Print

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

[Rush_Clasic]

Version 1.0

Brokerage (3)
Action - Duration
Now and at the beginning of your next turn: +$1.
-----
While this is in play, each player (including you) gets +1 Buy during their turn and must use all their buys during that turn.

Version 2.0

Brokerage (3)
Action - Duration
+1 Card
+$1
At the start of your next turn: +$1.
-----
While this is in play, each player (including you) gets +1 Buy during their turn and must use at least 2 of their buys during that turn.

• The forced buy-in is a nasty ploy. Don't get too caught up in it!
• One of the interesting things about designs like this is the decision of whether or not to impose the drawback on all player or just all opponents. I went with the former here and tried to wrap the general benefit around it.
  
• I considered using the cost reduction mechanic on Bridge instead of the coins since it offered a greater general benefit. It might still be a good idea, but it seemed a bit too good. If I had to move this up to costing 4 or more, I'd reconsider the ability.
• I don't know how harsh the stacking powers of this card is. I might have to put a clause in to restrict things a bit if it's too overwhelming/
• I don't like using "he" or "his or her". I was using the latter for the past two weeks, but I'm changing to "their", which should just be accepted as a "unknown gender" pronoun already.

[Morgrim7]

Too expensive. In fact, I doubt I would buy this much, if at all. Lighthouse provides a positive benefit and +1 Action. This card is the same except it is a not so positive benefit and no +Actions.

[UltimaPenguin]

First of all, I don't think this card is going to be worth buying. It's terminal, not worth very much coin, and forces you into an awkward buying situation for two turns. Even if you can take advantage of it cleanly in the current turn, it might screw you over next turn.

But if you improve it so that it's worth playing, its got a nasty scaling problem in multiplayer games. Imagine 4 people play this. Each player at the table might be forced to buy 3-4 copper during their turn. Gross. Finally, this generally discourages the entire table from getting any other cards with +Buys on them, since they become liabilities, which I don't see as a good thing.

[thirtyseven]

What if you made it so that you get to choose whether it's you or your opponents who gets the +Buy and the forced use of the buys? I think this might make it a card worth buying (like Morgrim said, it's probably not worth buying as is)... in Gardens games, you'd give the +Buy to yourself (and whenever you need it for the particular hand you have), and most of the time, when the mandatory +Buy is negative, you give it to your opponents.

I really like how this card would impact kingdoms and interact with other cards... make people pick up two cheap (engine-y?) cards as opposed to one expensive card, and it might even discourage buying other cards that provide +Buy...

[Rush_Clasic]

Somehow, no matter how much I think about a card, I always forget the multiplayer scaling problem. I'm editing the original card and comments to reflect what I think is a more balanced version.

As for its weakness, I'm starting to want to move this up to 4 anyway. I really don't want this card being spammed as much as a good 3 could be. This is another option I'm heavily considering:


Brokerage #2 (4)
Action - Duration
This turn and during your next turn, all cards (including cards in players’ hands) cost $1 less, but not less than $0.
-----
While this is in play, each player (including you) gets +1 Buy during their turn and must use at least 2 of their buys during that turn.



It feels a bit close to Upgrade as far as stacking goes, but a bit easier to stack, and with multiple buys, so I wonder if that's just too good. I might just need to add more regular bonuses instead (+1 Card?). Also, as I think of this more, I wonder whether or not I should have the mandatory buy on one's self.

[eHalcyon]

I am not sure, but I think this also needs to be labelled as an Attack.

[Rush_Clasic]

I am not sure, but I think this also needs to be labelled as an Attack.

I didn't do so because of the way it affects players. It isn't directly harming them, just regulating them. It's closer to Masquerade than it is to Swindler.

[chesskidnate]

Brokerage #2 (4)

Keep in mind that this would seem to be much stronger than bridge except for the times when the opponent can make use of the buy, which won't be often except for in mirror matches. When this card would be good, it would probably feel a lot more game warping than bridge because the card being a duration means that you'd have them in play easier and, in the case where your opponent tries a different strategy, he'd find himself forced to buy frequent coppers(or other subpar buys) while you have a bridge engine that is easier to set up because you don't even need to play all of them at once, just between two turns. When both players go for this strategy, it probably plays a lot like bridge only you have an easier time getting the effect of all the brokerages you have due to their duration nature and you get a lot of extra buys to go with your cost reduction due to your opponents brokerages in play. And also, I don't see any comparisons this card has to upgrade, did you mean bridge or highway?

[Rush_Clasic]

I meant Highway. I mix those two a lot.

[DStu]

I think there is no official card that has just +1card without +1action also.  I guess there is a reason for it, probably the +1card is somehow not attractive enough?

[Rush_Clasic]

So, obviously I was struck by the second half of the card but haven't figure out the first half of the card. Given that, how would you cost a card with that second half, and what benefits would you put in the first half? I'm very interested to know.

[thirtyseven]

I think it would have to be $2 before I would even consider buying it. It seems to best compare to Pawn and Lighthouse, both at $2. At $3, it competes with Silver, and I would always buy Silver over Brokerage.