Print

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

[nopawnsintended]

In the "Secret History of Dark Ages" outtakes, Donald X makes this point,

There was also a similar card here later, “+2 Cards +1 Action, discard a card,” for $4, which ended up being too good.

I found this interesting given quite a few cards in the competition focus on weakening the Lab.  Even though the overpowered card in question wouldn't qualify for this contest, it is interesting to think about other attempts to weaken Laboratory in the competition, and how they compare.  Obviously, there are lots of ways to weaken a Lab, but consider some of the simpler ones.

Pollack
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Action
Each other player draws a card, then discards a card from hand.

It is interesting that the externality for this card is exactly what DXV said was too strong for a $4 cost card.  So, Lab for me... and something worth more than $4 for you.  When I first read this, I thought it was priced perfectly, but after thinking about it this way (and reading WW's comment), this is a pretty strong externality, stronger than it looks (maybe $3 cost is right... I don't know, but I'd like to try playing with it).

Altman
$3 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Action
Each other player may choose one: Discard his hand and draw 4 cards OR Draw up to 6 cards in hand.

This would be easier to think about if it was just "Draw up to 6 cards in hand."  In most cases, the first one of these is a Lab for everyone (thereafter, a lab for me nothing for you, which seems fair at $4 to me... I don't know), but there's that pesky self-Minion option in there.  This could help the other players a lot, or it could hurt.  On average, it should help if you play your cards right... and if another one of these is played, you can get LOTS of help.  If there's no other good source of draw, I'd pick it up.  If there's Militia or Ghost Ship support, I'd pick it up.  But, if there's another source of draw and no way to knock my opponent's draw down, I'd go that way instead.  Cost of $3 seems right to me for this kind of tradeoff.  Plus, the interaction seems fun.

Renoir
$3 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
If the top card of the trash pile costs more than this card: +1 Card.

I like the idea of a half-Lab, but I'm not sure conditioning on there being expensive stuff in the trash is a good way to go.  In trash-for-benefit games or Dark Ages games, this might usually be a Lab, but in most others, I want to trash Curses, Estates and Coppers... so this card would do nothing (at least it wouldn't take up space).

Truffaut
$3 - Action
+1 Action
If you have an odd number of cards in play (including this), +2 Cards.

I read this wrong when I first commented.  I thought it was +1 Card, +1 Action on even and +2 Cards, +1 Action on odd.  I think I like the version in my mind better, but oh well.

As it is written, it's a herky jerky card that replaces itself without support, and it is better (more like a Lab) with action continuation support.  That's kind of an interesting tension that would get me to load up on Great Halls and Pearl Divers to get this to "work"... and that's probably priced right at $3.  Other people have made fun of the Odd/Even distinction, which I don't think is fair.  Yes, there's lots of number theory that has the word "odd" in the theorems/proofs, but it's not exactly a high-level concept.  The kids learn odd versus even in grade school.

----
There are lots of other more subtle variations on weakening/strengthening a Lab, but given that DXV made this comment, I thought it would be fun to think about these cards some more.

[Davio]

Well, secret histories have a way of putting our cards in a new perspective.

And I'm keen on sending in my cards after just 5 minutes of thought, because I don't want to overthink them (exception on this contest). This may lead to my cards costing way too much or too little or not being bought ever, but hey, I'm just in it for fun.

It's hard conjuring up a card and not having the chance to playtest it.
I myself can be horrible at judging cards. I had thought I would never buy IGG.
A curser which gives out just one Curse, is worth 1 Copper and gives more Coppers!? PASS!!

So when I see comments on my card ranging from "I like it" to "I hate it" I don't tend to take it too personally. We all just have to go with our guts on judging these cards.


I happen to think that my card is better than the credit it receives, but that's because there are multiple aspects to it, but some draw more attention than others so they're easily looked over.

[Polk5440]

Some comments, by category:

Lab-like

This category contains cards in which (one of the) the main intent(s) seem(s) to be drawing two cards.

Renoir... I'm not so sure it works to care about the order of cards in the trash. Especially now that we have cards like Graverobber that allow people to gain cards from the trash... there's no guarantee or rule that says that when looking through the trash to see what you want to gain, you have to make sure you keep all those cards in the same order.

Agreed.

Spielberg: Agree with others that this seems too strong.

Ozu
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.
Put 2 cards in your hand that do not share any type or subtype.
Discard the rest.
--
(Rule clarifications:  As always you try to do as much as you can. So if you reveal 3 Treasures, you can put 1 in hand and have to discard the others.)

I do not like this card. It rubs me the wrong way that its instructions cannot be carried out in full a lot of the time. Maybe I would like it better if it said "You may put up to two cards..." instead. What is a subtype, anyway? Attack, Reaction, Duration? That sort of thing? But not Estate?

Lang: I don't really care for this mini-game and it's cantripped encouraging multiple plays. Not for me, I'm afraid.

Tarantino
$5 - Action
+1 Action
The player to your left names a card.
Reveal cards from you deck until you reveal the named card, putting it and one other revealed card of your choice into your hand.

Tarantino works better for me. I like the decision it gives: name something in the deck that's not too great to give the player a bad card + one good card from a limited selection, or name something not in his deck, but he gets his most preferred card from his deck. I'm not so sure that it's overpriced. Also, should have a "and discard the rest" clause attached to the end.

Clouzot
$3 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. The player to your left picks one for you to discard. Put the others into your hand.

Fellini, Visconti, and Clouzot all have an Envoy-style interaction which I like a lot and is nice to see it on a non-terminal. I like Clouzot the best by far. It's clean; not gunked up by other unnecessary additions to the card. It fits better in this category than a similar entry we saw earlier.

Truffaut
$3 - Action
+1 Action
If you have an odd number of cards in play (including this), +2 Cards.

Like nopawnsintended, I too read this incorrectly and like the version in my head better. My version went like this: "+1 Action, If you have an even number of Truffauts in play (including this), +2 Cards. Otherwise, +1 Card" I like this version better because you don't have to worry so much about the order you play all your non-terminal draw cards too much, and having the bonus on even makes more sense for a $3 cost card. And, if you have a lot, it's like each one gives you 1.5 cards. As submitted, you open this and Silver, and you've opened Lab and Silver. Oh, and isn't even/odd an easier concept than "1+half rounded down" like on Bishop?

Lynch
$3 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
The opponent to your left reveals and discards the top card of their deck.  Reveal the top card of your deck. If it costs less than your opponent's card, place it in your hand; if it does not, discard it.

I like the idea, but am afraid it's too weak. Maybe just strike the discard part so the card goes back on top if you lose?

Eisenstein just has too much going on for me.
Lubitsch: I do not like this concept.
Kazan: Agree it's too strong. Kill the Cutpurse-plus and then we'll talk.

Altman
$3 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Action
Each other player may choose one: Discard his hand and draw 4 cards OR Draw up to 6 cards in hand.

Now here's one I like. I think the externality is right on. The choice for the opponents makes it interesting. It's strong enough to offset the benefits of getting a Lab for $3 while weak enough to encourage an early buy. Like Truffaut, this makes more sense thinking about it played a few times. Unlike Truffaut, the trick with this card is in the THREAT of it being playing multiple times (do I minion myself and hope another gets played? or draw, and then if another is played, I don't get an externality?) Also, re: One Armed Man, if you've self-minioned yourself enought times to have the perfect four card hand; think how many cards your opponent has drawn with this. It's probably worth it.

Powell
$6 - Action
Look at the top 2 cards of your deck.  Discard them or put them back.
+2 Cards
+1 Action

Nice; the set could use a $6 Action.

In the "Secret History of Dark Ages" outtakes, Donald X makes this point,

There was also a similar card here later, “+2 Cards +1 Action, discard a card,” for $4, which ended up being too good.

Pollack
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Action
Each other player draws a card, then discards a card from hand.

It is interesting that the externality for this card is exactly what DXV said was too strong for a $4 cost card.  So, Lab for me... and something worth more than $4 for you.  When I first read this, I thought it was priced perfectly, but after thinking about it this way (and reading WW's comment), this is a pretty strong externality, stronger than it looks (maybe $3 cost is right... I don't know, but I'd like to try playing with it).

Completely agree.

--------------------------------------------

Stables-like

Cards that let you draw 3 or remind me of Stables in that there is discarding required.

Welles: Agree with above. Too strong, not worth fixing.
Nolan: Agree with above. Too much like Stables, too strong.
Curtiz: I like Pollack better for a $6 Action this week. This one doesn't seem worth it.
Coen: Not worth the trouble of mats, to me.

Chabrol
$5 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Discard 2 Victory cards. If you do, +3 Cards.

I like this. Kind of neat that there is an incentive to buy a card that looks like it's for engines when you're going for alt VP.

Murnau
$5 - Action
+4 Cards
+1 Action
Discard a card per [This Card] in play (including this one).

The first one is a double lab, and the second is still a lab. So you can't chain a ton of these, like with lab, but you just don't. In all honesty, grabbing SO many labs isn't that good very often anyway. Too strong.

Agreed.

Coppola: Stables x Warehouse. Cool concept, but for some reason, the more I think about it, the less I like it.
DeMille: I prefer Pollack and Leone over this.
Cassavetes: I agree that this is less interesting than Warehouse.

Bunuel
$5 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 2 Victory Cards. Put them into your hand. Shuffle the other revealed cards back into your deck.

This card is really terrible. So, it basically just trashes two estates for you, while letting you keep the points - IF you draw it before the green in your reshuffle. And you have to waste a $5 for that. Won't be very useful very often.

Once again, I disagree. This card is +1 Action, +3 Cards... but two of the cards are guaranteed to be Victory cards. It's not a powerhouse, but it outclasses Laboratory in the late game. It also combos with Crossroads and Baron as well as grabbing stuff like Nobles and Islands. What I think is nice about this card is that the other revealed cards are shuffled back into the deck, not discarded like what most "reveal cards from your deck..." cards have you do.

I don't get the "outclasses Laboratory in the late game." You could still draw that first card as a Victory card just like Lab, and at least with Lab you have a chance at drawing two non-Victory cards. The other agruments could also be applied to Scout, so I am not buying that this card is anything special.

Leone
$5 - Action
+1 Buy
You may discard a Treasure. If you do, then +4 Cards, +1 Action, and each other player may discard a Treasure. If he does, then he draws 2 cards.

A super-Stables that lets your opponents Stables when it hits. A cleaned up version of a card that was submitted previously. Leads to quicker games, which is a good thing from my perspective. I still like this a lot and think we need a card that gives a Stables externality.

More comments later....

[One Armed Man]

Now here's one I like. I think the externality is right on. The choice for the opponents makes it interesting. It's strong enough to offset the benefits of getting a Lab for $3 while weak enough to encourage an early buy. Like Truffaut, this makes more sense thinking about it played a few times. Unlike Truffaut, the trick with this card is in the THREAT of it being playing multiple times (do I minion myself and hope another gets played? or draw, and then if another is played, I don't get an externality?) Also, re: One Armed Man, if you've self-minioned yourself enought times to have the perfect four card hand; think how many cards your opponent has drawn with this. It's probably worth it.

I was referring to opponents. If you think that the card will be played twice or more in multiplayer, you can set up a perfect hand. Also, you will likely have copies of this, too, so that you will be able to draw better (and set up opponents to play this more, too). It is a positive feedback loop!

[Polk5440]

Now here's one I like. I think the externality is right on. The choice for the opponents makes it interesting. It's strong enough to offset the benefits of getting a Lab for $3 while weak enough to encourage an early buy. Like Truffaut, this makes more sense thinking about it played a few times. Unlike Truffaut, the trick with this card is in the THREAT of it being playing multiple times (do I minion myself and hope another gets played? or draw, and then if another is played, I don't get an externality?) Also, re: One Armed Man, if you've self-minioned yourself enought times to have the perfect four card hand; think how many cards your opponent has drawn with this. It's probably worth it.

I was referring to opponents. If you think that the card will be played twice or more in multiplayer, you can set up a perfect hand. Also, you will likely have copies of this, too, so that you will be able to draw better (and set up opponents to play this more, too). It is a positive feedback loop!

Oh, ok. I think I get what you are saying. I still don't think it's so clear that a player will be able to set up a perfect 4 card hand with only a few plays of Altman since you have to discard your whole hand. And you have to think about when to pull the trigger and draw up to 6 -- and the person playing Altman knows this, and may never play the last one.

[nopawnsintended]

Now here's one I like. I think the externality is right on. The choice for the opponents makes it interesting. It's strong enough to offset the benefits of getting a Lab for $3 while weak enough to encourage an early buy. Like Truffaut, this makes more sense thinking about it played a few times. Unlike Truffaut, the trick with this card is in the THREAT of it being playing multiple times (do I minion myself and hope another gets played? or draw, and then if another is played, I don't get an externality?) Also, re: One Armed Man, if you've self-minioned yourself enought times to have the perfect four card hand; think how many cards your opponent has drawn with this. It's probably worth it.

I was referring to opponents. If you think that the card will be played twice or more in multiplayer, you can set up a perfect hand. Also, you will likely have copies of this, too, so that you will be able to draw better (and set up opponents to play this more, too). It is a positive feedback loop!

Interesting.  If two players are playing an Altman strategy in a three-player game, maybe I go for an alternative strategy that doesn't use Altmans.  If that's clearly better, it might not be worth emptying the Altman pile. 

Truffaut
$3 - Action
+1 Action
If you have an odd number of cards in play (including this), +2 Cards.

Like nopawnsintended, I too read this incorrectly and like the version in my head better. My version went like this: "+1 Action, If you have an even number of Truffauts in play (including this), +2 Cards. Otherwise, +1 Card" I like this version better because you don't have to worry so much about the order you play all your non-terminal draw cards too much, and having the bonus on even makes more sense for a $3 cost card. And, if you have a lot, it's like each one gives you 1.5 cards. As submitted, you open this and Silver, and you've opened Lab and Silver. Oh, and isn't even/odd an easier concept than "1+half rounded down" like on Bishop?

In the same sense, if you open Shanty Town and Silver, you've opened Level-2 City and Silver, but the benefits decline after that if you don't have support.  Viewed this way, Truffaut is trying to be the Shanty Town of the action-continuation genre.  It's probably a little easier to set up (maybe too easy on some boards?) with alternating play on another card with +Actions, so it probably warrants the cost... I'd have to see how it plays though.

Ozu
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.
Put 2 cards in your hand that do not share any type or subtype.
Discard the rest.
--
(Rule clarifications:  As always you try to do as much as you can. So if you reveal 3 Treasures, you can put 1 in hand and have to discard the others.)

I do not like this card. It rubs me the wrong way that its instructions cannot be carried out in full a lot of the time. Maybe I would like it better if it said "You may put up to two cards..." instead. What is a subtype, anyway? Attack, Reaction, Duration? That sort of thing? But not Estate?

I was wondering the same thing about subtype.  I thought it had something to do with dual types, but that's two types, not a hierarchy of them.  Then, given your interpretation, I'm not sure why this has to be worded as any type or subtype.  If they share a subtype (Action-Attack), they're both the same type... unless you think "Reaction" is a subtype rather than a type (which sorta violates the "sub" part of subtype because it is an overlapping category rather than a refinement on a larger category).  Even so, would the card mean that I can't put both Watchtower and Fool's Gold into my hand (not that I would want to...)?

Clouzot
$3 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. The player to your left picks one for you to discard. Put the others into your hand.

Fellini, Visconti, and Clouzot all have an Envoy-style interaction which I like a lot and is nice to see it on a non-terminal. I like Clouzot the best by far. It's clean; not gunked up by other unnecessary additions to the card. It fits better in this category than a similar entry we saw earlier.

Agreed.  I like this, but I'd like to see how it plays.

[Polk5440]

Truffaut
$3 - Action
+1 Action
If you have an odd number of cards in play (including this), +2 Cards.

Like nopawnsintended, I too read this incorrectly and like the version in my head better. My version went like this: "+1 Action, If you have an even number of Truffauts in play (including this), +2 Cards. Otherwise, +1 Card" I like this version better because you don't have to worry so much about the order you play all your non-terminal draw cards too much, and having the bonus on even makes more sense for a $3 cost card. And, if you have a lot, it's like each one gives you 1.5 cards. As submitted, you open this and Silver, and you've opened Lab and Silver. Oh, and isn't even/odd an easier concept than "1+half rounded down" like on Bishop?

In the same sense, if you open Shanty Town and Silver, you've opened Level-2 City and Silver, but the benefits decline after that if you don't have support.  Viewed this way, Truffaut is trying to be the Shanty Town of the action-continuation genre.  It's probably a little easier to set up (maybe too easy on some boards?) with alternating play on another card with +Actions, so it probably warrants the cost... I'd have to see how it plays though.

You know, you're right. My criticism of Lab-Silver opening was formed when I misunderstood the card and thought it would remain a Lab forever if you did not buy more. With it as written, it DOES get weaker as your deck gets stronger (gets more actions) and that's okay. I don't know why I had such a hard time understanding this card.

[zahlman]

In the same sense, if you open Shanty Town and Silver, you've opened Level-2 City and Silver, but the benefits decline after that if you don't have support.

Heck, the same is true if you open Moat and Silver, in that your +Actions are only as good as the Action cards you can play with them, and thus worthless with no other Actions in your deck.

[rinkworks]

Ozu
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.
Put 2 cards in your hand that do not share any type or subtype.
Discard the rest.
--
(Rule clarifications:  As always you try to do as much as you can. So if you reveal 3 Treasures, you can put 1 in hand and have to discard the others.)

I do not like this card. It rubs me the wrong way that its instructions cannot be carried out in full a lot of the time. Maybe I would like it better if it said "You may put up to two cards..." instead. What is a subtype, anyway? Attack, Reaction, Duration? That sort of thing? But not Estate?

Yes, as I understand it from the author, "Attack" would be a subtype, so if there were a Treasure-Attack card, and you revealed one of those with an Action-Attack, you could only put one of them into your hand.  It should probably be reworded if it wins to only say "type," since that would be sufficient, but this card was written during the Dark Ages previews when it was unclear what kind of new types would be coming out that this card would have to account for.

[Schneau]

Hope it's not too late for some more card reviews!

Hitchcock
$4 - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card
Gain a copper in hand.
Gain up to 3 more Coppers, +1 Card per Copper gained.

Interesting to self-Copper. But, man, wouldn't this just be too strong with Gardens / most alt-VP strategies? Also, somewhat too similar to Almoner.

Wilder
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal one that isn't a Victory card or a Curse. Put the revealed cards into your hand. If you didn't reveal a Victory card or a Curse, gain a Victory card costing up to $5, putting it on top of your deck.

Most of the time, I'd prefer Farming Village to this for the +2 Actions over getting all the junk in my hand. I'd say this also compares somewhat to Scout, though the Victory and Curse cards must be contiguous and you also get one non-Victory-non-Curse card. The Duchy portion definitely helps even it out. Maybe a little FBI going on here? At first I didn't like this card, but the more I look the more I like!

Ford
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Discard a card for each other [This Card] you have in play.
Reveal your hand. +1 Card per Copper revealed.

I think this is probably too good in the early game. The penalty of discarding one card per Ford played isn't much of a penalty.

Kubrick
$4 - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card for every 6 cards in the trash pile up to 4 cards, rounded up.
If no cards are in the trash pile, +1 Card, +$1.

Straight Peddler with no trashing, and a Lab variant otherwise. You need to have at least 7 cards in the trash to make this worthwhile. I'd say generally not interesting enough. It also has multiplayer balance issues, where many more cards can be trashed in 4 player than 2 player.

Welles
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Choose one of the following:
+1 Card, +$1.
+2 Cards, +1 Buy.
+3 Cards, gain a Copper.

Whoa there. Better than many cards, including Lab and probably Stables. Too strong.

Renoir
$3 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
If the top card of the trash pile costs more than this card: +1 Card.

I don't think the trash has an ordering.

Spielberg
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Look at the top 3 cards of your deck. Discard one of them. Put the other two into your hand.
Each other player may gain a copy of the card that you have discarded.

Almost definitely better than Lab, and it costs $4! You'll almost always have a Copper or Estate (or Curse) to discard, and when will your opponents take that? The small percent of the time that this helps your opponents isn't enough to give you a sifting Lab for $4.

Capra
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 5 cards of your deck.  The player to your left separates them into two piles.  Choose one pile to discard and draw the rest.

I like this card a lot better at $6. Or only revealing 4 cards. Even with those changes, an engine of these sure could bog down the game with AP.

Malick
$6 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal your hand.
+2 Cards for every Action card in your hand.
Trash this card.
--
This card may not be gained, it may only be bought.

Not a fan of only-bought cards. This card seems a lot like Madman, which Donald X. says was tried as a kingdom card at $5 but was just too strong to be bought. This seems to often be weaker than Madman, but when it's not, it's overpowered. FBI here.

Ozu
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.
Put 2 cards in your hand that do not share any type or subtype.
Discard the rest.
--
(Rule clarifications:  As always you try to do as much as you can. So if you reveal 3 Treasures, you can put 1 in hand and have to discard the others.)

This may be slightly weaker than Lab, but probably not in a "it's horrible" way. Lab is good. This would probably be mid-range $5, maybe in the lower half. But, they can't all be top 10, right? It needs a few wording tweaks ("Put up to 2 cards in your hand that do not share a type." would suffice). Otherwise, looks fine.

Nolan
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Discard a card costing $0 from your hand.  If you do, +3 Cards.

Almost strictly better than Stables (though Stables can discard other Treasures besides Copper). Plus, this should cost $5 if anything. The ability to discard Ruins and Curses probably more than makes up for not being able to discard other Treasures.

Lang
$3 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you play this, the player to your left reveals a card from his hand.  Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal the named card.
If you do, trash it or put it in your hand, your choice.  Otherwise, gain a copy of the named card.

This is almost certainly too strong for $3. If your opponent reveals a very weak card, you will probably get to cantrip trash one. If they reveal a medium card (i.e. Silver), you will either get one or put one in your hand. If they reveal a strong card knowing you don't have one, you'll get a copy. Basically, a Lab for medium-strong cards or a cantrip trasher for weak cards. I'd say too strong.

Curtiz
$6 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal three cards costing at most $4. Put those cards into your hand, discard the other revealed cards.

Doesn't seem very exciting drawing crap and skipping your good cards. I'd much rather this to draw 2 cards costing at least 3 (or 4?). (Hmmm, that's a good idea I'll have to write down).

Coen
$5 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Action
If there are no cards on your [This Card] mat, set aside an Action or Treasure card from your hand onto your [This Card] mat or reveal a hand with no Actions or Treasure cards. Otherwise, take a card from your [This Card] mat and place it in your hand.

I see nothing glaringly wrong here. Every other time it gives you 3 cards, and the other times 1 card. I don't know why it should be limited to Actions and Treasures. It could also use some rewording. But, overall fine.

Tarantino
$5 - Action
+1 Action
The player to your left names a card.
Reveal cards from you deck until you reveal the named card, putting it and one other revealed card of your choice into your hand.

This seems pretty weak. You can always name a card not in the person's deck and they just get one card of their choice from their deck. Or, name Copper and they get a likely weak Lab, if they're lucky. Maybe it's ok.

Lean
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Reveal the top card of your deck. If it is a Copper, put it in your hand.
Discard any number of Coppers. +1 Card per Copper discarded.

As far as I can tell, this seems pretty balanced. It can Lab a lucky Copper, and can Cellar Coppers. Plus, if the top card isn't a Copper, you can see what it is and whether it's worth trading a Copper for. I like it, even though it may be on the strong side of $4.

Chabrol
$5 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Discard 2 Victory cards. If you do, +3 Cards.

Seems extremely swingy. You hit it, and it's crazy-good. Otherwise, it's lamezor.

Fellini
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.  The player to your left chooses one for you to set aside.  Draw the rest.
--
During cleanup, return the set aside cards to the top of your deck, in any order.

This may be too strong. Or it may be fine. You get to Lab 2 cards of an opponent's choice, but say they pick strong cards - then you get them next turn. Maybe this should cost $5? Maybe it's ok?

Truffaut
$3 - Action
+1 Action
If you have an odd number of cards in play (including this), +2 Cards.

I have to say I like this. I see nothing wrong with the odd concept. It's like Menagerie - when you can make it work, it's golden, otherwise, it's meh. I would suggest bumping the price to $4, since it seems a little easier to activate than similar ideas (Menagerie, Wishing Well).

Fincher
$5 - Action-Victory
Worth 1 VP
+1 Action
+$1
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand. Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

Obviously just an improved Scout. This is probably balanced, and probably more buyable than Scout. Still, even if you can chain a few of these, it's not that great. Plus, I feel like someone is just trying to get in on Scout's recent notoriety to get a few votes.

Bergman
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Action cards into your hand. Discard the rest.
--
At the end of your clean-up phase, place this card at the bottom of your deck instead of discarding it.

I feel this is either too strong or too FBI. The bottom of your deck thing is sort of weird, and definitely needs to be rephrased - as is, at the end of your clean-up phase this is somewhere in your discard pile and you've already drawn 5 cards. Better is "when discarded from play" I think.

Lynch
$3 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
The opponent to your left reveals and discards the top card of their deck.  Reveal the top card of your deck. If it costs less than your opponent's card, place it in your hand; if it does not, discard it.

This seems to be very weak. Often, your opponent will reveal a Copper or an Estate, making the extra card you get a Copper at best. And when you reveal a more costly card, you have to discard it, meaning you'll skip good cards. I think flipped it might make a good $3 card - if your card costs more, you get to keep it, and otherwise discard it. Man, that might even be worth $4!

Visconti
$5 - Action-Duration
+1 Action
Now and at the start of your next turn:
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. The player to your left chooses two for you to discard. Draw the rest.
--
While this is in play, when you gain a card, you may put that card on top of your deck.

Even though this nets you 4 cards, it is super-duper weak. Like, practically weaker than Scout in almost any case.

Murnau
$5 - Action
+4 Cards
+1 Action
Discard a card per [This Card] in play (including this one).

Haha, I almost submitted a card exactly like this except it cost $4 and only had +3 Cards, otherwise identical. First a double lab, then a lab, then a cantrip... though each one sifts out bad cards. This has a bit of the problem of one or two being too strong for the cost. So, I'd say my less-powerful version may be a bit more balanced, but at the same time I like the idea!

Melville
$3 - Action-Reaction
+1 Action
Trash a card from your hand. If it costs $0 and isn't a Treasure, +3 Cards.
--
When you gain a card costing less than this, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, put the gained card in your hand.

This basically is only worthwhile in games with Cursers or Looters. In other games it will never be bought, and it may not even be worth it with them. Additionally, I wouldn't cosider it to fit the rules of this contest, since the main purpose isn't to increase handsize. (Not that I'm complaining about rinkworks' judging abilities, just saying for me its not worth voting for to fill this role).

Coppola
$4 - Action
+3 Cards
+1 Action
Discard 3 cards or a Silver.

As with the previous card, I would consider this to primarily be a handsize increaser. It's a Warehouse that you can discard a Silver to to make it a Lab. Somewhat interesting and on the weak side of balanced, but I don't really think it works for this contest.

Huston
$4 - Action-Duration
+1 Card
+1 Buy
+1 Action
On your next turn, draw 7 cards during your draw phase instead of 5.  If you play more than 3 actions, trash this card.

My OCD is so turned off by all the non-official wordings on this card it makes it hard to look past them. +Action comes before +Buy. There is no draw phase (you draw 5 during your clean-up phase). The author probably doesn't realize that as-worded, the drawing 7 happens in next-turn's clean-up phase. Plus, when would the trashing happen?

Kurosawa
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
All players reveal a card from his hand. If all players revealed a Treasure card, +1 Card for all (including you) and +$1 for you. Otherwise, all players gain a Copper, putting it into his hand (including you).

This is both weak and a little weird. I'll give it points for creativity about all players having a vote in what happens, but beyond that it is super weak. The opponent gets same treatment besides an extra +$1 in the first case. And no matter what happens, this card doesn't help you or hurt others very much.

Griffith
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal any number of Coppers from your hand and draw that many cards.  Trash one of the revealed Coppers.  If you do not reveal a Copper, gain a Copper and put it into your hand.

This seems really weak. You'd want to have Coppers that you can get a big draw, but this trashes your Coppers so that you won't have as many.

Wyler
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Pick one: Gain a card costing up to $4 onto your [This Card] mat, or place a card from your [This Card] mat into your hand.
--
At the end of the game, trash all of the cards on your [This Card] mat.

I sort of like the card, but this doesn't seem to line up with the contest rules of not gaining to hand. Plus, the main intent of this card isn't to increase handsize, but to gain cards. Pass.

Cukor
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may gain a Copper, putting it into your hand. If you do, +1 Card.

Too much like Almoner.

Herzog
$4 - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card
Choose one: +3 Cards, and return this card to the supply; or trash a card from your hand, and gain a [This Card]; or put this card on your deck at the start of your Clean-up phase.
--
(Rules clarification: When doubled or trebled with Throne Room, King's Court, or Procession, you may choose the first option multiple times despite returning only this copy of [This Card] to the supply.  You may gain multiple [This Card]s with the second option, but you must trash one card for each copy you gain.  You can only put the played copy on top of your deck; choosing this option does nothing if the card was returned to the supply.  If the card was returned to the supply with the first option, it cannot be trashed by Procession, and you do not gain a card costing $5.)

Even for a sometimes-one-shot, this seems too strong. Way too easy to build these up for a megaturn.

DeMille
$6 - Action
+3 Cards
+1 Action
Discard a card.
--
While this is in play, you can't buy any Treasure.

The price is probably right for the top half of the card. I don't really understand the no-buy-Treasure clause. Otherwise, looks fine.

Eisenstein
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Choose one; you get the version in parentheses:
Each player draws 2 (1) cards and discards 2 (0) cards from his hand;
or each player draws 2 (3) cards and discards 1 (1) card from his hand.
--
While this is in play, Attack cards you play do not affect players with more than 5 cards in hand.

The first option is a weak lab, since it offers filtering for your opponents. The second option is super-strong for you (draw 4, discard 1) and pretty strong for opponents. I'm guessing the no-attacking-opponents clause is to prevent Eisenstein-Militia shenanigans, but is a weird thing to do. Overall, I'm not a huge fan of cards that are super-strong for you offset by being super-strong for opponents. I might like this better if it were just a $4 Lab that sifts for your opponents.

Scorsese
$4 - Action
+1 Action
You may gain a Copper, if you do +2 Cards.
You may gain an Estate, if you do +1 Card.
You may gain a Curse, if you do +1 Card.

The good-ol' self-attack for major benefits. I can see why Copper is the best (since it will probably be the more viable option, and the others won't happen very often). I guess this is probably ok, though the gain Copper+Estate for a double Lab is really strong in endgames.

Cassavetes
$4 - Action
+3 Cards
+1 Action
Reveal your hand. Discard two differently named cards which are not Action cards from your hand if you can.

Too strong probably. Especially in a trashed-down no-Treasure engine, this is redonkidonk strong.

Bunuel
$5 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 2 Victory Cards. Put them into your hand. Shuffle the other revealed cards back into your deck.

I think I like it. It sets up next turns well, though WW has a good point that if this causes a reshuffle, the effects are negligible. I might price this at $4, where it would be a cross between a good Scout and a bad Cartographer.

Lubitsch
$4 - Action
Reveal your hand. If there are no Action our Treasure cards costing $5 or more in it +2 Cards, +1 Action.

Super-duper weak. It does absolutely nothing if it doesn't activate, which is really bad on 95% of boards.

Kazan
$5 - Action-Attack
+2 Cards
+1 Action
+1 Buy
Every other player with at least 5 cards in hand discards a Treasure card or reveals a hand without any Treasure.
--
You can't gain this if you have a [This Card] in play.

The first of these is strictly better than Lab, with the only drawback being you can't buy another with this in play. At first glance, this is probably too strong. The attack is pretty weak, and doesn't stack, but maybe it would be better if opponents just discarded 1 card that wasn't necessarily treasure. Or, you could just remove the +Buy or Attack parts altogether, leaving it barely better than Lab but with bottom part still attached. Neat idea but probably too strong.

Leone
$5 - Action
+1 Buy
You may discard a Treasure. If you do, then +4 Cards, +1 Action, and each other player may discard a Treasure. If he does, then he draws 2 cards.

Comparing to Stables, the self-help part is better but the opponent-help part is even stronger. I think this will make it weaker than Stables in most situations, but too strong in others.

Altman
$3 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Action
Each other player may choose one: Discard his hand and draw 4 cards OR Draw up to 6 cards in hand.

I think this is probably too strong at $3. Being able to buy and then play multiple of these in a turn benefits you more than your opponents.

Powell
$6 - Action
Look at the top 2 cards of your deck.  Discard them or put them back.
+2 Cards
+1 Action

I like it! Pre-filtered Lab. Maybe on the weaker side of $6, but they can't all be Goons, right?

Eastwood
$2 - Action
+1 Action
+1 Buy
Draw any number of cards up to the number of Buys you have in play. -1 Buy for each card drawn this way.

I've never been a fan of -1 Buy. It just doesn't make that much sense. Can you trade in the Buy you always get in a turn?

Pollack
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Action
Each other player draws a card, then discards a card from hand.

The opponent filtering is pretty strong. Games with this would be super-quick, somewhat like with Governor. That said, this is probably balanced, and maybe underbalanced, maybe to the extent of being a really weak $4.

Antonioni
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may reveal your hand. If you do and you have no Treasure Cards other than Copper in your hand, reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Treasure Card that isn't a Copper.
Put it into your hand and discard the rest.

This is super-weak unless you can combine it with some sifters. It doesn't stack, and you have to have at least one non-Copper Treasure in your deck that doesn't come in the same hand to make it work. This could probably cost $2.

Clouzot
$3 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. The player to your left picks one for you to discard. Put the others into your hand.

I'm never fond of cards that skip your best cards. Maybe it's ok for Envoy, since you don't want Actions there anyway, but this card will skip all your favorite Actions you want to play with the +1 Action it gives you.

Gilliam
$5 - Action-Looter
Gain a Copper, Estate, or Ruins to the top of your deck.
+1 Action
+3 Cards

This will usually be a Lab + Copper, or + Ruins if you like the top Ruins. It's probably balanced. It is unclear if you can not gain anything if the Estate pile is empty. With a ruling on that (I'd suggest forcing a gain of something if you can), this card is probably acceptable.

[Polk5440]

Forgot to post this!

continuing from last post....

Gilliam
$5 - Action-Looter
Gain a Copper, Estate, or Ruins to the top of your deck.
+1 Action
+3 Cards

I kind of like this. Nice and simple.

It might need an "If you do" clause to make it work.

I agree with this.

Copper Matters

Hitchcock
$4 - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card
Gain a copper in hand.
Gain up to 3 more Coppers, +1 Card per Copper gained.

The initial part treads a little too close to Almoner.

Agreed. Same goes for Cukor and the first option of Scorsese.

Lean
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Reveal the top card of your deck. If it is a Copper, put it in your hand.
Discard any number of Coppers. +1 Card per Copper discarded.

I like the Copper matters for drawing, and I like Lean's implementation of it better than Ford's or Griffith's.

Normally I like interaction, but I don't like the pressure that Kurosawa puts on the last player to reveal a Treasure (or decide not to).

Others

Capra
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 5 cards of your deck.  The player to your left separates them into two piles.  Choose one pile to discard and draw the rest.

I like this a whole lot better in this category than I did when the mechanic was submitted previously. Agree it might be too cheap.

Fincher
$5 - Action-Victory
Worth 1 VP
+1 Action
+$1
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand. Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.
I wish Scout was this, but I don't think a just-better version is the best result.

I think this is appreciably different than Scout.  The fact that it self combos and gives money and VP is much cooler than Scout.

Agreed.

Antonioni
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may reveal your hand. If you do and you have no Treasure Cards other than Copper in your hand, reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Treasure Card that isn't a Copper.
Put it into your hand and discard the rest.

It's like 1/2 an Adventurer cross Conspirator. And given my unreasonable love of Adventurer, I like this, even with all its crazy restrictions.

I don't care for Wilder, Kubrick, Malick (if you have a hand full of actions, why do you need this card to draw so much?), Bergman, Melville (its primary purpose does not seem to be drawing cards), Huston, Wyler (doesn't seem to fit this category as well as others), Herzog, or Eastwood.

[rinkworks]

The results for the Non-Terminal Draw challenge are in!  This was a tricky one, because the basic version of this effect costs $5, so there's not a lot of room to scale up.  Still, contestants proved themselves up to the challenge, submitting cards that tapped into a wide variety of design niches.

The objective was as follows:

Create a non-terminal drawing card.  This is a card that may be used to increase your hand-size from what it was before it was played from your hand, while also offering exactly +1 Action.  The card must never add more than +1 Action, but there is no maximum to how many cards it can add to your hand.  The card need not always increase your hand-size, but this should be a primary function of the card.  A Duration card increasing the size of a future hand instead of the current one is acceptable, so long as you still get +1 Action on the current turn.

"Draw up to X" cards are not permitted for this challenge.

I don't have a card this time either, so on with the results.  It's another tie, which means the contest set gets two more cards:

#1 (tie) - Conference Room by RobertJ with 14 points (Pollack)
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Action
Each other player draws a card, then discards a card from hand.

#1 (tie) - Harbinger by eHalcyon with 14 points (Capra)
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 5 cards of your deck.  The player to your left separates them into two piles.  Choose one pile to discard and draw the rest.


Congratulations to eHalcyon, a double winner this week, and RobertJ, who gets his first card in the set.  Both are Laboratory variants with potentially steep penalties.  Too many Conference Rooms, and you might be giving your opponents power turns.  And while Harbinger could let you draw a power card and skip some junk, it runs the risk of making you skip something you really need.

The rest of the pack is close behind:


#3 - Zealot by Sakako with 13 points (Truffaut)
$3 - Action
+1 Action
If you have an odd number of cards in play (including this), +2 Cards.

#4 - Oracleplusactionandminusattack by Bella Cullen with 10 points (Powell)
$6 - Action
Look at the top 2 cards of your deck.  Discard them or put them back.
+2 Cards
+1 Action

#5 (tie) - Placeholder Name by Tables with 9 points (Curtiz)
$6 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal three cards costing at most $4. Put those cards into your hand, discard the other revealed cards.

#5 (tie) - Cavern by nopawnsintended with 9 points (Altman)
$3 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Action
Each other player may choose one: Discard his hand and draw 4 cards OR Draw up to 6 cards in hand.

#7 (tie) - Pioneer by Nicrosil with 8 points (Fincher)
$5 - Action-Victory
Worth 1 VP
+1 Action
+$1
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand. Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

#7 (tie) - Inventor by Mecherath with 8 points (Fellini)
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.  The player to your left chooses one for you to set aside.  Draw the rest.
--
During cleanup, return the set aside cards to the top of your deck, in any order.

#7 (tie) - Hiker by Archetype with 8 points (Bunuel)
$5 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 2 Victory Cards. Put them into your hand. Shuffle the other revealed cards back into your deck.

#10 (tie) - Thrift Shop by Davio with 7 points (Ozu)
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.
Put 2 cards in your hand that do not share any type or subtype.
Discard the rest.
--
(Rule clarifications:  As always you try to do as much as you can. So if you reveal 3 Treasures, you can put 1 in hand and have to discard the others.)

#10 (tie) - Journeyman by Watno with 7 points (Lubitsch)
$4 - Action
Reveal your hand. If there are no Action our Treasure cards costing $5 or more in it +2 Cards, +1 Action.

#12 (tie) - Surveyor by zahlman with 6 points (Wilder)
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal one that isn't a Victory card or a Curse. Put the revealed cards into your hand. If you didn't reveal a Victory card or a Curse, gain a Victory card costing up to $5, putting it on top of your deck.

#12 (tie) - Money Changer by Dsell with 6 points (Lean)
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Reveal the top card of your deck. If it is a Copper, put it in your hand.
Discard any number of Coppers. +1 Card per Copper discarded.

#14 (tie) - Nabob by heatthespurs with 5 points (Spielberg)
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Look at the top 3 cards of your deck. Discard one of them. Put the other two into your hand.
Each other player may gain a copy of the card that you have discarded.

#14 (tie) - Jousting Dummy by DWetzel with 5 points (Lynch)
$3 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
The opponent to your left reveals and discards the top card of their deck.  Reveal the top card of your deck. If it costs less than your opponent's card, place it in your hand; if it does not, discard it.

#14 (tie) - Horse Farm by Polk5440 with 5 points (Leone)
$5 - Action
+1 Buy
You may discard a Treasure. If you do, then +4 Cards, +1 Action, and each other player may discard a Treasure. If he does, then he draws 2 cards.

#14 (tie) - Tax Collector by yuma with 5 points (Hitchcock)
$4 - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card
Gain a copper in hand.
Gain up to 3 more Coppers, +1 Card per Copper gained.

#14 (tie) - Storeroom by razorborne with 5 points (Coppola)
$4 - Action
+3 Cards
+1 Action
Discard 3 cards or a Silver.

#14 (tie) - Fill by WanderingWinder with 5 points (Clouzot)
$3 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. The player to your left picks one for you to discard. Put the others into your hand.

#20 (tie) - Scientist by dnkywin with 4 points (Wyler)
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Pick one: Gain a card costing up to $4 onto your Scientist mat, or place a card from your Scientist mat into your hand.
--
At the end of the game, trash all of the cards on your Scientist mat.

#20 (tie) - Wise Man by Graystripe77 with 4 points (Tarantino)
$5 - Action
+1 Action
The player to your left names a card.
Reveal cards from you deck until you reveal the named card, putting it and one other revealed card of your choice into your hand.

#20 (tie) - Garage Sale by Michaelf7777777 with 4 points (Scorsese)
$4 - Action
+1 Action
You may gain a Copper, if you do +2 Cards.
You may gain an Estate, if you do +1 Card.
You may gain a Curse, if you do +1 Card.

#20 (tie) - Consul by ashersky with 4 points (Lang)
$3 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you play this, the player to your left reveals a card from his hand.  Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal the named card.
If you do, trash it or put it in your hand, your choice.  Otherwise, gain a copy of the named card.

#20 (tie) - Moneychanger by Fragasnap with 4 points (Ford)
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Discard a card for each other Moneychanger you have in play.
Reveal your hand. +1 Card per Copper revealed.

#20 (tie) - Dragon by ChocophileBenj with 4 points (DeMille)
$6 - Action
+3 Cards
+1 Action
Discard a card.
--
While this is in play, you can't buy any Treasure.

#20 (tie) - Colloquium by Guy Srinivasan with 4 points (Chabrol)
$5 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Discard 2 Victory cards. If you do, +3 Cards.

#27 (tie) - Exorcist by NoMoreFun with 3 points (Melville)
$3 - Action-Reaction
+1 Action
Trash a card from your hand. If it costs $0 and isn't a Treasure, +3 Cards.
--
When you gain a card costing less than this, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, put the gained card in your hand.

#27 (tie) - Piffle by popsofctown with 3 points (Gilliam)
$5 - Action-Looter
Gain a Copper, Estate, or Ruins to the top of your deck.
+1 Action
+3 Cards

#27 (tie) - Manufactory by One Armed Man with 3 points (Coen)
$5 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Action
If there are no cards on your Manufactory mat, set aside an Action or Treasure card from your hand onto your Manufactory mat or reveal a hand with no Actions or Treasure cards. Otherwise, take a card from your Manufactory mat and place it in your hand.

#27 (tie) - Joust by feelingzwontfade with 3 points (Bergman)
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Action cards into your hand. Discard the rest.
--
At the end of your clean-up phase, place this card at the bottom of your deck instead of discarding it.

#31 (tie) - Priest by Adrienaline with 2 points (Malick)
$6 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal your hand.
+2 Cards for every Action card in your hand.
Trash this card.
--
This card may not be gained, it may only be bought.

#31 (tie) - Trash Collector by ignorentmen with 2 points (Kubrick)
$4 - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card for every 6 cards in the trash pile up to 4 cards, rounded up.
If no cards are in the trash pile, +1 Card, +$1.

#31 (tie) - Braggart by Schneau with 2 points (Kazan)
$5 - Action-Attack
+2 Cards
+1 Action
+1 Buy
Every other player with at least 5 cards in hand discards a Treasure card or reveals a hand without any Treasure.
--
You can't gain this if you have a Braggart in play.

#31 (tie) - Soup Kitchen by Tdog with 2 points (Cukor)
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may gain a Copper, putting it into your hand. If you do, +1 Card.

#35 (tie) - Royal Fool by Powerman with 1 point (Visconti)
$5 - Action-Duration
+1 Action
Now and at the start of your next turn:
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. The player to your left chooses two for you to discard. Draw the rest.
--
While this is in play, when you gain a card, you may put that card on top of your deck.

#35 (tie) - Rickety Contraption by FishingVillage with 1 point (Murnau)
$5 - Action
+4 Cards
+1 Action
Discard a card per Rickety Contraption in play (including this one).

#35 (tie) - Tithe by Kirian with 1 point (Herzog)
$4 - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card
Choose one: +3 Cards, and return this card to the supply; or trash a card from your hand, and gain a Tithe; or put this card on your deck at the start of your Clean-up phase.
--
(Rules clarification: When doubled or trebled with Throne Room, King's Court, or Procession, you may choose the first option multiple times despite returning only this copy of Tithe to the supply.  You may gain multiple Tithes with the second option, but you must trash one card for each copy you gain.  You can only put the played copy on top of your deck; choosing this option does nothing if the card was returned to the supply.  If the card was returned to the supply with the first option, it cannot be trashed by Procession, and you do not gain a card costing $5.)

#35 (tie) - Street Merchant by andwilk with 1 point (Griffith)
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Reveal any number of Coppers from your hand and draw that many cards.  Trash one of the revealed Coppers.  If you do not reveal a Copper, gain a Copper and put it into your hand.

#35 (tie) - Mender by Tejayes with 1 point (Eastwood)
$2 - Action
+1 Action
+1 Buy
Draw any number of cards up to the number of Buys you have in play. -1 Buy for each card drawn this way.

#35 (tie) - Yield by Qvist with 1 point (Antonioni)
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may reveal your hand. If you do and you have no Treasure Cards other than Copper in your hand, reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Treasure Card that isn't a Copper.
Put it into your hand and discard the rest.

#41 (tie) - Cabinet Maker by angrybirds with 0 points (Welles)
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Choose one of the following:
+1 Card, +$1.
+2 Cards, +1 Buy.
+3 Cards, gain a Copper.

#41 (tie) - Refinery by Rush Clasic with 0 points (Renoir)
$3 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
If the top card of the trash pile costs more than this card: +1 Card.

#41 (tie) - Investment by yudantaiteki with 0 points (Nolan)
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Discard a card costing $0 from your hand.  If you do, +3 Cards.

#41 (tie) - Theorist by PenPen with 0 points (Kurosawa)
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
All players reveal a card from his hand. If all players revealed a Treasure card, +1 Card for all (including you) and +$1 for you. Otherwise, all players gain a Copper, putting it into his hand (including you).

#41 (tie) - Unnamed by Murf with 0 points (Huston)
$4 - Action-Duration
+1 Card
+1 Buy
+1 Action
On your next turn, draw 7 cards during your draw phase instead of 5.  If you play more than 3 actions, trash this card.

#41 (tie) - Field Guide by Schlippy with 0 points (Eisenstein)
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Choose one; you get the version in parentheses:
Each player draws 2 (1) cards and discards 2 (0) cards from his hand;
or each player draws 2 (3) cards and discards 1 (1) card from his hand.
--
While this is in play, Attack cards you play do not affect players with more than 5 cards in hand.

#41 (tie) - Congregation by Saucery with 0 points (Cassavetes)
$4 - Action
+3 Cards
+1 Action
Reveal your hand. Discard two differently named cards which are not Action cards from your hand if you can.

[eHalcyon]

I sent a PM to rinkworks earlier about my entry to this contest, and I would like to put it to the community.

I do not play Magic and I do not know any Magic cards.  However, One Armed Man pointed out that this is almost exactly like Fact or Fiction.

As it turns out, I had actually read about the Magic card in discussions on a fan expansion posted on f.ds some months ago.  I had simply forgotten about it.  And I think there was also some mention of Fact or Fiction in discussions even in an earlier contest (maybe the terminal draw contest, which I did not follow as closely because I hadn't entered it).

rinkworks said that just because the card basically exists in another game, it can still be a good fit for Dominion.  I think he is right.  Nonetheless, it does leave me feeling a little icky.  I would be happy to withdraw it, especially since it would give my second place "non-attack interaction" card a fighting chance in the possible "runners-up" contest (it fills the same niche as my entry to this contest).  I would feel even better about withdrawing considering it ended in a tie.

[yuma]

I sent a PM to rinkworks earlier about my entry to this contest, and I would like to put it to the community.

I do not play Magic and I do not know any Magic cards.  However, One Armed Man pointed out that this is almost exactly like Fact or Fiction.

As it turns out, I had actually read about the Magic card in discussions on a fan expansion posted on f.ds some months ago.  I had simply forgotten about it.  And I think there was also some mention of Fact or Fiction in discussions even in an earlier contest (maybe the terminal draw contest, which I did not follow as closely because I hadn't entered it).

rinkworks said that just because the card basically exists in another game, it can still be a good fit for Dominion.  I think he is right.  Nonetheless, it does leave me feeling a little icky.  I would be happy to withdraw it, especially since it would give my second place "non-attack interaction" card a fighting chance in the possible "runners-up" contest (it fills the same niche as my entry to this contest).  I would feel even better about withdrawing considering it ended in a tie.

Keep it in. Congrats

[One Armed Man]

This was a surprisingly difficult challenge. It is important with non-terminal draw that they can be chained to each other continuously.

Harbinger (eHalcyon's Capra): The choice for the opponent is complex unless you reveal only treasure and victory cards. The choice for the player is usually very easy. If the sum of the treasure is higher (number of cards in a tie), draw that pile. If another Harbinger is in the top 5, then it will almost always be in a 2-card pile. If that pile has a copper, the piles may be even choice. If it is an estate, then the other pile looks better. The problem comes when you realize you can always take the bigger pile except when you are going to get more Harbingers, draining your deck of the junk (much better than the same cost lab). In a given turn, there could be several "mini-games" of this, requiring complex (but often easy or meaningless) decisions from each player. Again my other concerns for collaboration.

The best design feature of the card is it lets players group terminals together, which reduces your average gain from the draw unless you have a hidden village, in which case you get more of an advantage.

Congrats to eHalcyon and RobertJ. I don't want to diminish this win or ask eHalcyon to rescind. I just think that this card in particular needs a lot of testing. Magic also has Divination, which is Laboratory! Magic also has 7000 other card designs.

[Schneau]

I share the same concern as One Armed Man about the AP that Harbinger may produce, especially an engine containing a lot of them. There are 16 different ways the piles could be split [(5 choose 0) + (5 choose 1) + (5 choose 2)], and even though 6 of these are unlikely (choosing 0 or 1 for a pile), the other 10 may all be worth considering. If this were terminal, it wouldn't be too big of a deal, but since this is non-terminal and the type of card that's great for engines, this could definitely create a slow process. This would be my main argument for not including it.

Either way, congrats to both eHalcyon and RobertJ for winning the contest!

[brokoli]

"Oracleplusactionandminusattack" what a cool name !
Now, find an image for this card... 

[Hks]

Congratulations to the winners!
I like both cards very well, those cards look very fun! But I agree with One Armed Man and Schneau.

[DWetzel]

I sent a PM to rinkworks earlier about my entry to this contest, and I would like to put it to the community.

I do not play Magic and I do not know any Magic cards.  However, One Armed Man pointed out that this is almost exactly like Fact or Fiction.

As it turns out, I had actually read about the Magic card in discussions on a fan expansion posted on f.ds some months ago.  I had simply forgotten about it.  And I think there was also some mention of Fact or Fiction in discussions even in an earlier contest (maybe the terminal draw contest, which I did not follow as closely because I hadn't entered it).

rinkworks said that just because the card basically exists in another game, it can still be a good fit for Dominion.  I think he is right.  Nonetheless, it does leave me feeling a little icky.  I would be happy to withdraw it, especially since it would give my second place "non-attack interaction" card a fighting chance in the possible "runners-up" contest (it fills the same niche as my entry to this contest).  I would feel even better about withdrawing considering it ended in a tie.

Definitely no reason to withdraw it IMO.

[Polk5440]

Congrats to the winners. I see no need to withdraw the card. I voted for it! Dominion plays so differently from Magic that identical cards will feel very different.

Is it just me, or did a lot of really good cards get really low vote totals this week? Are fewer people voting for fewer cards?

[rinkworks]

We won't know until we playtest, but I have a suspicion that the card will need to only look at 4 cards instead of 5.  I appreciate the aesthetics of looking at an odd number of cards -- then the piles will never be even -- but I just think "draw a good card; discard your trash" is going to happen a lot and will be too good when it does.  But I don't know.

[PenPen]

I sent a PM to rinkworks earlier about my entry to this contest, and I would like to put it to the community.

I do not play Magic and I do not know any Magic cards.  However, One Armed Man pointed out that this is almost exactly like Fact or Fiction.

As it turns out, I had actually read about the Magic card in discussions on a fan expansion posted on f.ds some months ago.  I had simply forgotten about it.  And I think there was also some mention of Fact or Fiction in discussions even in an earlier contest (maybe the terminal draw contest, which I did not follow as closely because I hadn't entered it).

rinkworks said that just because the card basically exists in another game, it can still be a good fit for Dominion.  I think he is right.  Nonetheless, it does leave me feeling a little icky.  I would be happy to withdraw it, especially since it would give my second place "non-attack interaction" card a fighting chance in the possible "runners-up" contest (it fills the same niche as my entry to this contest).  I would feel even better about withdrawing considering it ended in a tie.

No you don't need to withdraw it. It just happens that there's a similar card in Magic, but then Magic has like zillions of different cards. No worries there.

[Titandrake]

I think the Fact or Fiction thing was from ChaosRed's expansion in the card Fool's Choice.

The card is fine. It might only need to look at 4 cards, but I'm not sure. In Big Money it's easy to play it out, but in an engine it's a lot harder to judge...

[Tables]

Hmm... I was quite surprised by the comments to my card (Curtiz) here. I expected mostly cries of overpowered, with some underpowered's thrown in, but didn't see a single person question it being too powerful. It's pretty much better than Gold in big money games, as long as you don't overstock them (you need three silvers, one Curtiz and you have something as good as Gold on average). With trashing or engines making use of many cheap parts, it can be even better.

The winners were both interesting cards. One very simple, one... not so original. But I didn't vote this time, so what can I comment .

[Archetype]

Yay, my card Hiker/Bunuel got 7th! I was put off about how many people dismissed it. It's actually a better card than it appears.

Congratulations to eHaclyon for yet another win!

I'm also glad Wilder/Surveyor did so well. Really like that card.