be 'they choose: lab or gain 3 provinces', and that is strictly worse than lab - because they always give you lab until it is clear it's worse, which happens more often than never, so in those rare instances, it is worse than lab, and it is never better than lab unless your opponent plays poorly, ergo it's worse than lab.
I don't understand why Grapefruit is bad against want-bloat strategies - you can always trash all the cards on the mat to not give your opp a chance to gain anything other than what you junk right now. And if them getting a copper or estate is so much better than you getting rid of it, well, why are you buying this at all, and not going for the bloat strat? I mean, that is a mediocre bloat strat to start with, if this is all the help it's getting.

Peach... peach, peach, peach. I don't see why trashing 3s with it is so hot. I do think the comparison to remodel is apt, but let's break it down. It is definitely WORSE than remodel if you trash something costing 2 or less, because you can't get anything better, and your opponent CAN get something better than nothing, if they want to. Trashing a $3, you would have to turn it into a $6 to not have it still be worse than remodel, and you can do that, but what 6 are you getting? Sometimes there will be something (cough cough goons), but usually, it is a delayed mine, or an expand to turn silver into gold, which is quite good for a 3.... except, your opponent can grab a silver or peach in return. So that is not so great. Turning 4s into provinces is clearly the big power here. 5s go into province, but the opponent can then get a 5 - and at least duchy really mitigates your big province gain. And if you 6+-> province, they get to gain at least a gold or duchy, which they couldn't do if you remodeled. Now it's cheaper. But if it cost $4, it would actually probably be better, because that will help you get the estate-> 4 cost -> province train rolling, as peach is itself a 4-cost.  Well, anyway, it still seems weaker than remodel to me, and probably too weak.

Clementine I have rethought, and it seems not so good now, because it will take a LONG time to be able to chain these things - you need 4. Still seems fairly good, but actually reasonable maybe.
Lemon, I don't understand how this combos with bureaucrat (unless they have great hall/island/nobles I guess), or especially cutpurse. Still seems weak.
Blackberry I have re-thought as well. I mean, it is terminal. So it probably compares to, like, envoy. The split up your treasures, name silver and silver usually, and it seems a weaker envoy. Now sometimes it won't be, but I think most often, that would be what you get. In a deck with lots of actions, well, you'd knock out their villages, except you can't - they can always take whatever you try to deny them. So better for engines than envoy. Which makes me like it. To be clear, the order here is 1) they name cards, 2) you reveal cards and separate into piles, 3) you choose a pile to draw
Date - ah, it looks like it IS 2 AND potion. So this makes it most often actions and the cash, which is comparable to festival, but almost certainly worse. Pretty meh - compare it to the other 2p cards, it looks weaker across the board. I assume the choices must be different.
Currant, I have to assume, was intended to have you gain only your opponent's trashed cards. As is, it's trash itself.
You guys are right about the full stables on Gooseberry. This is a pretty big boon for the opponent, which make me think it might be UNDERpowered if anything, but probably decently good.
Mango, I missed the word 'may'. So of course this is a benefit for them, seems an interesting to good card.

Elderberry, I think some confusion is happening here. As written, you only get the bonus from cards trashed VIA elderberries. To have it work for other trashed cards, too, you would need it to be a 'while this is in play' or 'while at least one copy of elderberry is in play' or something - at least something that's below a line.

Papaya, you have to realize, they do get to keep that gold later, which is not negligible. I mean, still seems weak, but not THAT weak.
Huckleberry - I agree it looks strong, because it's at least a terminal gold with buy, and most often getting 4 or 5, and incredibly good for engines, BUT... I mean, it costs 6. And is it really so clearly better than Goons? I think not.

[angrybirds]

So, they can't get any Treasure from you unless you played Black Market.  What order do the players make the exchange?  If it's a 4p game and you only play this card, only one player can exchange?  Do the other players put their new card into their hands?  Does it count as a gain for them?  Can you decide whether to gain or trash each exchanged card one by one, or is it all or nothing?

I think this would create a lot of rules confusion, and could also be a tracking nightmare.  It's one thing to remember how many MVs you've trashed this turn.  Its another to have all of your played cards disappear.

This isn't my card, but I know who wrote it and I think it needs an explanation.

The person that plays the watermelon doesn't lose his cards from the play area. The opponents exchange their cards in hand with ones from the supply, but the watermelon player can gain the exchanged cards.

Example:

Player one plays a Village, a Witch and a Watermelon.
At this point Player two can exchange a silver for a watermelon from the supply.
Player 1 either gains the silver or it goes in the trash, his choice.

Confusing wording yes.

[nopawnsintended]

Elderberry
$3* - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card
Each other player may trash a card from hand.  If a [This Card] is in play, +1 VP for each card trashed.
--
If another card that allows trashing on play is in the kingdom, this card costs $6.

A trash for benefit amplifier!  You could pile up the Victory chips with one of these and a Forge.  Chapel gets a VP benefit with this, too.  That's probably why there is a dual cost.  I like it.

I share the objection to the alt cost, just why. Also, checking for "cards that allow trashing on play" sounds tedious. Also, I have no idea how the "if an Elderberry is in play" part could possibly not be satisfied, given that you just played one.

I think you're reading this differently than I am reading it.  The way I read it, you get +1 VP for any card trashed while this card is in play.  Yes, you get +1 VP for each card opponents trash, but play a Forge after this and trash 4 cards... BAM!  There's +4 VP on top of that.  That seems powerful, but only if you have other trashers.  Maybe I'm misreading that... it's possible this was the intent of the card given the pricing... perhaps a PM to the author is in order to clarify?

[nopawnsintended]

Peach... peach, peach, peach. I don't see why trashing 3s with it is so hot. I do think the comparison to remodel is apt, but let's break it down. It is definitely WORSE than remodel if you trash something costing 2 or less, because you can't get anything better, and your opponent CAN get something better than nothing, if they want to. Trashing a $3, you would have to turn it into a $6 to not have it still be worse than remodel, and you can do that, but what 6 are you getting? Sometimes there will be something (cough cough goons), but usually, it is a delayed mine, or an expand to turn silver into gold, which is quite good for a 3.... except, your opponent can grab a silver or peach in return. So that is not so great. Turning 4s into provinces is clearly the big power here. 5s go into province, but the opponent can then get a 5 - and at least duchy really mitigates your big province gain. And if you 6+-> province, they get to gain at least a gold or duchy, which they couldn't do if you remodeled. Now it's cheaper. But if it cost $4, it would actually probably be better, because that will help you get the estate-> 4 cost -> province train rolling, as peach is itself a 4-cost.  Well, anyway, it still seems weaker than remodel to me, and probably too weak.

Hmmm... on reading this, I misread Peach.  I read it as giving you an opportunity to "Remodel+" and your opponent an opportunity to "Remodel-"... now, I see that your opponent's remodel benefit involves no trashing of their own cards... and only depends on your trashing.  Sorry for the confusion.

Elderberry, I think some confusion is happening here. As written, you only get the bonus from cards trashed VIA elderberries. To have it work for other trashed cards, too, you would need it to be a 'while this is in play' or 'while at least one copy of elderberry is in play' or something - at least something that's below a line.

Isn't that how it reads?  Taken from the text of the card: "If a [This Card] is in play, +1 VP for each card trashed."

[WanderingWinder]

So, they can't get any Treasure from you unless you played Black Market.  What order do the players make the exchange?  If it's a 4p game and you only play this card, only one player can exchange?  Do the other players put their new card into their hands?  Does it count as a gain for them?  Can you decide whether to gain or trash each exchanged card one by one, or is it all or nothing?

I think this would create a lot of rules confusion, and could also be a tracking nightmare.  It's one thing to remember how many MVs you've trashed this turn.  Its another to have all of your played cards disappear.

This isn't my card, but I know who wrote it and I think it needs an explanation.

The person that plays the watermelon doesn't lose his cards from the play area. The opponents exchange their cards in hand with ones from the supply, but the watermelon player can gain the exchanged cards.

Example:

Player one plays a Village, a Witch and a Watermelon.
At this point Player two can exchange a silver for a watermelon from the supply.
Player 1 either gains the silver or it goes in the trash, his choice.

Confusing wording yes.

Maybe that's what he intends, but I am fairly sure that is not what happens as worded. Well, actually, 'exchange' isn't well-defined game-wise.
However, that interpretation just makes this thing even more bananas powerful.

[WanderingWinder]

Elderberry, I think some confusion is happening here. As written, you only get the bonus from cards trashed VIA elderberries. To have it work for other trashed cards, too, you would need it to be a 'while this is in play' or 'while at least one copy of elderberry is in play' or something - at least something that's below a line.

Isn't that how it reads?  Taken from the text of the card: "If a [This Card] is in play, +1 VP for each card trashed."

Yeah, but that text is in the wrong spot. You can't just stick text wherever you want - this is in the place of 'effects-I-get-when-I-play-this'; the phrasing may be fine, but it needs to be below a line.

[heatthespurs]

Wait, it's a communal mat?  Weird... if that's the case, I don't see why anyone would ever choose to trash everything.

I don't see why either, and that's enough reason for me to pass on the card, really.

If you have a hand full of good card and the mat contains lots of bad cards and you would like to get the +$2 from the card. There are a lot of "if" though

With same logic, Grapefruit could be a weak attack if played after milita (as the "Masquerade" role)

[Guy Srinivasan]

Pineapple
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Each other player may trash a card from his hand. If anyone does, +$3. If no one does, you may trash a card from your hand, +$2 if you do.

Somewhat interesting interaction.  Late game, I see this card dying... but maybe not.  Seems like this wouldn't trash the bad stuff very quickly.

Might be political. In what order do the opponents make their decision?

For all decisions like this, opponents make their decision in turn order (starting with the active player if applicable).

[yudantaiteki]

By the same logic applied in reverse, a card that says "Your opponent chooses: Lab, or something else" is strictly worse than Lab (assuming that your opponent has the goal of making the card as bad as possible for you, which is a pretty safe assumption).

I see what you're trying to say but it seems bizarre -- by that logic a card that said "Your opponent chooses: Lab, or you gain 5 provinces" would be strictly worse than lab, which seems like an odd thing to say.

[Grujah]

By the same logic applied in reverse, a card that says "Your opponent chooses: Lab, or something else" is strictly worse than Lab (assuming that your opponent has the goal of making the card as bad as possible for you, which is a pretty safe assumption).

I see what you're trying to say but it seems bizarre -- by that logic a card that said "Your opponent chooses: Lab, or you gain 5 provinces" would be strictly worse than lab, which seems like an odd thing to say.

But he would always choose the lab. Unless you gaining 5 provinces is better than Lab (like, he is in huge lead but you have a better engine, so he just wants ends the game before you catch up). In that case - you wanted to the lab effect - and if you had lab you wouldn't lose, but with this, you did. Its strictly worse (opponent would choose lab in any other situation)

[heatthespurs]

By the same logic applied in reverse, a card that says "Your opponent chooses: Lab, or something else" is strictly worse than Lab (assuming that your opponent has the goal of making the card as bad as possible for you, which is a pretty safe assumption).

I see what you're trying to say but it seems bizarre -- by that logic a card that said "Your opponent chooses: Lab, or you gain 5 provinces" would be strictly worse than lab, which seems like an odd thing to say.

But he would always choose the lab. Unless you gaining 5 provinces is better than Lab (like, he is in huge lead but you have a better engine, so he just wants ends the game before you catch up). In that case - you wanted to the lab effect - and if you had lab you wouldn't lose, but with this, you did. Its strictly worse (opponent would choose lab in any other situation)

It does sound weird. But since your opponent choice makes it never better than Lab, it has to be strictly worst than Lab. Min[X, Y, Z] <= X

Having said this, all the discussion above assume that your opponent would always know which option is the worst for you, which is not true. So under this constraint, it may not be strictly worst than Lab in practise.

[rinkworks]

Modified the rules clarifications for "Grapefruit" to clarify that it only uses a single communal mat, rather than multiple individual ones.

[popsofctown]

I'm going to defend Carambola.  4$ terminal gold would be too good, but it IS significantly weaker than terminal Gold.  Early on, gaining a Silver is definitely the most powerful option, and is a considerable draw back.  The remaining choices are much weaker.  A typical hand after opening Carambola would be something like:

Copper - Copper - Copper - Carambola - Estate

You play Carambola.  Your opponent gains a Silver, which is really good.  You can draw a card, and you'll probably draw a copper and hit 7$ instead of 6$ so there's not much point to that.  You can trash a card from your hand, and that's ok, that's probably what you do.  But that's not as good as adding a Silver to your deck if you're playing a Big money strategy.  +1 VP is provable weaker than gaining a Silver, because it is a terminal silver benefit for a 4$ card while Silver gain is a terminal silver benefit for a 5$ card, Explorer. (Province reveal is totally a fringe aspect of the card). 
Now if there's a really good engine on the board, like Bridge, the shoe actually moves to the other foot, trashing a card could be better than cluttering a deck with Silver.  So when your opponent trashes an Estate, your forced to take a halfMoat and pick up maybe a better engine component, or clog your deck with a Silver that you don't need because this Carambola card here is already your engine component procurer.

Lastly, the +card benefit is a halfMoat for the player playing a card and a Lab for his opponent.  That on it's own makes it ok as a terminal Gold.  Midgame, your opponent can take the effect of a 5$ card every time you play this sucker, and leave you with three effects that are all not as strong as that 5$ card.  And if he needs a different effect even more, you're left with a Halfmoat for you, and he knows whether you've supported it with a Village or not.

This is one of my favorite entries, (besides my own, which is awesome, but I have to be polite and not identify)

[Polk5440]

Commenting on some later cards (my card is before this point):

Peach
$3 - Action
Trash a card. Gain a card costing up to twice the cost of the trashed card.
Each opponent may gain a card costing up to the cost of the trashed card.

Why is this $3?  Just compare to Remodel.  2-cost: Peach an Estate into a $4, and your opponent can un-Swindle (OK, that's weaker than Remodel, but slightly). 3-cost: Peach an Silver into Gold/Goons... opponent can still un-Swindle (probably about like Remodel's power).  4-cost: Peach a Sea Hag into a Province?  Crazy.  5-cost: Peach a Trading Post into a Province?  Crazy.  6+ cost: Peach a Gold into a Province... could do that with Remodel anyway.  I suppose this would be weaker if Peddler is on the board, but that's one card.

When you Peach the Sea Hag into a Province, opponent gains an Island. When you Peach the Trading Post, opponent gains a Duchy. So really your net gain is 3VP for the Trading Post, 4 for the Hag (except that opponent might actually get to play the Island and improve his deck by -2 greens). If you Bishoped the Trading Post, you'd get +$1 in addition.

So I'm not so sure it's that crazy. But yeah, overall it's probably comparable enough to Remodel to justify a $4 price tag. And yeah you obviously wouldn't want to use it on Gold in a Province game (and it wouldn't necessarily be stellar in a Colony game either).

Peach Gold into Colony (opponents gain Gold or small VP) actually scares me the most.

[Polk5440]

Is it just me, or is the competition getting even stiffer? These cards are great!

I think for this one, my vote will be mostly based on the quality of the interaction element and how it fits in with the rest of the card.

Raspberry
$2 - Action
+1 Card
+$1
Each other player may trash a Treasure from his hand. You gain all of these trashed cards; put them into your hand. If no player trashes a treasure this way, +$1.

You must gain the trashed cards; interesting. However, it just seems too niche to be interesting in enough games.

Lemon
$3 - Action
Name an Action card. The player to your left either reveals the named card, or reveals a hand with no such card. If he revealed the named card, you play it. At the start of Clean-up, return the card to the player's hand. If he did not reveal the card you named, you get +1 Card, +1 Action, and gain a Curse.

As much as I dislike Possession, I like this card. A really fun-looking interaction where you play your opponent's card, but isn't too mean to your opponents, and it has a nice little gamble built in, too! Not really sure the curse gain is needed, but the concept of this card is really neat. Is this the first card that combos with the ability of other cards that make your opponent reveal his hand? Also, I prefer Lemon over Boysenberry. For some reason that card reminded me of Possession, too.

Lime
$5 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.
The player to your left chooses 1 for you to receive: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.

I really like the mechanic of the player to your left choosing something for you. Among Lime, Pear, Blackberry, and Date, I would like Date's simple implementation of the mechanic. . . if it didn't have the potion cost or option!  So I will probably go with Lime, instead. Maybe Lime would be better if the last line instead read: "Then, the player to your left chooses a different option for you to receive"?

Kiwi
$5 - Action
+$2
Each other player may reveal an Estate.  If no Estates are revealed, +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1.

The more I think about this card, the more I like it. It's simple, and I think it would really change the dynamic of a game by adding this interesting incentive to not trash your Estates (even buy more?) and accepting the clog in order to turn your opponent's Kiwi from a Gold that doesn't take up space into a terminal Silver.

Gooseberry
$5 - Action
You may discard up to two cards. If you discard a Treasure, +4 Cards, +1 Action.  If you discard two cards, +1 Buy.
Each other player may discard a Treasure. If he does, he draws 2 cards.

I just really like the idea of having your opponents get a Stables as an externality (the Lab as externality is so popular, it's almost overdone). Being able to discard a Copper to draw some cards also fits in tangentially with the emerging theme of use of Coppers of the fan set.

Mango
$5 - Action
Each opponent may choose one: gain a Copper in hand, or gain an Estate in hand.
Choose three of the following: +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1, +1 Buy.  (The choices don't have to be different.)
--
(Rules clarification:  Like with Pawn, you have to choose all three before drawing any cards.)

May clog with money or Victory; I like it. With all the choosing, it may slow the game down a little, but I get the feeling it may be worth it! However, as WW notes, it is really strong at $5.

Dragonfruit
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
Each other player may trash a card from his hand.

I think I'm a sucker for Treasure cards, but I really like this cheap Gold with positive externality to opponents for off-set. Seems like it would be playable in more situations than Contraband or Cache. The only downside is the interaction has been done on other existing cards. It would be nice for a new non-attack interaction to win.

I do prefer this over the other Treasure and "others may trash" cards, though.

Papaya
$5 - Action
Gain a Gold in hand. Discard 2 cards. Every other player may gain a Silver in hand.

And we're back to "how powerful is getting money in hand, anyway"? I do like this idea, though. Nice and simple.

Carambola
$4 - Action
+$3
Clockwise starting from the player on your left, each player chooses one: +1 VP; +1 Card; gain a Silver; trash a card from hand. No player may choose the same option as any previous player.

I like having to choose something different.

Huckleberry
$6 - Action
+$2
+1 Buy
+$1 per differently named action card you have in play (including this).
When you play this card, each other player may place a card on top of his deck, or gain a Copper, putting it into his hand.

I just don't know about this card. I mean, I like the opponents' choice, but for some reason, the card as a whole doesn't seem to be as fun as the existing $6 actions.

[rinkworks]

Boysenberry
$5 - Action
Draw one fewer card than last turn during Cleanup this turn.  Take an extra turn after this one.  During that: Players see all you see.  If you may play a card, do so.  If you may buy or gain a card, do so, selecting one with the highest cost in coins.  The player to your left makes all decisions for you.

I am a little confused.  This card gives instructions on what to play and buy, but then it says the player to your left makes decisions.  I assume that these decisions are only for things not specified by the card.  So you must play actions in hand; if there are multiple, the player to your left picks which one.  If the card you play involves a choice, player to your left decides.  During the buy phase you buy the costliest card you can afford; if there are multiple at the same cost, player to your left decides.

I believe your interpretation of the card is correct.  The author of the card had provided rule clarifications which I agreed to withhold unless there were questions:

-Black Market's purchase becomes compulsory.
-University becomes compulsory.
-Tournament discarding a Province is optional because you don't have a direct option to gain a card.
-Similar for Baron
-King's Court is not mandatory because you may choose a card.  Once you decline to do so, you may not play one.
-You can reveal Trader freely and turn any gain into a Silver, even if Silver costs less in coins.

[Stealth Tomato]

Does Boysenberry seem like a terrible card on 95% of boards to anyone else? I see a few things happening most often:

1. BM-Boysenberry: Good if there are no bad cards in the Kingdom. A bad $4 makes it okay, a bad $5 makes it bad, and a a $6 kingdom will almost always make it awful. Especially if that card is Border Village, in which case Boysenberry is going to give you BV-Duchy or BV-[Counting House or similar] a lot.
2. Combo/chain/KC/etc. boards: Terrible. Opponent will terminal you out of actions as quickly as possible. Unless he wants to make you promptly pile the Curses, in which case he will stockpile +Buys for you, THEN terminal you out of actions.
3. Any board with trashing: Terrible. Opponent will trash all your good cards.
4. Any board with discard-for-benefit: Bad. Makes Warehouse, etc. untouchable, and if your opponent manages to put one or two in your deck, be prepared to buy the rest of them, followed by all the Curses and Estates.
5. The rare board where there are literally no terminals: Ungodly powerful.

It just seems completely untouchable on most boards, middling on a few, and ungodly powerful on some rare ones.

(edit: had one inaccuracy)

[blueblimp]

It's not that great even in case 5, because if you have a treasure in hand, presumably your opponent can play it, which kicks you into your buy phase, preventing any action plays after that.

[Stealth Tomato]

It's not that great even in case 5, because if you have a treasure in hand, presumably your opponent can play it, which kicks you into your buy phase, preventing any action plays after that.

Well, that case is pretty simple to resolve via card text. He seems to be implying that you must play Action cards until you are out of either Actions or Action cards.

Also, I do realize I could be totally underestimating the card, and look forward to being proven wrong.

[popsofctown]

3. Any board with trashing: Terrible. Opponent will trash all your good cards.

Trash for benefit still gains a benefit, even if it's not exactly what you would have picked. 

[One Armed Man]

Thoughts starting from the bottom (you don't have to read them that way).

Grape
I don't like this card's power in 4P games. A Steward that lets you choose all the options at once, almost. Everyone wants them, but they weaken after they are played more than twice, since players will wait until their own turn to trash the last 2 cards from their hand.

Raspberry
The combination of +Cards and +$ rubs me wrong.

Cantaloupe
This is wacky. If you played a Village first, the opponent wants to give you $3, but there isn't much difference between the choices. Unless I was drawing my whole deck, I would let my opponent choose.
The extra effect is fun. I would rather see it on another card, though. It should say "starting with you" to give you less of an advantage.

Peach
Gold to Colony, Potion to Province. I like the Remodel idea, but there are quite a few bonkers things that can happen. Seems okay.

Clementine
Both the players to the left and right get a callout, awesome! The penalty is very steep. Experiment: I play this card. Now my hand is: Clementine, $4 Terminal Silver, Gold, Silver, 3 Coppers, 2 Victory. My opponents pull a Gold and Clementine out of my hand. Now I have a the terminal silver and $5 in coin. If I started with a hand that was the "average" of those cards, I would get 1.4*5= 7. Seems reasonable, not-overpowering in engines since Clementine would be the first thing pulled from engine hands. Seems fun.

Boysenberry
Masquerade style cooperation is forgiven because of the nature of the challenge. I don't like the self-choice taken out of Dominion. Other people have mentioned the trashing thing.

Tamarind
The Treasure costing up to $3 only applies to Loan and Fools Gold. Since the +Buy on this card already encourages FG, the boost isn't needed and it could say Silver. Other than that, it is only a Silver gain better than Horse Traders with no Reaction. It also doesn't work if you don't have 2 cards to discard, so too weak overall.

Lemon
The cost for missing the card is huge. The only Action cards worth naming are 7 cost, Governor, Hunting Party, Mountebank, Grand Market, Golem, Alchemist, or Possession. Otherwise you can just buy the actions yourself. In all but the most trashed, Alchemisted, Schemed, or Minioned of games, there is no confidence they have what you are looking for. This card could also follow a hand-revealing attack (Cutpurse?) or if your opponent revealed a reaction. This card also discourages people from buying other actions (bad) and encourages diversity of actions (not as bad).

Lime
When these cards are stacked, the choices become difficult to keep track of. The main "game" of this card is to make sure you have extra actions when you play it so you don't choose +Actions. If you do, the opponent will too, since +4 Actions doesn't do much for you. If you have extra actions, +card or +$ is usually best. At that point, the card becomes a Level 2 city or (+2 card, +$2) or Monument+Buy. Seems okay.

Pomegranate
People probably only want to pitch their hand if it is full of green, the game is early, or they are confident their engine will go off with any other hand. It is a nice way to mitigate some bad luck. If no one takes advantage of it, you just played a copper (excluding Minion, draw up to).

Guava
Everyone will want to trash and draw most of the time. Too strong. I think a much more balanced version of this card doesn't let you trash and draw.

Cherry
This card is the best counter to itself. If no one buys a lot of this useless cantrip, this is almost a Grand Market. Everyone will get a few in most games, but the 2P games themselves will be swingier than even Tournament or Familiar games.

Tangerine
You get best of 9. Your opponents get best of 8. Considering that you had to spend an action to play this card, I don't think it is useful often enough considering how much faster the game is in the presence of this card.

Blackberry
This is an interesting drawing technique. The opponent usually wants to name the best card you have a few of (Silver, Gold, Platinum, engine component) or some combination of 2 weak ones. I want to play with this!

Watermelon
Mixing +Coin and +Cards rubs me the wrong way. I also don't understand what happens if you buy a Gold with this and 3 opponents have a Silver to exchange.

Date
The masquerade cooperation thing is a problem here, but since that is part of the challenge, I will let it slide. seems okay, I like +potions as a bonus.

Currant
This causes a crazy swing! I like it for 2P, but not for 4P. Gaining 6 crappy starting cards each time it is played is only good for alt VP.

Kiwi
People seem to like this one. Seems swingy, but Baron is, too. I would have liked to see the Estate thing with a lower bonus, but this seems okay.

Gooseberry
I don't understand. You can discard just a Copper for a Super Stables, but your opponent can stables too? The only reason to discard 2 cards is to get a +Buy. I like cards that explain their purposes simply.

Mango
This is gives you 4*4*4*4 choices and the opponent 2, so over 500 choices. The best thing most of the time are Lab, Smithy, Woodcutter, or some combination of actions and stuff. Filled with AP. The bonuses for the opponent seem very small. I would like discard 1 and draw 1 as an opponent bonus for a card this strong.

Nectarine
Naming in this case is similar to choosing. Is there a difference, thread? This is swingy if your opponent's hand is Gold-Province-Copper-Copper-Copper.

Pineapple
If you trash a card, this is a non-terminal $2 that trashes. If they do trash, it is a Dragonfruit. I like the game of the card, but Dragonfruit is simpler.

Elderberry
I don't want to even think about the confusion this could cause.

Dragonfruit
Since this would be good for a Smithy-BM strategy, the perk helps an engine strategy more. In multiples, eventually the opponent doesn't want to trash at all, but even then a $5 isn't too gamebreaking. Seems okay.

Papaya
The bonuses on this make the game end too quickly for my taste. These games would be even shorter than Governor ones.

Kumquat
Enough with the copper gain.    This is an interesting way to do a weak restriction. Don't buy this against a Gardens player. I don't like easy BM enablers unless their bonuses explicitly help engine players, not other BM.

Huckleberry
Too strong

Carambola
This seems really powerful as an opener at $4. The trashing a card and gaining a silver are very strong and you would so often want either so the benefit your opponent gets in 2P is not a big deal.

[ChocophileBenj]

I haven't understood something about boysenberry.
If chapel+festival+conspirator+province in hand, you would usually play festival->chapel (trash nothing)->conspirator->..., but may opponent decide to play chapel and to trash your 3 cards ? (and then buy a curse !!!)

[WanderingWinder]

You miscalculate mango. You only have 20 options, since order doesn't matter, and your opp has 3: copper, estate, or nothing.

[One Armed Man]

You miscalculate mango. You only have 20 options, since order doesn't matter, and your opp has 3: copper, estate, or nothing.

Oh, that makes sense. Then that reduces the AP argument a bit. Pawn has 6 modes and causes AP. It is still a very strong card.

[Schneau]

As some people have said, some of these cards that force opponents to do something seem like they should be classified as Attack cards. In particular, Strawberry, Grapefruit, Mango, and Huckleberry all could force opponents to do things they don't want to do, if their effects are mandatory for opponents (though most of their wordings are ambiguous on this issue). I would say any of these that force opponents to choose to discard / gain Copper or Estates / get rid of a card / gain a card that might be bad shouldn't be eligible for this clearly Non-Attack challenge.

[rinkworks]

As some people have said, some of these cards that force opponents to do something seem like they should be classified as Attack cards. In particular, Strawberry, Grapefruit, Mango, and Huckleberry all could force opponents to do things they don't want to do, if their effects are mandatory for opponents (though most of their wordings are ambiguous on this issue). I would say any of these that force opponents to choose to discard / gain Copper or Estates / get rid of a card / gain a card that might be bad shouldn't be eligible for this clearly Non-Attack challenge.

Strawberry, Mango, and Huckleberry all say things like "Each other player may choose one:".  I read these cards (and have received clarification from some of their creators affirming as much) that this means that the other players don't have to choose to do either of the options.  I'd therefore agree that these should NOT be attack cards.

Grapefruit does require other players to choose between two different options; that is, they can't just do nothing.  That may or may not mean it should be an Attack card; that's a judgment I'll leave up to the voters.

[Schneau]

As some people have said, some of these cards that force opponents to do something seem like they should be classified as Attack cards. In particular, Strawberry, Grapefruit, Mango, and Huckleberry all could force opponents to do things they don't want to do, if their effects are mandatory for opponents (though most of their wordings are ambiguous on this issue). I would say any of these that force opponents to choose to discard / gain Copper or Estates / get rid of a card / gain a card that might be bad shouldn't be eligible for this clearly Non-Attack challenge.

Strawberry, Mango, and Huckleberry all say things like "Each other player may choose one:".  I read these cards (and have received clarification from some of their creators affirming as much) that this means that the other players don't have to choose to do either of the options.  I'd therefore agree that these should NOT be attack cards.

Grapefruit does require other players to choose between two different options; that is, they can't just do nothing.  That may or may not mean it should be an Attack card; that's a judgment I'll leave up to the voters.

Fair enough! I agree that if the option is optional, then it is definitely not an attack card. If any of those cards won, I hope we would make the wording more obvious that they are optional, since they could easily be read otherwise.

As for Grapefruit, I would definitely classify this as an Attack card, since it forces players to either essentially trash a card from their hand or gain a card that may be bad. But, I'm fine leaving that choice up to the voters.

[popsofctown]

The number of options isn't the only factor for AP.  It depends on the relative quality of the options, especially if situations change the relative quality a lot..  "Choose two: Trash a curse from your hand, if you do, gain 3 Golds, or reveal and discard a Province, if you do, gain three Silvers, +1 Buy, or +1 Action" is much easier to play than Pawn with the same number of choices.

[heatthespurs]

As for Grapefruit, I would definitely classify this as an Attack card, since it forces players to either essentially trash a card from their hand or gain a card that may be bad. But, I'm fine leaving that choice up to the voters.

Shouldn't Masquerade be an attack card then?

[ftl]

Perhaps it should, but it would get way too weird if one person in a group of four Moats a Masquerade. So it's not.

[Schneau]

As for Grapefruit, I would definitely classify this as an Attack card, since it forces players to either essentially trash a card from their hand or gain a card that may be bad. But, I'm fine leaving that choice up to the voters.

Shouldn't Masquerade be an attack card then?

Excellent point! The only reason Masquerade is not an attack card, as far as I can tell, is that it would be really weird if someone blocked it with a Moat or Lighthouse, etc. Grapefruit, on the other hand, doesn't have any of this weirdness, and could be classified as an Attack without trouble.

[rinkworks]

The results for the Non-Attack Interaction challenge are in!  Here were the criteria:

Design a card that is not an Attack card but that, when played by one player, allows or requires at least one other player to act.  The card may not be "targeted" in the sense that it allows the player to choose which opponent(s) are affected.

I've got nothing of my own this time, so let's get straight to it.  As with the Village contest, the winner ran away with it:

#1 - Amulet by Kirian with 31 points (Dragonfruit)
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
Each other player may trash a card from his hand.


This entry in the Contraband/Cache category lets you have a cheap Gold in exchange for giving out some free trashing to your opponents.  As with Bishop, the severity of this penalty depends a lot on the kingdom at hand.  Unlike Bishop, this doesn't help you trash down as well, but the boost to your economy, especially in the early game, could be very well worth it.

The rest of the ballot has a lot of intriguing ideas deserving of exploration:


#2 (tie) - Artificer by eHalcyon with 13 points (Clementine)
$5 - Action
+5 Cards
+1 Action
Reveal your hand.  The player to your left chooses a card to discard from your hand, then the player to your right does the same.

#2 (tie) - World's Fair by Mecherath with 13 points (Banana)
$3 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain a card costing up to $6, placing it on top of your deck.
Each other player may gain a copy of the card you gained.

#4 - Inheritance by nopawnsintended with 11 points (Kiwi)
$5 - Action
+$2
Each other player may reveal an Estate.  If no Estates are revealed, +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1.

#5 - Smelt by Tables with 10 points (Strawberry)
$5 - Action
+3 Cards
Reveal your hand and trash two Copper cards. If you do, gain a Silver, putting it into your hand. Each other player may trash a Copper from their hand or gain a Copper, putting it into their hand.

#6 (tie) - Beggar by Drab Emordnilap with 9 points (Raspberry)
$2 - Action
+1 Card
+$1
Each other player may trash a Treasure from his hand. You gain all of these trashed cards; put them into your hand. If no player trashes a treasure this way, +$1.

#6 (tie) - Ward by A Drowned Kernel with 9 points (Pomegranate)
$2 - Action
+1 Action
+$1
Each other player may discard his hand and draw four cards. If any do, you do too.

#6 (tie) - Coffers by Dsell with 9 points (Kumquat)
$5 - Action
+$3
Each other player may gain 2 coppers, putting one into their hand.

#6 (tie) - Philanthropist (1) by One Armed Man with 9 points (Blueberry)
$5 - Action
+$4
While this is in play, Victory cards cost +$1 and each other player gains a copy of the first non-Victory card you buy during your Buy step.

#10 (tie) - Ramp by WanderingWinder with 8 points (Peach)
$3 - Action
Trash a card. Gain a card costing up to twice the cost of the trashed card.
Each opponent may gain a card costing up to the cost of the trashed card.

#10 (tie) - Salesman by Michaelf7777777 with 8 points (Lime)
$5 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.
The player to your left chooses 1 for you to receive: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.

#10 (tie) - Stagecoach by Tejayes with 8 points (Guava)
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each player (including you) may trash a card from his hand, then draw a card if he does.
If any other player trashes a card this way, +1 Card.

#10 (tie) - Horse Farm by Polk5440 with 8 points (Gooseberry)
$5 - Action
You may discard up to two cards. If you discard a Treasure, +4 Cards, +1 Action.  If you discard two cards, +1 Buy.
Each other player may discard a Treasure. If he does, he draws 2 cards.

#14 - Inspector by dnkywin with 7 points (Blackberry)
$4 - Action
The player to your left names two cards (the two cards are allowed to be the same). Reveal the top 5 cards in your deck, and pick one: put all instances of cards the player to your left named into your hand, or put all cards that the player to your left did not name into your hand. Discard the rest.

#15 (tie) - Philanthropist (2) by andwilk with 5 points (Tangerine)
$3 - Action
Choose to draw between 2 and 5 cards.  Discard from your hand 2 less cards than you drew.  Your opponents draw and discard a number of cards equal to what you discarded.

#15 (tie) - Campaign by ChocophileBenj with 5 points (Pineapple)
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Each other player may trash a card from his hand. If anyone does, +$3. If no one does, you may trash a card from your hand, +$2 if you do.

#15 (tie) - Mad Scientist by DWetzel with 5 points (Date)
$2P - Action
The opponent to your left chooses two: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +$2 and +P.

#15 (tie) - Flag by Powerman with 5 points (Cantaloupe)
$3 - Action
Choose one: +2 Cards; or +$2; or the player to your left chooses +3 Cards or +$3.
Each player (including you) may trash a card from their hand.  If no one does, each player gains a Silver, placing it on top of their deck.

#15 (tie) - Prospector (1) by Graystripe77 with 5 points (Apple)
$5 - Action
+$1
Trash a card from your hand.
Draw up to 5 cards in hand.
Each other player may put a card from their hand on top of their deck.

#20 (tie) - Antique Traders by Nicrosil with 4 points (Plum)
$5 - Action
+2 VP
Discard down to 2 cards in hand. Gain a Silver, putting it in hand.
Each other player may trash up to two cards in hand.

#20 (tie) - Courtier by Schneau with 4 points (Papaya)
$5 - Action
Gain a Gold in hand. Discard 2 cards. Every other player may gain a Silver in hand.

#20 (tie) - Body Snatcher by brokoli with 4 points (Nectarine)
$3 - Action
The player to your left reveals two cards costing more than $0 from his hand. Name one.
Gain a card of the same price as the named card.
--
(Rule clarification: If he have less than two cards costing more than $0, he reveal his hand, and you gain no benefit.)

#20 (tie) - Trading House by heatthespurs with 4 points (Grapefruit)
$3 - Action
+$2
You may trash all the cards in the Trading House mat.
Each player (including you) chooses one: put a card from his hand into the Trading House mat; or gain a card from the Trading House mat and put it into his hand
--
(Rules clarification: All cards on the Trading House mat are visible to all players at all times.)

#20 (tie) - Maven by Guy Srinivasan with 4 points (Fig)
$2 - Action
+1 Action
Each player puts a Victory token on a non-empty Supply pile.
You may trash a card from your hand. If you do, +1 VP per Victory token on that card's pile and remove those tokens from that pile.

#20 (tie) - Scrap Heap by Bella Cullen with 4 points (Elderberry)
$3* - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card
Each other player may trash a card from hand.  If a Scrap Heap is in play, +1 VP for each card trashed.
--
If another card that allows trashing on play is in the kingdom, this card costs $6.

#20 (tie) - Tartuffe by Garth One-eye with 4 points (Currant)
$4 - Action
Trash any number of cards from your hand.  +$1 for each card trashed this way.
Each other player may trash up to two cards from his hand.
Gain the trashed cards.

#20 (tie) - Inventor by Qvist with 4 points (Cherry)
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each other player may reveal a copy of Inventor from his hand. If no one does, +$2.

#28 (tie) - Treaty by yuma with 3 points (Watermelon)
$5 - Action
+2 Cards
+$3
+1 Buy
When you play this card, each other player may exchange a card costing more than $2 from their hand for a copy of a card that you have played this turn, including this one. You may either gain the exchanged cards or trash them.

#28 (tie) - Dilemma by Auto-Destruct Sequence with 3 points (Pear)
$5 - Action
The player to your left chooses one for you to receive:
+$4, +1 Buy
+2 Cards, +1 Action
+2 VPs

#28 (tie) - Stalker by NoMoreFun with 3 points (Orange)
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
Name a card. Each other player reveals the bottom card of his deck. If the named card is revealed, +1 Action, +$1.
--
(Rules clarification: After the reveal, the card is returned to the bottom of his deck.)

#28 (tie) - False Prophet by Robz888 with 3 points (Lemon)
$3 - Action
Name an Action card. The player to your left either reveals the named card, or reveals a hand with no such card. If he revealed the named card, you play it. At the start of Clean-up, return the card to the player's hand. If he did not reveal the card you named, you get +1 Card, +1 Action, and gain a Curse.

#28 (tie) - Incinerator by FishingVillage with 3 points (Grape)
$3 - Action
Each player may trash up to 2 cards from his hand. +$1 per 2 cards trashed in total, rounded down.

#28 (tie) - Spoils by Kelume with 3 points (Carambola)
$4 - Action
+$3
Clockwise starting from the player on your left, each player chooses one: +1 VP; +1 Card; gain a Silver; trash a card from hand. No player may choose the same option as any previous player.

#28 (tie) - Pagan Rites by zahlman with 3 points (Apricot)
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Discard any number of cards from your hand. Draw until you have 5 cards in hand.
Each other player with at least 5 cards may discard his hand and then draw 5 cards.

#35 (tie) - Prospector (2) by Fragasnap with 2 points (Tamarind)
$3 - Action
+1 Buy
+$1
You may discard 2 cards from your hand. If you do, gain a Treasure costing up to $3, putting it into your hand.
Each other player may discard a card. Each player who does gains a Silver.

#35 (tie) - Plunderer by Dubdubdubdub with 2 points (Mango)
$5 - Action
Each opponent may choose one: gain a Copper in hand, or gain an Estate in hand.
Choose three of the following: +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1, +1 Buy.  (The choices don't have to be different.)
--
(Rules clarification:  Like with Pawn, you have to choose all three before drawing any cards.)

#37 (tie) - Gambler by Adrienaline with 1 point (Honeydew)
$6 - Action
+2 Cards
You may trash 3 random cards from your hand. If you do, gain a Province, putting it on top of your deck.
Every other player may trash two random cards from their hand. If they do, they gain a Gambler, Duchy, or Gold of their choice.

#37 (tie) - Procession by popsofctown with 1 point (Boysenberry)
$5 - Action
Draw one fewer card than last turn during Cleanup this turn.  Take an extra turn after this one.  During that: Players see all you see.  If you may play a card, do so.  If you may buy or gain a card, do so, selecting one with the highest cost in coins.  The player to your left makes all decisions for you.

#39 - Lucky Fountain by Saucery with 0 points (Huckleberry)
$6 - Action
+$2
+1 Buy
+$1 per differently named action card you have in play (including this).
When you play this card, each other player may place a card on top of his deck, or gain a Copper, putting it into his hand.

[eHalcyon]

Finally got a decent placement.

[DWetzel]

Meh, apparently I should have left out the potiony bits (or saved this card for challenge #10 or something).  Oh well.

[Polk5440]

Congratulations to Kirian's Amulet! Could see this result coming from a mile away. It's such a nice card. I gave it 2 points, but I am a little disappointed a new non-attack interaction mechanic didn't win since it's such a thin space at the moment.

And actually, I kind of like Dragonfruit as the official name. Or maybe Dragon's Fruit? Dragons like treasure...

[ChocophileBenj]

GG Kirian, even if without you I'd probably have won because we nearly had the same idea ^^

[eHalcyon]

Congratulations to Kirian's Amulet! Could see this result coming from a mile away. It's such a nice card. I gave it 2 points, but I am a little disappointed a new non-attack interaction mechanic didn't win since it's such a thin space at the moment.

And actually, I kind of like Dragonfruit as the official name. Or maybe Dragon's Fruit? Dragons like treasure...

I voted for it, but I actually think it is a little boring.  However, that is not necessarily a bad thing.  We need some simple cards in the set too.

[ChocophileBenj]

Yes, I knew a too complicated wouldn't be that interesting for a contest with many cards, some of them much simpler than mine.

But I'm like this. When you ask me to design something, I'm often proud of my creations, but I also often miss the fact that I get too complicated while other people design other simpler, and as good as, or even better things.

[Dsell]

I am really happy with my placement this time! Also, I didn't get through all the cards in time to vote again, but I like Amulet a lot and Artificer (Clementine) was my favorite card!

[Kirian]

Holy crap!  Thanks all.

For the record, Amulet was every bit as much a placeholder name as Dragonfruit.  I'm open to better suggestions.

Edit:  That said, the art yuma chose in the other thread is pretty nice.

[Powerman]

#15 (tie) - Flag by Powerman with 5 points (Cantaloupe)
$3 - Action
Choose one: +2 Cards; or +$2; or the player to your left chooses +3 Cards or +$3.
Each player (including you) may trash a card from their hand.  If no one does, each player gains a Silver, placing it on top of their deck.

A lot of you talked about how my card was too strong for $3, which I agree.  I had to change the card to fit the rules of the contest, but here is how it originally read:

Flag
$3 Action
Choose one: +2 Cards; or +$2; or the player to your left chooses +3 Cards or +$3
_________________
While this is in play, when you buy a card, your opponents may trash a card from their hand.

I think this is a lot more balanced, but are there any thoughts?

[Tables]

Amulet looks like an interesting card, but I'm concerned about multiplayer games with it in particular, where it seems that if one person picks one up early, you can probably pretty much treat the whole game as having $5 Golds. Well, maybe not always. But often. Actually, it's probably less of an issue than I thought.

I'm surprised by the margin it won by. I voted for Peach and Clementine, and barely added Dragonfruit at the end after a bit of thinking. Clementine in particular looked very interesting to me, a kind of different Envoy, probably very hard to use, but very interesting.

My submission here was one of my favourite cards, not just that I've made, but actually one of my favourite Dominion cards I've used, period. I originally wanted to submit it to the terminal draw contest, but it didn't satisfy the criteria quite (as you often trash one copper). It's a deck thinning terminal drawer which thins your opponents decks, which is quite useful, and generally leads to some fun games. It's fairly average power wise. It tends to thin decks of copper early, before throwing them back in towards the end game. If both players have them, it can also lead to a lot of interesting choices. I had one game with this where my opponent TR'd one early, when I had no coppers in hand (I had 7 coppers in deck and was relying on his Smelt to trash my coppers), hit 4 coppers into two silver, then played it again a little later... with two coppers, while I had none then managed to Salvage it and bought some other drawer. I lost that game, somehow...

[Tejayes]

Congrats to Kirian for an incredibly well-deserved victory!

[Mecherath]

Grats Kirian!  Considering nobody was even close to you, I'm pretty pleased with my 2nd place tie on this one.  On the other hand, other than Kirian, the spread is pretty thin for the rest of the cards.  Wonder if any of these ideas will show up in the Dark Ages previews.

I think WW might have touched upon the main thing I was going for with World's Fair / Banana - divergent strategies.  If you are going for cards your opponent doesn't want, then he might take one to keep you from getting them all, but if he's not planning to use that card, it's not great for him.

It's also useful for you to grab a gold on your deck while your opponents get a gold in their discard.  Used like that it accelerates the game, which I think is fun.  Sort of like how Bishops can get everybody very trim decks quickly.

A few other people mentioned the risk of using World's Fairs to get more World's Fairs to end a pile quickly.  But you can't force your opponents to take one.  So early on you probably don't want to waste your terminal $3 to get another terminal $3 (at this point your opponents might want it).  If you're actively trying to 3-pile, they definitely won't be helping you.

[Kirian]

Congratulations to Kirian's Amulet! Could see this result coming from a mile away. It's such a nice card. I gave it 2 points, but I am a little disappointed a new non-attack interaction mechanic didn't win since it's such a thin space at the moment.

I voted for it, but I actually think it is a little boring.  However, that is not necessarily a bad thing.  We need some simple cards in the set too.

I think having some simple cards is good too!

Amulet looks like an interesting card, but I'm concerned about multiplayer games with it in particular, where it seems that if one person picks one up early, you can probably pretty much treat the whole game as having $5 Golds. Well, maybe not always. But often. Actually, it's probably less of an issue than I thought.

Yeah, in creating it my thought process was kinda like this:  The $5 Gold design space is pretty open.  So this would be a great place to give all the other players an advantage instead of giving the purchaser a disadvantage (Cache and Contraband).  One of Contraband's problems in games without alternate VP cards is that it becomes nearly useless in the endgame.  Cache, meanwhile, is a big liability from start to finish unless you have a way of quickly getting rid of the extra coppers (Chapel, Trader, Watchtower, etc.)  Amulet doesn't have the same disadvantages that keep Cache and Contraband from ever showing up above the bottom third of the "best $5" cards.  In a game with heavy trashing elsewhere, it's probably a no-brainer pickup that will just make the game faster.  In a game with mediocre (or no!) trashing, though, it can be a big boost to your opponent--much as it's often possible to skip Bishop if your opponent opens with it early.

[yuma]

Edit:  That said, the art yuma chose in the other thread is pretty nice.

Feel free to change it, it was actually kind of a struggle to find anything that would work...

[Schneau]

I just noticed that all official Kingdom Treasures with on-play wordings say "When you play this, ...". So, Amulet should probably read:

Amulet
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
When you play this, each other player may trash a card from his hand.

[Kelume]

Just wanted to thank popsofctown for defending my poor Carambola.

While it's true that I didn't consider 5-6 player (I did not know these were official possibilities and have never seen them played), I am a little baffled that it's regarded as far too strong. I've tested $4 terminal golds a few times and they never pan out to be quite as strong as one would think due to the risk of collision and worthlessness in combination with terminal draw.

In money games, the silver is the obvious choice; in engine games, the trashing. So, if you are going for the same strategy as your opponent, this card is deceptively weak. Where it shines is when strategies diverge, and indeed I feel like it promotes that nicely (and then provides interesting opportunities to deny your opponent options they need.) With more players it only becomes more interesting as often you gain a small early benefit in exchange for your opponents' choices slightly altering your needed gameplan.

Anyway, I thought it worked nicely, I'll try for something more appealing next challenges. : )

[Kirian]

I just noticed that all official Kingdom Treasures with on-play wordings say "When you play this, ...". So, Amulet should probably read:

Amulet
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
When you play this, each other player may trash a card from his hand.

You're correct!  Thanks for the catch.