Print

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

[rinkworks]

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 concurrent challenge.  That is, if you have submitted a card to one challenge, you may not submit it to another challenge until the results of that first challenge have been announced.
* Do not disclose your submissions publicly, either in this thread or elsewhere

--

The deadline for this week's challenges is Monday, September 3, at 10am EDT.

--

Challenge #13 - One-Shot Card

Objective: Create a one-shot card.  This is a card that trashes itself, returns itself to its pile, or sets itself aside permanently when played.  The card must always do this when played; it can't, for example, only trash or return itself under certain circumstances, or if the player chooses a particular option.  You may only submit a single card -- that is, you can't submit multiple cards that work together (such as Pillage and Spoils).

You may not include an event clause that undoes the effect of the trashing/returning.  For example, "When you trash this, gain a copy of this card from the trash."

Official Examples: Feast, Embargo, Treasure Map, Island, Pillage.

Official Non-Examples: Mining Village, because you don't have to trash it when you play it.  Horn of Plenty, because it only trashes itself if you use it to gain a Victory card.  Hermit, because it only trashes itself if you don't buy something when it is in play.  Madman, only because you'd need to submit Hermit as well, to specify how Madman cards are gained, and Hermit is ineligible.  Spoils, for the same reason, and even though Pillage is eligible, you can't submit multiple cards (Pillage plus Spoils).

--

The Ballot
The Results

[Schneau]

I'd assume that the following card does not qualify, with or without the "you may" included?

Weird Woodcutter
$3 - Action
+$2
+1 Buy
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this, you may gain a Weird Woodcutter from the trash.

[rinkworks]

I'd assume that the following card does not qualify, with or without the "you may" included?

Weird Woodcutter
$3 - Action
+$2
+1 Buy
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this, you may gain a Weird Woodcutter from the trash.

Boy, is that a sneaky way to circumvent the rules.  Yes, let's disallow that.

[jonts26]

BoyMan, is that a sneaky way to circumvent the rules.  Yes, let's disallow that.

FTFY

[PenPen]

Stupid question: Can it be like an Action-Reaction? Like this:

Trashy Reaction
$2 - Action Reaction

Trash this card. +3 cards.
------------------
(Reaction effect eg Moat)

[rinkworks]

Stupid question: Can it be like an Action-Reaction? Like this:

Trashy Reaction
$2 - Action Reaction

Trash this card. +3 cards.
------------------
(Reaction effect eg Moat)

Sure, that's fine.

[Kirian]

Could a card reference Madman/Spoils or other non-Supply cards, as long as it uses ones already in the game?

[rinkworks]

Could a card reference Madman/Spoils or other non-Supply cards, as long as it uses ones already in the game?

Yes, absolutely.

[ChocophileBenj]

Too bad Island isn't allowed. Because technically, you play this card only once (or twice/thrice with TR/KC/Procession, but you know what I mean), so it sounds like a one-shot.

[rinkworks]

Too bad Island isn't allowed. Because technically, you play this card only once (or twice/thrice with TR/KC/Procession, but you know what I mean), so it sounds like a one-shot.

Island ought to be allowed.  (The fact that you can play it multiple times with TR/KC is true of other one-shots as well, so no problem there.)  I'll go modify the rules to allow it.

(That means Seaside has three one-shots, when many sets don't have any!)

[popsofctown]

I fail to understand why Pillage/Spoils would be an ineligible submission.  We've seen [support card]'s before.  And both support cards in the combo are one shot.

[rinkworks]

I fail to understand why Pillage/Spoils would be an ineligible submission.  We've seen [support card]'s before.  And both support cards in the combo are one shot.

Mostly just because this time there's an explicit rule disallowing support cards.

[Schneau]

I fail to understand why Pillage/Spoils would be an ineligible submission.  We've seen [support card]'s before.  And both support cards in the combo are one shot.

Mostly just because this time there's an explicit rule disallowing support cards.

I like this answer. It is very DXV.

[NoMoreFun]

Something worth noting about the one shots that already exist is that they all have effects that linger for the rest of the game. Feast permanently gets you a $5 card that you wouldn't otherwise have without gaining that feast, Treasure map gives you 4 golds. Embargo affects what you can buy for the rest of the game. Island comes back later. The only exception is Pillage, but between its deadly attack and the 2 (admittedly self trashing) cards it gains its effect can be felt for some time after it's used. I don't think a card that's something like "Trash this card. +5 cards" would go down well.

[razorborne]

You may not include an event clause that undoes the effect of the trashing/returning.  For example, "When you trash this, gain a copy of this card from the trash."

if you want to be insanely pedantic, I think this rule disqualifies Feast, as Feast can gain another Feast. it doesn't undo it entirely, in that in doing so you effectively trash a feast from the supply, but the fact remains that, when you use a Feast to gain a Feast, you have the same total amount of Feasts in your deck before and after playing the action.

[AJD]

You may not include an event clause that undoes the effect of the trashing/returning.  For example, "When you trash this, gain a copy of this card from the trash."

if you want to be insanely pedantic, I think this rule disqualifies Feast, as Feast can gain another Feast. it doesn't undo it entirely, in that in doing so you effectively trash a feast from the supply, but the fact remains that, when you use a Feast to gain a Feast, you have the same total amount of Feasts in your deck before and after playing the action.

...Feast can gain another feast. (And Embargo gives you enough +$ to buy another Embargo.) But what Rinkworks is ruling out here is cards that say, in effect, 'Do something. Oh, and then pretend to trash this card so it qualifies for the contest, but don't really trash it.'

Whether a card "Ruined Feast", whose text is "Trash this card. Gain a Ruined Feast," would be eligible, I don't want to judge; but Ruined Feast is a far cry from actual Feast.

[NoMoreFun]

I always thought ruined feast (Trash this card, gain a ruins, maybe with +1 action) would be a nice way to tie the ruins deck together. I'm assuming these competitions are only for kingdom cards though.

[rinkworks]

You may not include an event clause that undoes the effect of the trashing/returning.  For example, "When you trash this, gain a copy of this card from the trash."

if you want to be insanely pedantic, I think this rule disqualifies Feast, as Feast can gain another Feast. it doesn't undo it entirely, in that in doing so you effectively trash a feast from the supply, but the fact remains that, when you use a Feast to gain a Feast, you have the same total amount of Feasts in your deck before and after playing the action.

When you use Feast to gain another Feast, that second Feast doesn't come from the trash.  So it's okay by the letter of the rule here.  Not that I'd allow "when you trash this, gain another copy" either, particularly.  The spirit behind the rule is that you shouldn't be able to use its power and keep it or a copy of it in your deck.

With Feast, if you use it to gain another Feast, you haven't made use of its power (replacing itself with another card), and so it's okay.  It's not greatly different from not playing it at all.

[Kirian]

Something worth noting about the one shots that already exist is that they all have effects that linger for the rest of the game. Feast permanently gets you a $5 card that you wouldn't otherwise have without gaining that feast, Treasure map gives you 4 golds. Embargo affects what you can buy for the rest of the game. Island comes back later. The only exception is Pillage, but between its deadly attack and the 2 (admittedly self trashing) cards it gains its effect can be felt for some time after it's used. I don't think a card that's something like "Trash this card. +5 cards" would go down well.

Why not?  It would be a newish mechanic that might be interesting.  Also, Madman, while not technically qualifying for this, is a one-shot that doubles your hand size.

[Adrienaline]

Does it have to be trash/return to the supply/set aside? If we can come up with another mechanic for the card to no longer available after you play it, is that ok?

[rinkworks]

Does it have to be trash/return to the supply/set aside? If we can come up with another mechanic for the card to no longer available after you play it, is that ok?

Go ahead and submit it, and I'll let you know if it's eligible.

[Adrienaline]

I was going to submit this, but I think it's too out there even for those that like customisable cards

Legacy- $3
Action/Attack?
You may add the "top sticker" to the remaining *card names* in the supply, in your hand and in your discard pile, if you do rip this card up, destroying it. If not, trash this card.
Discard the top card of the "sticker cards" to reveal a new "top sticker"

Sticker cards: +1 card, +1 action, +$1, +1 buy, everyone else gains a curse

Set up: Before play, shuffle together all the previously used *card names* and create a kingdom pile from these.

Special rule: Stickers are not allowed to cover previous stickers. The card area for the stickers is big enough for three stickers in a line. __/__/__
Special rule: The sticker cards are five random cards that are shuffled together, with the top one revealed so that players will know which sticker can be applied the next time *card name* is revealed.

[zahlman]

Could the card be a "permanent" Duration? E.g. "Now and at the beginning of each turn, X"?

Could the card trash/return/set-aside itself on gain/buy rather than on play?

[eHalcyon]

Could the card be a "permanent" Duration? E.g. "Now and at the beginning of each turn, X"?

Could the card trash/return/set-aside itself on gain/buy rather than on play?

The topic says that it should trash itself (etc.) when played, so I would think no for the second point.

It is less clear on the first point, but I think a permanent Duration would violate the spirit of the competition.

[Kirian]

Could the card trash/return/set-aside itself on gain/buy rather than on play?

"This is a card that trashes itself, returns itself to its pile, or sets itself aside permanently when played.  The card must always do this when played."

I think it's pretty clear.  It could probably have an on-trash ability (like Cultist does) as long as its main section includes "trash this card" and doesn't include "gain a copy of this card."

[nopawnsintended]

Could the card be a "permanent" Duration? E.g. "Now and at the beginning of each turn, X"?

Could the card trash/return/set-aside itself on gain/buy rather than on play?

This seems to fit the letter, but not the spirit of the competition.

Token Trashme
$20 - Action

Trash this and place a Token Trashme token to your Token Trashme mat.  if there are any tokens on your Token Trashme mat at the beginning of your turn, +1 Card, +1 Action, +$8, +1 Buy, +1 VP.

Has the feel of a permanent duration, but it trashes itself when played.

[Darthcaboose]

Hey rinkworks,

I tried sending you my suggestion by private message, but I'm not 100% sure if it came through. Any chance you could let me know if you got it (also, I just signed up for the Dominion forums after months of lurking, yay!)?

[Rush_Clasic]

I realize it isn't allowed by the strict guidelines, but a card that gifts itself to another player feels like it fits the spirit of the criteria, even if it could potentially come back to you. Just something I came across while brainstorming for this one.

[LastFootnote]

I've bowed out of submitting to the competition after my first entry won, so I won't be submitting. However, I think it's funny that only one card in my one-shot themed expansion actually qualifies for this contest. That's not a criticism of the challenge, just an observation. Making one-shots is hard! Good luck to the contenders.

[NoMoreFun]

I've bowed out of submitting to the competition after my first entry won, so I won't be submitting. However, I think it's funny that only one card in my one-shot themed expansion actually qualifies for this contest. That's not a criticism of the challenge, just an observation. Making one-shots is hard! Good luck to the contenders.

Link to that expansion?

You should enter your card if you think it's the best for the greater good of the set. There should be no shame in designing good cards.

[eHalcyon]

I've bowed out of submitting to the competition after my first entry won, so I won't be submitting. However, I think it's funny that only one card in my one-shot themed expansion actually qualifies for this contest. That's not a criticism of the challenge, just an observation. Making one-shots is hard! Good luck to the contenders.

I will keep on submitting because it is fun... and if I happy to win again, umm.

I like my entry for one-shot.  And I came up with an idea for self-synergy in the end, but the wording is pretty bad.  The card name is the best part of it.

[LastFootnote]

Link to that expansion?

Dominion: Enterprise

I need to rework it now that Dark Ages out. At minimum, I need to rename Mercenary.

You should enter your card if you think it's the best for the greater good of the set. There should be no shame in designing good cards.

Well, the true one-shot in the set, Boycott, is the card that's gotten the least playtesting of the lot. Also, I'd rather not have a card I design be in two expansions.

[NoMoreFun]

Loophole Lighthouse:
+$1
Return this to the supply.
Place a loophole token on your loophole mat
---
While you have a loophole token on your mat, attacks don't affect you
At the start of your turn, remove your loophole tokens from the mat. For each loophole token your remove, +$1 and a gain a Loophole Lighthouse.

[rinkworks]

Hey rinkworks,

I tried sending you my suggestion by private message, but I'm not 100% sure if it came through. Any chance you could let me know if you got it (also, I just signed up for the Dominion forums after months of lurking, yay!)?

I got it.  Thanks!

[Schneau]

I have a surprising number of good seeming ideas for this contest. I wish I could submit two cards! Part of the issue is that a more complex card may be the better card, but might not be as favorable to the voters. I'll have to make up my mind soon!

[popsofctown]

I have a surprising number of good seeming ideas for this contest. I wish I could submit two cards! Part of the issue is that a more complex card may be the better card, but might not be as favorable to the voters. I'll have to make up my mind soon!

This is something I have been bitching about.  Possession or Goons could never win this contest.

[Kirian]

I have a surprising number of good seeming ideas for this contest. I wish I could submit two cards! Part of the issue is that a more complex card may be the better card, but might not be as favorable to the voters. I'll have to make up my mind soon!

This is something I have been bitching about.  Possession or Goons could never win this contest.

Goons isn't any more complex than Crystal Ball or Pawn Shop.  That said, with 40+ entries per week, judging something this ten lines of text and a support card is... going to be a tough sell.

[rinkworks]

Although I regret that we won't get wild, game-changing cards in this format, that's probably a good thing given the format.  You can't just make up Possession or Knights on the spot, submit it to a contest, have people think about it for a couple minutes, vote for it, have it win, and expect to have a playable, non-broken card in the end.  It's hard enough trying to balance fairly simple, uncontroversial cards.  I think that's a workable goal, though, and certainly a rewarding one.

Which is not to say that creating a radical card wouldn't also be a rewarding goal.  I just don't think this contest is a conducive format for it (although for what it's worth, I think somewhat radical cards are getting more scrutiny and consideration from this contest than they have as one-off forum posts, which is a good thing).

[rinkworks]

I'm going to be out-of-town on Monday, which is a holiday here in the U.S., so results won't be posted until Tuesday or possibly Wednesday.  I'll continue to accept entries right up until when I post the results.

[eHalcyon]

I'm going to be out-of-town on Monday, which is a holiday here in the U.S., so results won't be posted until Tuesday or possibly Wednesday.  I'll continue to accept entries right up until when I post the results.

I hadn't noticed the "possibly Wednesday" phrasing.  I have been antsy.

[DWetzel]

I'm going to be out-of-town on Monday, which is a holiday here in the U.S., so results won't be posted until Tuesday or possibly Wednesday.  I'll continue to accept entries right up until when I post the results.

I hadn't noticed the "possibly Wednesday" phrasing.  I have been antsy.

psychfistbumpmontage.gif

[rinkworks]

Here is the ballot for Challenge #13!

--

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 Thursday, September 13, 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.

--

Poirot
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Place this on top of any supply pile.
--
(Rules clarification: When this is on top of a pile, this must be bought before any cards underneath.)


Holmes
$3 - Action
When you play [This Card], trash it.
Choose one: place any number of Treasure cards from your hand on your [This Card] mat; gain a Gold, placing it on your [This Card] mat; or place all cards on your [This Card] mat in your hand.
--
Setup: each player gets their own [This Card] mat if [This Card] is in play.  At the end of the game, return all cards on [This Card] mats to their owner's deck.


Marlowe
$5 - Action
Put your deck into your discard pile. Search your discard pile, reveal up to two cards costing up to $6 from your discard pile or hand and trash them. For each trashed card, gain a card costing at most $1 more than the trashed card. Then trash this card.
--
(Rules clarification: You are not restricted to either your hand or discard pile. You may choose to trash a card from your hand and a card from your discard pile.)


Brown
$4 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Gain a Victory card costing up to $6.
--
Worth 2 VP


Hardy
$1 - Action
+$1
+1 Buy
Choose one: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Return this card to the supply.


Marple
$3 - Action
+$2
Trash this.
Reveal any number of Victory cards from your hand. +$1 per Victory card revealed.
--
When you buy this, put your deck into your discard pile.


Spade
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a Gold on top of your deck. Each other player gains a Silver.


Bobbsey
$2 - Action
Trash this. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal an Estate. Trash the Estate. Discard the revealed cards.


Columbo
$3 - Action
Trash this card and gain a card costing up to $1 more than the cost of this card.
You may also trash a card from your hand in addition to this. If you do gain an additional copy of the card gained.


Dupin
$4 - Action
+$1
Trash this card. If you do, you may put your deck into your discard pile and trash up to four cards from it. After sorting through it, reshuffle your draw pile.

Rockford
$4 - Action-Attack
Each other player reveals their hand and trashes half their treasure cards (rounded down). Put all treasure trashed in this way into your hand.
Trash this card. Put a tax token on top of a kingdom supply pile.
--
Kingdom cards cost $1 more per tax token on that pile.


Magnum
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and 3 other cards from your hand.


Fletcher
$2 - Action
Trash this and another card from your hand.  All cards cost $2 less this turn, but not less than $0.


Chan
$2 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Trash this card. Move the [This Card] token to the top of a non-[This Card] Supply pile.
--
Cards from the Supply pile with the [This Card] token have no effect when played. At the beginning of each player's Buy phase, that player can discard from their hand any number of cards from that pile for +$1 each, +$2 each instead if they are Kingdom cards.


Wimsey
$2 - Treasure-Victory
Worth $2 and 0.5 VP.  When you play this, return it to the supply.
--
When you gain a Scout, you may gain two [This Card]s.
--
Setup: Add Scout as an extra Kingdom card.  There are 20 [This Card]s.


Carter
$1 - Action
+1 Action
Return this card to the supply.
--
If you gain this card during your turn, you may return it to the supply immediately. If you do, each other player gains a [This Card].


Queen
$5 - Action-Attack
Trash this. You may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from your hand; if you do, +1 VP. Each opponent may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from his hand. If he does, he gains a Curse in hand; otherwise, he discards his hand.


Tracy
$6 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you play this, trash it.  If you do, gain a Prize or a Gold.  You may put your deck in the discard pile.
--
You cannot buy this if you have any Copper in play.


Campion
$3 - Action
+$1
At the start of Clean-up this turn, if the +$X gained from all Action cards in play is greater than the coins provided by Treasure cards in play, gain a Treasure card costing up to the sum of all +$X in play and coins provided by Treasures in play. Otherwise, gain an Action card costing up to the sum of all +$X in play and coins provided by Treasures in play.
--
When this is in play, instead of discarding it during Clean-up, trash it instead.


Vance
$P - Action-Plague
+1 Card
+1 Action
Gain a Curse.
The person to your left gains this card.
--
If you trash this card, discard a card.
When you buy this card, return it to the supply. Everyone else gains a copy.


Dover
$4 - Action-Attack
+$1
Return this card to the supply.
Choose one: +1 Card, +1 Action, each other player gains a Curse; or, +2 Cards, +1 Buy, each other player draws a card, then discards two.
--
When you gain or trash this, each other player gains a Copper.


Alleyn
$4 - Treasure
Worth $2
Trash this card. Gain a Silver, and the player to your right gains a Gold.
--
When you would gain this, the player to your left gains this card instead, and only that player can gain this card.
--
(Rules clarification: The player to the left cannot have the player to HIS left gain this card, he is the sole person gaining the card. Reactions to card gains apply in this situation however, e.g. Watchtower. When this card is played, the original buyer of this card will gain the Gold, and the "player to the left" gains the Silver.)


Shayne
$5 - Action
Trash this card. If you do, gain two action cards, the first to your hand, the second to the top of your deck. You cannot use this card to gain another copy of this card.


Hammer
$4 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a random card costing up to $2 more than this.


Charles
$2 - Action
Trash this card.  Reveal your hand.  If there are no duplicate cards in it, gain a copy of each Action or Treasure you revealed this way.


Wolfe
$2 - Treasure
Worth $1
When you play this, trash this together with any number of cards in play or from your hand costing $0.
--
When you gain this, you may play it immediately.


Beresford
$4 - Action
Choose one:
+2 Actions;
+$1, +1 Buy;
trash your hand.
--
When you gain this, set it aside; you may add it to your hand at the start of any of your future turns.
--
When you play this, return it to the supply.


Warshawski
$3 - Action
+$1
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this, choose one: trash up to three cards from your hand; or +3 Cards; or gain a Spoils.


Withers
$3 - Action
+1 Action
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this card, set it aside. At the start of your next Buy phase, +1 Buy, +$3, and put this card in the trash.
--
(Rules clarifications: When you put this card in the trash after it was set aside, you are not trashing the card, so the "When you trash this card..." clause doesn't take effect.)


Blackie
$3P - Action-Looter
Gain a Ruins to your hand.
Set this card aside. If you do, place a Ruins on it.
Return them to your deck at the end of the game.
--
When you play the first action of your turn, play it as if your set-aside Ruins' texts were added to the bottom of the card in the order you decide.


Templar
$5 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Take an extra turn after this one.
This can't cause you to take more than two consecutive turns.
--
Worth 2 VP


Temple
$3 - Action
Name a card. Look through your discard pile and trash all copies of the named card.
Trash this card.


Falcon
$6 - Action
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
+$2
Trash this. If you do, each other player with 5 or more cards in hand draws a card, then passes a card from his hand to you.



Drew
$3 - Action-Attack
+2 Cards
You may trash up to two cards from your hand.  If you trash at least one card in this way, every other player gains a Curse.
Return this card to the supply.


Mason
$5 - Action
+1 Action.
Trash this card. If you do, reveal an Action card from your hand and choose one: +coins equal to the card's cost and +1 buy OR gain a copy of the card and play it immediately.


Drummond
$4 - Action
+$1
--
Setup: At the start of the game, place the [This Card] token on the [This Card] supply pile.
--
Whenever a [This Card] is played, play it as if were a copy of the card with the [This Card] token on it. The played [This Card] is that card until it leaves play. Then, its owner gets +$1, sets [This Card] aside, and moves the [This Card] token to an Action card in the Supply. Trash the set aside [This Card]s at the end of the game.
--
(Rules clarification: The [This Card] token cannot be moved to an empty supply pile. If the copied supply pile runs out, [This Card] is still a copy of that card. The +$1, setting aside, and moving happens after the effects of the copied action.)


Moto
$2 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and a card from your hand. Name a card. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal the named card, and then trash it. Discard the other revealed cards.


Bradley
$6* - Action
Trash this card and up to 4 cards from your hand. Gain 2 cards that together cost up to as much as the total cost in coins of all cards trashed this way (including this).
--
This costs $1 less for every copy of this card that is in the trash, but not less than $0.
--
(Special design considerations: This card is handled like a Prosperity card, so it increases the chances of playing with Platinum and Colonies if this is in the game.)


Monk
$2 - Action
Trash this. Trash a card from the supply that is not a Victory card.
+$1 per differently named card in the trash.


Silver
$6 - Action
You may choose an Action card from your hand. Play that card 4 times.
Trash this card as well as the card you chose.


Quin
$5 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain up to 2 cards costing a total of 7. Put the cards on your deck.


Lanyard
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
Trash this card.  Gain 2 Tokens on your [This Card] mat.
--
At the beginning of any turn, remove any number of tokens from your [This Card] mat.  +1 Action per token removed.


Spenser
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Choose one: Gain two cards costing up to $4 each; or gain three cards costing up to $3 each; or gain four cards costing up to $2 each.


Morse
$P - Action
Choose one: +$3; or +$P.
Trash this card. If you do, choose one: put a [This Card] token on any pile without one on it; or remove a [This Card] token from any pile with one on it.
Cards in piles with [This Card] tokens cost $P less and $3 more if it has a Potion in its cost; otherwise, it costs $P more and $3 less (but not less than $0).
--
(Rules clarification: If no piles have a [This Card] token on it, you must put a token on a pile. Eligible piles for [This Card] tokens include Supply piles, non-Supply piles such as Madman, the Black Market deck, the trash, and players' decks. For tokens on players' decks, the effect extends to that player's hand, play area, and discard pile. Once a card is removed from a [This Card]ed pile, its cost reverts to normal until placed in another pile with a [This Card] token.)


Stone
$0 - Action-Victory
Return this to the supply.
Worth -1 VP
--
When there are at least two [This Card]s in the supply, when you buy a card, you may pay $1 less than its current cost. If you do, put into your discard pile two [This Card]s from the supply.

[WheresMyElephant]

Can Poirot go on top of an empty pile to delay a 3-pile ending or sabotage Cities?

[Davio]

Can Poirot go on top of an empty pile to delay a 3-pile ending or sabotage Cities?

I think so.

An empty pile is still a pile, right?

[Qvist]

Hopefully no-one confuses the card Silver with the actual card Silver.

[One Armed Man]

Until the nigh-inevitable rinkworks name change, I think we should refer to that as "Contest Silver".

[Kirian]

What's important is recognizing that this Silver is strictly superior to the regular Silver.

[Rush_Clasic]

Just noticed I screwed up the wording on my card. Oh well. Should make commentary easier.

[One Armed Man]

LETS DO THIS! Read from the bottom:

Poirot
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Place this on top of any supply pile.
--
(Rules clarification: When this is on top of a pile, this must be bought before any cards underneath.)

I like the card (in another form posted somewhere), but I don't like that this can block Province. I think it needs to be limited to non-victory piles (Not kingdom piles, as I initially thought; I like it being able to stop Gold (BM Money)). I would also like it if it moved a Poirot from the Supply onto the card and trashed itself, that way the game can "resume" eventually.

Holmes
$3 - Action
When you play [This Card], trash it.
Choose one: place any number of Treasure cards from your hand on your [This Card] mat; gain a Gold, placing it on your [This Card] mat; or place all cards on your [This Card] mat in your hand.
--
Setup: each player gets their own [This Card] mat if [This Card] is in play.  At the end of the game, return all cards on [This Card] mats to their owner's deck.

This is either a one-time treasure only trasher or a Gold gainer that requires 2 plays to work, then disappears. Neither are interesting to me.

Marlowe
$5 - Action
Put your deck into your discard pile. Search your discard pile, reveal up to two cards costing up to $6 from your discard pile or hand and trash them. For each trashed card, gain a card costing at most $1 more than the trashed card. Then trash this card.
--
(Rules clarification: You are not restricted to either your hand or discard pile. You may choose to trash a card from your hand and a card from your discard pile.)

The $6 clause is only to prevent King's Court hijinx. How about: "Trash this card. Put your deck into your discard pile. Discard any number of cards from your hand. Search your discard pile for up to 2 cards and trash them. For each trashed card, gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card."

Brown
$4 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Gain a Victory card costing up to $6.
--
Worth 2 VP

Use up an action once during greening to gain a Duchy? Seems a little dull to me.

Hardy
$1 - Action
+$1
+1 Buy
Choose one: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Return this card to the supply.

A Squire that returns itself to the supply. It is too easy just to pick up a load of these every turn with extra +buys.

Marple
$3 - Action
+$2
Trash this.
Reveal any number of Victory cards from your hand. +$1 per Victory card revealed.
--
When you buy this, put your deck into your discard pile.

The parts of this card don't seem connected. If you have this, coppers, and Victory cards, this provides you with exactly $6 for that turn. People might chancellor themself when they don't need to, creating unnecessary shuffling.

Spade
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a Gold on top of your deck. Each other player gains a Silver.

I looked at this card and saw a bad Governor at the same price.

Bobbsey
$2 - Action
Trash this. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal an Estate. Trash the Estate. Discard the revealed cards.

This seems simple and cute. Compared to Chapel, this is very weak, trashing 2 estates (3, but the chapel sticks around) instead of 1.

Columbo
$3 - Action
Trash this card and gain a card costing up to $1 more than the cost of this card.
You may also trash a card from your hand in addition to this. If you do gain an additional copy of the card gained.

I think that this should just say "gain a card costing up to $4". Columbo covers too much of Carpenter's design space. Columbo Copper Copper Copper Estate give you two 4 costs, one 3 cost, and trashes an estate. That seems quite strong.

Dupin
$4 - Action
+$1
Trash this card. If you do, you may put your deck into your discard pile and trash up to four cards from it. After sorting through it, reshuffle your draw pile.

I think the reshuffle clause isn't "clean", though I see that it prevents you from being able to get the newly bought card on your next turn. I don't like the swinginess. If you have your estates in hand, this is much weaker than if they are in your deck. If you have Coppers in hand, you get to use them to buy a $5 this turn and remove all Estates and a copper from your deck.

Rockford
$4 - Action-Attack
Each other player reveals their hand and trashes half their treasure cards (rounded down). Put all treasure trashed in this way into your hand.
Trash this card. Put a tax token on top of a kingdom supply pile.
--
Kingdom cards cost $1 more per tax token on that pile.

In a 4 player game, turn 3, this often trashes 6 copper and gains it for you (that doesn't seem too game breaking). In 4 player, if 2 people play this when you have 1 copper and 1 gold in your hand, this seems really rough, considering you have no coin! There has got to be a better way to use the Tax mechanic.

Magnum
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and 3 other cards from your hand.

Seems like you can get lucky and trash 3 estates or unlucky and only trash 1. I don't like the swinginess. Probably fine.

Fletcher
$2 - Action
Trash this and another card from your hand.  All cards cost $2 less this turn, but not less than $0.

This is trash a card +$2, so like a one-time use Trade Route. Late game, this could be a megaturn card, particularly as one of this card makes all other ones free. I like how this doesn't need +buy to be playable. Seems okay.

Chan
$2 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Trash this card. Move the [This Card] token to the top of a non-[This Card] Supply pile.
--
Cards from the Supply pile with the [This Card] token have no effect when played. At the beginning of each player's Buy phase, that player can discard from their hand any number of cards from that pile for +$1 each, +$2 each instead if they are Kingdom cards.

There are controls against using this on Province, Estate, Curse, or Copper for much benefit. This turns powerful (or weak) kingdom cards into a non-terminal silver. People haven't liked not being able to play their cards (without the benefits Chan gives) in the past. There is a little concern in Platinum games without +buy. Seems fun.

Wimsey
$2 - Treasure-Victory
Worth $2 and 0.5 VP.  When you play this, return it to the supply.
--
When you gain a Scout, you may gain two [This Card]s.
--
Setup: Add Scout as an extra Kingdom card.  There are 20 [This Card]s.

This has to be a joke. I laughed quietly to myself.

Carter
$1 - Action
+1 Action
Return this card to the supply.
--
If you gain this card during your turn, you may return it to the supply immediately. If you do, each other player gains a [This Card].

A card that junks up other players for 1 card once. It is easy enough to get many of these on extra buys (like a $1 peddler). It doesn't seem as malicious as Cursing, but it grow very annoying in a few games with +Buy. It seems like an okay counter to the trim deck. Seems okay.

Queen
$5 - Action-Attack
Trash this. You may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from your hand; if you do, +1 VP. Each opponent may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from his hand. If he does, he gains a Curse in hand; otherwise, he discards his hand.

You trash an Estate or Copper from your hand, then your opponent trashes an Estate or Copper from their hand (and gets a Curse) or skips their turn (nearly always much worse). If you can put your opponent at risk for do. I don't think Marauder and Cultist are common enough for this to need an anti-Ruins clause. This card doesn't "read" well and I have difficulty liking it, but it doesn't seem imbalanced.

Tracy
$6 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you play this, trash it.  If you do, gain a Prize or a Gold.  You may put your deck in the discard pile.
--
You cannot buy this if you have any Copper in play.

Prize-gainer! Grand Market might as well be a Prize anyway (it is as good as the average prize). There isn't much reason to buy this when the Prizes are out, so the Gold is a consolation prize (unless you don't want Diadem or Bag of Gold). I like this better than the "Grand Laboratory" that has been bandied about. I love Grand Market enough that I like this. Seems okay.

Campion
$3 - Action
+$1
At the start of Clean-up this turn, if the +$X gained from all Action cards in play is greater than the coins provided by Treasure cards in play, gain a Treasure card costing up to the sum of all +$X in play and coins provided by Treasures in play. Otherwise, gain an Action card costing up to the sum of all +$X in play and coins provided by Treasures in play.
--
When this is in play, instead of discarding it during Clean-up, trash it instead.

Too complicated for such a unnecessary effect. If you are playing all BM, you gain some Actions. If you are playing an Engine, you gain something middling. If you are playing a crazy KC, Festival, Minion, Goons thing, you get a Gold. It all seems unimpressive after you take the time to set up.

Vance
$P - Action-Plague
+1 Card
+1 Action
Gain a Curse.
The person to your left gains this card.
--
If you trash this card, discard a card.
When you buy this card, return it to the supply. Everyone else gains a copy.

In a 4 player game, I (P1) buy this turn 3. P2, P3, P4 gain this. Turn 6: P2, P3 , and P4 play this. Turn 8: P3, P4 and I (P1) play this. By the end of the game, P4 has been hurt by this the most, followed by P3, P2, and you. It just seems unfair. Also, this is worthless without other potion cards.

Dover
$4 - Action-Attack
+$1
Return this card to the supply.
Choose one: +1 Card, +1 Action, each other player gains a Curse; or, +2 Cards, +1 Buy, each other player draws a card, then discards two.
--
When you gain or trash this, each other player gains a Copper.

Compare this to IGG. This is a Peddler. That is worse than silver. This can be used once and gives the opponent a Copper and Curse; the Curse is delayed. That gives the curse first and leaves you with the worse-than-silver in your deck. I understand this doesn't have the 3-piling problem, but this card does cost less, as well.

Alleyn
$4 - Treasure
Worth $2
Trash this card. Gain a Silver, and the player to your right gains a Gold.
--
When you would gain this, the player to your left gains this card instead, and only that player can gain this card.
--
(Rules clarification: The player to the left cannot have the player to HIS left gain this card, he is the sole person gaining the card. Reactions to card gains apply in this situation however, e.g. Watchtower. When this card is played, the original buyer of this card will gain the Gold, and the "player to the left" gains the Silver.)

I don't want "left-hurting" cards for multiplayer. Tribute isn't really something either player can control.

Shayne
$5 - Action
Trash this card. If you do, gain two action cards, the first to your hand, the second to the top of your deck. You cannot use this card to gain another copy of this card.

try: "Trash this card. If you do, gain two non-Shayne Action cards, place one in your hand; place the other on top of your deck." If there are 3 cards that cost 5 or more, this works. Gaining an action card to your hand after a terminal feels awkward, but it may be good balance.

Hammer
$4 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a random card costing up to $2 more than this.

I don't like how swingy this ability is (it can gain you an early Duchy).

Charles
$2 - Action
Trash this card.  Reveal your hand.  If there are no duplicate cards in it, gain a copy of each Action or Treasure you revealed this way.

As a Menagerie-type, it antisynergizes with itself (you are likely to have multiples after one play of Charles). The balance might need work (it is obviously awful as an opening or on turn 3-9) Menagerie isn't that great early, either and that is why it can cost $3, but I still am not sure. Seems okay.

Wolfe
$2 - Treasure
Worth $1
When you play this, trash this together with any number of cards in play or from your hand costing $0.
--
When you gain this, you may play it immediately.

I think that if this card existed, it should let you trash a combination of Curses and played Coppers/ Ruins. I think that might be the intent here, but I am not sure. It is fun that you can use this to give you more money on your buy phase (particularly after Princess Bridge or Highway).

Beresford
$4 - Action
Choose one:
+2 Actions;
+$1, +1 Buy;
trash your hand.
--
When you gain this, set it aside; you may add it to your hand at the start of any of your future turns.
--
When you play this, return it to the supply.

The "When you play this" clause should just be added to the ability. Considering the "trash your hand" ability, it is too powerful as an opening trasher.

Warshawski
$3 - Action
+$1
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this, choose one: trash up to three cards from your hand; or +3 Cards; or gain a Spoils.

I like that the trash clause works in the Dark Ages way. This is like a baby Count. It is a swiss army knife you want throughout the game. Seems okay.

Withers
$3 - Action
+1 Action
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this card, set it aside. At the start of your next Buy phase, +1 Buy, +$3, and put this card in the trash.
--
(Rules clarifications: When you put this card in the trash after it was set aside, you are not trashing the card, so the "When you trash this card..." clause doesn't take effect.)

This is a duration card in disguise. I would rather it just be a duration card.

Blackie
$3P - Action-Looter
Gain a Ruins to your hand.
Set this card aside. If you do, place a Ruins on it.
Return them to your deck at the end of the game.
--
When you play the first action of your turn, play it as if your set-aside Ruins' texts were added to the bottom of the card in the order you decide.

I don't like the idea of mixing Dark Ages and Alchemy. This is also a permanent card. I don't suspect that this will get a lot of votes, as creative as it is. Also: worthless without other potion cards.

Templar
$5 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Take an extra turn after this one.
This can't cause you to take more than two consecutive turns.
--
Worth 2 VP

An engine that can buy 1 of these every 2 turns (every opponent's turn) is nasty. Like possession, it seems good in the late game. This scares me, but I will give it the benefit of the doubt for now. Seems okay.

Temple
$3 - Action
Name a card. Look through your discard pile and trash all copies of the named card.
Trash this card.

Without a discard pile, this is useless. I don't want that swinginess

Falcon
[This Card]
$6 - Action
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
+$2
Trash this. If you do, each other player with 5 or more cards in hand draws a card, then passes a card from his hand to you.

This is extremely strong with any form of trashing. Without trashing, this mucks up your deck too much in a large multiplayer game. The (fancy) balance seems a little off.

Drew
$3 - Action-Attack
+2 Cards
You may trash up to two cards from your hand.  If you trash at least one card in this way, every other player gains a Curse.
Return this card to the supply.

Way too strong and dominant. If you are buying this card, you obviously want to trash at least 1 card from a given 6 card hand.

Mason
$5 - Action
+1 Action.
Trash this card. If you do, reveal an Action card from your hand and choose one: +coins equal to the card's cost and +1 buy OR gain a copy of the card and play it immediately.

This only seems to work with high cost actions. Would a version that worked if you only got low cost actions work well. In many games, the most expensive action is $5. In that case this just works as a village where you can't even draw the card unless it matches up with an expensive action or as a Salvager where you lose the Salvager instead of the Action. I think some variant of this ability might work.

Drummond
$4 - Action
+$1
--
Setup: At the start of the game, place the [This Card] token on the [This Card] supply pile.
--
Whenever a [This Card] is played, play it as if were a copy of the card with the [This Card] token on it. The played [This Card] is that card until it leaves play. Then, its owner gets +$1, sets [This Card] aside, and moves the [This Card] token to an Action card in the Supply. Trash the set aside [This Card]s at the end of the game.
--
(Rules clarification: The [This Card] token cannot be moved to an empty supply pile. If the copied supply pile runs out, [This Card] is still a copy of that card. The +$1, setting aside, and moving happens after the effects of the copied action.)

This seems overcomplicated for a mimic.

Moto
$2 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and a card from your hand. Name a card. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal the named card, and then trash it. Discard the other revealed cards.

A guaranteed trashing of something you want to get rid of and a card in your hand. This can remove 2 estates from your deck , give you a $5 hand, and remove itself. It seems a little too strong for $2, but so is Chapel... seems okay.

Bradley
$6* - Action
Trash this card and up to 4 cards from your hand. Gain 2 cards that together cost up to as much as the total cost in coins of all cards trashed this way (including this).
--
This costs $1 less for every copy of this card that is in the trash, but not less than $0.
--
(Special design considerations: This card is handled like a Prosperity card, so it increases the chances of playing with Platinum and Colonies if this is in the game.)

This has too many rules complications to just be a user friendly Forge.

Monk
$2 - Action
Trash this. Trash a card from the supply that is not a Victory card.
+$1 per differently named card in the trash.

I think Forager covers this ground a lot better. Not much is stopping the opponent from getting these after you got rid of yours powering them up. It makes for an awful opener.

Silver
$6 - Action
You may choose an Action card from your hand. Play that card 4 times.
Trash this card as well as the card you chose.

This has the potential for a whole lot of abuse. If you use Contest Silver on itself, you can play 4 cards a total of 16 times, trashing up to 5 actions from your hand and getting an unbelievable megaturn. I am especially worried about Contest Silver and high-value Cursers, who empty the curse pile and then eliminate themselves.

Quin
$5 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain up to 2 cards costing a total of 7. Put the cards on your deck.

This is like getting your opening buys again. This is similar to Spenser and also to getting another chance at an opening. It is weird to use this to gain a 5 cost and 2 cost, since it only really gets you a $2 at the cost of a card. Seems okay.

Lanyard
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
Trash this card.  Gain 2 Tokens on your [This Card] mat.
--
At the beginning of any turn, remove any number of tokens from your [This Card] mat.  +1 Action per token removed.

This is a Village you can use 3 times. I like Survivor's Village better. I feel like this is much better than a normal village and is a decent turn 3-5 buy.

Spenser
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Choose one: Gain two cards costing up to $4 each; or gain three cards costing up to $3 each; or gain four cards costing up to $2 each.

Cute. I like low-cost gaining strategies. This one is too good for a 5/2 opening. This may also run out piles in a non-trash directly from pile strategy.

Morse
$P - Action
Choose one: +$3; or +$P.
Trash this card. If you do, choose one: put a [This Card] token on any pile without one on it; or remove a [This Card] token from any pile with one on it.
Cards in piles with [This Card] tokens cost $P less and $3 more if it has a Potion in its cost; otherwise, it costs $P more and $3 less (but not less than $0).
--
(Rules clarification: If no piles have a [This Card] token on it, you must put a token on a pile. Eligible piles for [This Card] tokens include Supply piles, non-Supply piles such as Madman, the Black Market deck, the trash, and players' decks. For tokens on players' decks, the effect extends to that player's hand, play area, and discard pile. Once a card is removed from a [This Card]ed pile, its cost reverts to normal until placed in another pile with a [This Card] token.)

Cute. We have enough potion cards. Also, this shouldn't be able to cap Provinces!

Stone
$0 - Action-Victory
Return this to the supply.
Worth -1 VP
--
When there are at least two [This Card]s in the supply, when you buy a card, you may pay $1 less than its current cost. If you do, put into your discard pile two [This Card]s from the supply.

Seems alright, though gaining two of these never seems worth it. Maybe you gain 1 and it has -2VP? This seems to encourage BM or strategies that have actions left over.

[eHalcyon]

Ahh, I couldn't resist.

I had trouble evaluating many of these because they are one-shot.  Some of the effects are really strong, but might be fine as a one-shot.  Some are just plain too strong though.

Poirot
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Place this on top of any supply pile.
--
(Rules clarification: When this is on top of a pile, this must be bought before any cards underneath.)

I feel like i see this idea a lot in the forums.  It probably works just fine, but I am personally not a fan of it.  It can introduce interesting tactical plays (preventing a 3-pile, blocking opponent's key cards, delaying Province purchases significantly so you have time to build an engine) but I just think I'd find it annoying to play with.

Holmes
$3 - Action
When you play [This Card], trash it.
Choose one: place any number of Treasure cards from your hand on your [This Card] mat; gain a Gold, placing it on your [This Card] mat; or place all cards on your [This Card] mat in your hand.
--
Setup: each player gets their own [This Card] mat if [This Card] is in play.  At the end of the game, return all cards on [This Card] mats to their owner's deck.

NV (sans actions) that is more powerful but only works with Treasure.  My main concern is that it only costs $3 and gains Gold very easily.  Since Holmes costs $3 you could open two of them and have Gold in hand before the second reshuffle.  If you only open one, it is still likely that you can have Gold in hand after the second reshuffle (when you play Holmes the second time).  The only difference to having it gained to discard as normal is that you can't have Holmes miss the third reshuffle and you need to spend that action to retrieve it from the mat.

Oh but wait... it's one-shot.  This is the one-shot contest.  So its main uses would be Gold gaining (need to buy at least two, barring TR/Proc/KC) and Copper pseudo-trashing.

Yeah OK, I like it.

Marlowe
$5 - Action
Put your deck into your discard pile. Search your discard pile, reveal up to two cards costing up to $6 from your discard pile or hand and trash them. For each trashed card, gain a card costing at most $1 more than the trashed card. Then trash this card.
--
(Rules clarification: You are not restricted to either your hand or discard pile. You may choose to trash a card from your hand and a card from your discard pile.)

Expensive.  As a one-shot, I don't quite think it is strong enough to cost $5.  Not sure.  I'm also having a bit of trouble figuring out how I would use this.  Pseudo-Remake?  Or maybe Duchy massing in the end game?

Brown
$4 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Gain a Victory card costing up to $6.
--
Worth 2 VP

In the context of this set, I am biased against Victory card entries.  But I do like this.  The action alone is just a weak Feast.  Yeah it can go up to $6, but that's only relevant with a handful of alt VP (and possibly in price reduction games).  But since it is also worth 2VP, it gains some neat interaction with Duchy.  You can trash it for something better, if that something is indeed better.  I would vote for this if we didn't already have 3 VP cards in the set.

Hardy
$1 - Action
+$1
+1 Buy
Choose one: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Return this card to the supply.

The +$1, +1 Buy means that, when you play this, you have the choice to Buy another one without seriously impacting your current turn.  It's nice that you can't get both cards and actions from one play of Hardy, because that means there is a cost to using this (either you use up an action or you use up a card slot).  Looks good to me.  Bonus points for hitting several things missing from the set -- virtual coin, +Buy, low price.

Marple
$3 - Action
+$2
Trash this.
Reveal any number of Victory cards from your hand. +$1 per Victory card revealed.
--
When you buy this, put your deck into your discard pile.

I think it looks fine, but it's not that interesting to me.

Spade
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a Gold on top of your deck. Each other player gains a Silver.

Looks fine, but I am biased against expensive cards this contest.

Bobbsey
$2 - Action
Trash this. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal an Estate. Trash the Estate. Discard the revealed cards.

Cheap one-shot Estate-Killer.  Looks fine, I think.

Columbo
$3 - Action
Trash this card and gain a card costing up to $1 more than the cost of this card.
You may also trash a card from your hand in addition to this. If you do gain an additional copy of the card gained.

One-shot Workshop (with some differences if there is price reduction), trash another card to double the gain.  Looks fine, but I think it is far too similar to Carpenter.  The set doesn't need a second self-trashing Workshop variant.

Dupin
$4 - Action
+$1
Trash this card. If you do, you may put your deck into your discard pile and trash up to four cards from it. After sorting through it, reshuffle your draw pile.

Very strong.  It's a Chapel that doesn't hurt your current hand and gets itself out of the way.  Very good for trimming down the starting deck.  I think it may be too strong.

Rockford
$4 - Action-Attack
Each other player reveals their hand and trashes half their treasure cards (rounded down). Put all treasure trashed in this way into your hand.
Trash this card. Put a tax token on top of a kingdom supply pile.
--
Kingdom cards cost $1 more per tax token on that pile.

It sounds too strong at first.  It is seriously hurting other players' hands, and you get a decent boost (huge boost with more than 2 players).  But often you'll just be getting a lot of Copper.  While you may be hurting others and getting a boost in the short-term, you help them and hurt yourself in the long term.  So for that, I think it is OK.

The Tax token idea has been floating around for a long time.  It seems like a very natural spin on Embargo, so I imagine that Donald must have tried it before.  I suspect it is either coming in Guilds or has some deeper flaw.  One possibility is that you can get into a game state where it is impossible for anyone to buy anything.  With Possession, Graverobber and Rogue, you can play an infinite number of these and making everything too expensive to buy!  But that's a very improbably situation.

Magnum
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and 3 other cards from your hand.

Similar to Dupin, above, but I like this better.  Magnum is weaker because you do hurt your current hand.  It also only trashes 4 cards total (including itself) as opposed to Dupin's 5.

Fletcher
$2 - Action
Trash this and another card from your hand.  All cards cost $2 less this turn, but not less than $0.

In the early game this is often just a one-shot Silver with light trashing.  If you can open with this and non-terminal +Buy, it can be a really nice boost.  This could be amazing in the right engine, though the requisite trashing needs to be handled properly.  Looks interesting.  Bonus points for low price and virtual coin (sort of).  Minus points because it would exacerbate the set's need for +Buy.

Chan
$2 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Trash this card. Move the [This Card] token to the top of a non-[This Card] Supply pile.
--
Cards from the Supply pile with the [This Card] token have no effect when played. At the beginning of each player's Buy phase, that player can discard from their hand any number of cards from that pile for +$1 each, +$2 each instead if they are Kingdom cards.

I don't like how it can shut down strategies.  Opponent spends time to build an engine that will come back from a huge point deficit for an astounding win... then you play this and shut out his key card(s).  Now he can still discard them for +$2 but his multi-Province engine takes a heavy hit.

In retaliation, the engine player plays this on Gold or Silver.  Hey BM-player, you are suddenly flooded with Copper.  Enjoy.

And so this becomes a battle to see who can play the last Chan, after which the unlucky loser bears a heavy handicap for the rest of the game.

Wimsey
$2 - Treasure-Victory
Worth $2 and 0.5 VP.  When you play this, return it to the supply.
--
When you gain a Scout, you may gain two [This Card]s.
--
Setup: Add Scout as an extra Kingdom card.  There are 20 [This Card]s.

I have no idea how serious this entry is. 

Carter
$1 - Action
+1 Action
Return this card to the supply.
--
If you gain this card during your turn, you may return it to the supply immediately. If you do, each other player gains a [This Card].

On-gain junking attack.  It is like IGG except super cheap and it doesn't add anything to your own deck.  I don't like it... with +Buy (or hey, Talisman) it is easy to heavily harm opponent's decks.  Opponents can make them disappear without much trouble, but they only return to the supply so they'll be flying around again soon enough.  It's probably nothing more than a minor hindrance.  It worries me nonetheless.

Queen
$5 - Action-Attack
Trash this. You may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from your hand; if you do, +1 VP. Each opponent may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from his hand. If he does, he gains a Curse in hand; otherwise, he discards his hand.

With Graverobber/Rogue, it wouldn't be too difficult to build an engine that plays this every turn.  If there is no other Curser on the board, the built in Moat will not work (well, I guess you could just buy Curses).  Basically, you can Torture them while leaving them with almost no way out, since their only option would be to buy Curses and then hope they are in hand when you attack.  And once the Curses run out (and they will, since you have to trash it to use it as a Moat), you are once again defenseless.

Edit: I just realized that I misread Queen.  I thought it forced the trashing of EITHER a Curse or a Ruin.  But it actually says NEITHER.  Whoops!  Um, this makes it better.  Might be OK for a one-shot attack... but probably not.  Pillage doesn't stack.  This does, and it will work with KC.

Tracy
$6 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you play this, trash it.  If you do, gain a Prize or a Gold.  You may put your deck in the discard pile.
--
You cannot buy this if you have any Copper in play.

The Gold gaining option is kind of pointless.  Consolation prize if the Prizes run out, I suppose.  This seems as swingy as Tournament.

Campion
$3 - Action
+$1
At the start of Clean-up this turn, if the +$X gained from all Action cards in play is greater than the coins provided by Treasure cards in play, gain a Treasure card costing up to the sum of all +$X in play and coins provided by Treasures in play. Otherwise, gain an Action card costing up to the sum of all +$X in play and coins provided by Treasures in play.
--
When this is in play, instead of discarding it during Clean-up, trash it instead.

Way too wordy.  Aside from cards leaving play (Embargo, or purchasing Mint/Mandarin), this is basically "double your coin, +1 Buy restricted to Treasure if you used most Actions to get +$ or restricted to Action cards otherwise".

Vance
$P - Action-Plague
+1 Card
+1 Action
Gain a Curse.
The person to your left gains this card.
--
If you trash this card, discard a card.
When you buy this card, return it to the supply. Everyone else gains a copy.

Wha.

OK, you buy this.  You return it to the supply.  Everyone else gets one instead.

One of those players plays it, gaining a Curse and passing Vance along.

Maybe another player trashes it with Salvager... and drops to a 2 card hand as a result.

It has a potion cost so it is harder to get.  Buying it doesn't help you, but then again it doesn't take up space in your deck either.  Of course, it could quickly come back to you.

It is probably fine, but I am not a fan.

Dover
$4 - Action-Attack
+$1
Return this card to the supply.
Choose one: +1 Card, +1 Action, each other player gains a Curse; or, +2 Cards, +1 Buy, each other player draws a card, then discards two.
--
When you gain or trash this, each other player gains a Copper.

Another attack that seems to be doing too much.  On-gain and on-trash junking attack.  Cantrip Curser.  Unlimited discard.  Being a one-shot limits it, so each of these is OK, but there is just too much going on.

Alleyn
$4 - Treasure
Worth $2
Trash this card. Gain a Silver, and the player to your right gains a Gold.
--
When you would gain this, the player to your left gains this card instead, and only that player can gain this card.
--
(Rules clarification: The player to the left cannot have the player to HIS left gain this card, he is the sole person gaining the card. Reactions to card gains apply in this situation however, e.g. Watchtower. When this card is played, the original buyer of this card will gain the Gold, and the "player to the left" gains the Silver.)

The idea is interesting.  It is basically giving the player to your left a Silver, so that you will (probably) get a Gold after his next reshuffle.

The wording is not so good.  It makes no sense without the clarification (because the "when you gain" text would apply to the player to your left, and to his left, and so on -- "only that player" doesn't help much).  The easy fix is to have it apply "when you buy this".  You only lose interaction with gainers, and that's a very small price for rules clarity.

Shayne
$5 - Action
Trash this card. If you do, gain two action cards, the first to your hand, the second to the top of your deck. You cannot use this card to gain another copy of this card.

Seems fine, I think.

Hammer
$4 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a random card costing up to $2 more than this.

Random?  Well, first there is the issue of how to do it randomly.  Then there is the issue of what cards can be gained -- even cards not in the Kingdom?

Play-wise, it is weak because you may very well gain a card you didn't want in the first place.  And you probably could have bought the card you wanted anyway, if Hammer was just a Silver instead.

Charles
$2 - Action
Trash this card.  Reveal your hand.  If there are no duplicate cards in it, gain a copy of each Action or Treasure you revealed this way.

Quirky and unique.  Could lead to some interesting strategies if there is support.

Wolfe
$2 - Treasure
Worth $1
When you play this, trash this together with any number of cards in play or from your hand costing $0.
--
When you gain this, you may play it immediately.

This is way stronger than Loan and is almost strictly superior to Mint's on-gain effect.

Beresford
$4 - Action
Choose one:
+2 Actions;
+$1, +1 Buy;
trash your hand.
--
When you gain this, set it aside; you may add it to your hand at the start of any of your future turns.
--
When you play this, return it to the supply.

One-shot "trash your hand" that you can play immediately on the next turn or save for your next crappy hand, with additional options for a free Village or free +$1/+1 Buy...

While the other two options seem alright, the trashing looks way too strong for me.  Might be OK if it weren't for the long-term-Haven effect.

Warshawski
$3 - Action
+$1
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this, choose one: trash up to three cards from your hand; or +3 Cards; or gain a Spoils.

Seems OK, I think.

Withers
$3 - Action
+1 Action
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this card, set it aside. At the start of your next Buy phase, +1 Buy, +$3, and put this card in the trash.
--
(Rules clarifications: When you put this card in the trash after it was set aside, you are not trashing the card, so the "When you trash this card..." clause doesn't take effect.)

Why not just put +$3, +1 Buy right in the on-play effect?  Interaction with other trashers, I suppose.  Seems quite niche though.  Looks fine?

Blackie
$3P - Action-Looter
Gain a Ruins to your hand.
Set this card aside. If you do, place a Ruins on it.
Return them to your deck at the end of the game.
--
When you play the first action of your turn, play it as if your set-aside Ruins' texts were added to the bottom of the card in the order you decide.

Is this a permanent duration?  It looks that way.  I am not a fan... Even though it is expensive, it just seems too good to have a near-permanent Caravan or Village or Peddler. 

Templar
$5 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Take an extra turn after this one.
This can't cause you to take more than two consecutive turns.
--
Worth 2 VP

One-shot Outpost that doesn't limit the size of your next hand.  Decently strong already, I think.  If you only have $5 now but expect stronger turns in the future, this can be a good buy.  The extra VP just seems out of place, especially on a one-shot.

Temple
$3 - Action
Name a card. Look through your discard pile and trash all copies of the named card.
Trash this card.

I don't like how swingy this is.  Draw it immediately after the reshuffle -- it's just a dead card then.  But draw it at the end, when everything is in the discard... you can trim your deck very effectively, without hurting your current hand.  I don't know about this.  As a one-shot, it doesn't average out over time.  It's just hit or miss.

Falcon
[This Card]
$6 - Action
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
+$2
Trash this. If you do, each other player with 5 or more cards in hand draws a card, then passes a card from his hand to you.

Powerful.  Should probably be an Attack type?  I remain biased against expensive cards for this contest.

Drew
$3 - Action-Attack
+2 Cards
You may trash up to two cards from your hand.  If you trash at least one card in this way, every other player gains a Curse.
Return this card to the supply.

Very strong, not sure if one-shot covers it.

Mason
$5 - Action
+1 Action.
Trash this card. If you do, reveal an Action card from your hand and choose one: +coins equal to the card's cost and +1 buy OR gain a copy of the card and play it immediately.

Strong.  One-shot.  Again, hard to evaluate.  But I am still biased against expensive one-shots.

Drummond
$4 - Action
+$1
--
Setup: At the start of the game, place the [This Card] token on the [This Card] supply pile.
--
Whenever a [This Card] is played, play it as if were a copy of the card with the [This Card] token on it. The played [This Card] is that card until it leaves play. Then, its owner gets +$1, sets [This Card] aside, and moves the [This Card] token to an Action card in the Supply. Trash the set aside [This Card]s at the end of the game.
--
(Rules clarification: The [This Card] token cannot be moved to an empty supply pile. If the copied supply pile runs out, [This Card] is still a copy of that card. The +$1, setting aside, and moving happens after the effects of the copied action.)

Some timing issues:  "The played [This Card] is that card until it leaves play. Then [many things]."  The "Then" implies that the [many things] don't happen until it leaves play.  +$1 is meaningless at that point.  It's also unclear why you would set them aside instead of just trashing them outright.

Overall, too many moving parts.

Moto
$2 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and a card from your hand. Name a card. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal the named card, and then trash it. Discard the other revealed cards.

Looks fine.

Bradley
$6* - Action
Trash this card and up to 4 cards from your hand. Gain 2 cards that together cost up to as much as the total cost in coins of all cards trashed this way (including this).
--
This costs $1 less for every copy of this card that is in the trash, but not less than $0.
--
(Special design considerations: This card is handled like a Prosperity card, so it increases the chances of playing with Platinum and Colonies if this is in the game.)

Probably fine.  I don't think the cost reduction is necessary.

Monk
$2 - Action
Trash this. Trash a card from the supply that is not a Victory card.
+$1 per differently named card in the trash.

Probably fine...

Silver
$6 - Action
You may choose an Action card from your hand. Play that card 4 times.
Trash this card as well as the card you chose.

Crazy KC variant.  Too crazy for me!

Quin
$5 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain up to 2 cards costing a total of 7. Put the cards on your deck.

Probably fine.

Lanyard
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
Trash this card.  Gain 2 Tokens on your [This Card] mat.
--
At the beginning of any turn, remove any number of tokens from your [This Card] mat.  +1 Action per token removed.

One-shot seems tacked on.

Spenser
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Choose one: Gain two cards costing up to $4 each; or gain three cards costing up to $3 each; or gain four cards costing up to $2 each.

Too weak, I think.

Morse
$P - Action
Choose one: +$3; or +$P.
Trash this card. If you do, choose one: put a [This Card] token on any pile without one on it; or remove a [This Card] token from any pile with one on it.
Cards in piles with [This Card] tokens cost $P less and $3 more if it has a Potion in its cost; otherwise, it costs $P more and $3 less (but not less than $0).
--
(Rules clarification: If no piles have a [This Card] token on it, you must put a token on a pile. Eligible piles for [This Card] tokens include Supply piles, non-Supply piles such as Madman, the Black Market deck, the trash, and players' decks. For tokens on players' decks, the effect extends to that player's hand, play area, and discard pile. Once a card is removed from a [This Card]ed pile, its cost reverts to normal until placed in another pile with a [This Card] token.)

So weird!  Not sure how it would play.  It is slow to get.  You could use it to block a non-Potion card if your opponent didn't go Potions, but you can't do it very early in the game.  Going the other way probably isn't useful.  You have a Potion already (had to, to buy this card) so why remove Potion costs to make something accessible to an opponent without Potion?  Interesting though.

Stone
$0 - Action-Victory
Return this to the supply.
Worth -1 VP
--
When there are at least two [This Card]s in the supply, when you buy a card, you may pay $1 less than its current cost. If you do, put into your discard pile two [This Card]s from the supply.

Interesting.  Not sure how it would play!

[Schlippy]

Disclaimer: One of these is mine.

Poirot
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Place this on top of any supply pile.
--
(Rules clarification: When this is on top of a pile, this must be bought before any cards underneath.)

While I appreciate the idea, I don't really like how this gums up games, considering the fact that it backfires sooner or later as the enemy you want to hinder with it gets this in his deck. Also being able to put this on top of Colonies or Provinces adds a lot of swingyness.

Holmes
$3 - Action
When you play [This Card], trash it.
Choose one: place any number of Treasure cards from your hand on your [This Card] mat; gain a Gold, placing it on your [This Card] mat; or place all cards on your [This Card] mat in your hand.
--
Setup: each player gets their own [This Card] mat if [This Card] is in play.  At the end of the game, return all cards on [This Card] mats to their owner's deck.

Looks fine. A one shot native Village that can gain you a Gold and can also be used to pseudo-trash Coppers early on. I don't really like that you have to buy it several times if you want to use it for anything else than pseudo-trashing. Might be quite weak for that matter.

Marlowe
$5 - Action
Put your deck into your discard pile. Search your discard pile, reveal up to two cards costing up to $6 from your discard pile or hand and trash them. For each trashed card, gain a card costing at most $1 more than the trashed card. Then trash this card.
--
(Rules clarification: You are not restricted to either your hand or discard pile. You may choose to trash a card from your hand and a card from your discard pile.)

One shot Remake that can search your complete deck. I like it.

Brown
$4 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Gain a Victory card costing up to $6.
--
Worth 2 VP

Simple and interesting in a few Kingdoms, relatively bad in most Kingdoms. Also too bad the set has a lot of Victory cards already.

Hardy
$1 - Action
+$1
+1 Buy
Choose one: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Return this card to the supply.

I think this is too cheap. I mean you can simply buy it again every time you play it and it is like it never leaves your deck.

Marple
$3 - Action
+$2
Trash this.
Reveal any number of Victory cards from your hand. +$1 per Victory card revealed.
--
When you buy this, put your deck into your discard pile.

While this is better than a Silver in the greening phase it is really hurt by the forced reshuffle. At time where you want to have this in your deck you ideally want as little reshuffling as possible. On the other hand this helps getting it into your hand. The early game potential is certainly there, however it is really bad in games with Shelters. I am also relatively sure that getting a Silver instead of this helps you more early on.

Spade
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a Gold on top of your deck. Each other player gains a Silver.

Maybe I am underestimating it, but I don't think this would be overpowered if other players gained nothing instead of the Silver.

Bobbsey
$2 - Action
Trash this. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal an Estate. Trash the Estate. Discard the revealed cards.

Neat and simple. It wouldn't hurt if it said "Estate or Shelter". It's also quite weak compared to other cheap trashers.

Columbo
$3 - Action
Trash this card and gain a card costing up to $1 more than the cost of this card.
You may also trash a card from your hand in addition to this. If you do gain an additional copy of the card gained.

I like the concept of a one-shot Workshop with trashing for an additional card. I guess this is quite fun to play with cost-reduction cards in the Kingdom. I also like how the wording prevents you from things like getting two provinces with this when you have played 4 Bridges.

Dupin
$4 - Action
+$1
Trash this card. If you do, you may put your deck into your discard pile and trash up to four cards from it. After sorting through it, reshuffle your draw pile.

While it might look like this is less swingy than trashing from your hand, it is actually a lot more swingy than trashing from your hand.

Rockford
$4 - Action-Attack
Each other player reveals their hand and trashes half their treasure cards (rounded down). Put all treasure trashed in this way into your hand.
Trash this card. Put a tax token on top of a kingdom supply pile.
--
Kingdom cards cost $1 more per tax token on that pile.

This looks far too strong, even for an one-shot attack.

Magnum
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and 3 other cards from your hand.

I am pretty sure this would do fine at a cost of $3.

Fletcher
$2 - Action
Trash this and another card from your hand.  All cards cost $2 less this turn, but not less than $0.

Quite good. Imho it should say 'if you do' so you only get the bonus once with KC/TR. But other than that, this feels like a solid card.

Chan
$2 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Trash this card. Move the [This Card] token to the top of a non-[This Card] Supply pile.
--
Cards from the Supply pile with the [This Card] token have no effect when played. At the beginning of each player's Buy phase, that player can discard from their hand any number of cards from that pile for +$1 each, +$2 each instead if they are Kingdom cards.

Feels like this favours BM-strategies over Engine-strategies big time when it is part of the Kingdom. I don't really like how it's done.

Wimsey
$2 - Treasure-Victory
Worth $2 and 0.5 VP.  When you play this, return it to the supply.
--
When you gain a Scout, you may gain two [This Card]s.
--
Setup: Add Scout as an extra Kingdom card.  There are 20 [This Card]s.

I really don't know what I should say about this. Sure, it makes Scout a lot better, But what is the point? I also don't really like how it enforces you to own Intrigue.

Carter
$1 - Action
+1 Action
Return this card to the supply.
--
If you gain this card during your turn, you may return it to the supply immediately. If you do, each other player gains a [This Card].

I have played a lot of testgames with self-trashing on-buy curses for a fan expansion and $1 is imho simply too cheap for it.

Queen
$5 - Action-Attack
Trash this. You may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from your hand; if you do, +1 VP. Each opponent may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from his hand. If he does, he gains a Curse in hand; otherwise, he discards his hand.

Trashing from other players hands is already on the borderline. Wiping out his turn if he doesn't is extremely frustrating. And if this attack is stacked it easily can whipe out your turn even if you trash in multiplayer games. I do understand that this is one-shot, but I still don't like it because of the frustration factor.

Tracy
$6 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you play this, trash it.  If you do, gain a Prize or a Gold.  You may put your deck in the discard pile.
--
You cannot buy this if you have any Copper in play.

I don't think this can be balanced in any way. Not being able to buy it with copper in play exaggerates the problem that this often massively favours the player who is already in the lead through a lucky draw. Some might argue that this is the case with Tournament, but I think the problem is much less severe with Tournament than with this card.

Campion
$3 - Action
+$1
At the start of Clean-up this turn, if the +$X gained from all Action cards in play is greater than the coins provided by Treasure cards in play, gain a Treasure card costing up to the sum of all +$X in play and coins provided by Treasures in play. Otherwise, gain an Action card costing up to the sum of all +$X in play and coins provided by Treasures in play.
--
When this is in play, instead of discarding it during Clean-up, trash it instead.

While I certainly like it, it feels far to complicated.

Vance
$P - Action-Plague
+1 Card
+1 Action
Gain a Curse.
The person to your left gains this card.
--
If you trash this card, discard a card.
When you buy this card, return it to the supply. Everyone else gains a copy.

This seem fine for the prize. Maybe it should be phrased differently, like "pass this to the person to your left", because of the weird interactions with Trader. It is also quite annoying regarding the turn order "problem" in multiplayer games.

Dover
$4 - Action-Attack
+$1
Return this card to the supply.
Choose one: +1 Card, +1 Action, each other player gains a Curse; or, +2 Cards, +1 Buy, each other player draws a card, then discards two.
--
When you gain or trash this, each other player gains a Copper.

I don't really like how this can wipe out turns. King's Court it once and every other player only has 2 cards in his hand.

Alleyn
$4 - Treasure
Worth $2
Trash this card. Gain a Silver, and the player to your right gains a Gold.
--
When you would gain this, the player to your left gains this card instead, and only that player can gain this card.
--
(Rules clarification: The player to the left cannot have the player to HIS left gain this card, he is the sole person gaining the card. Reactions to card gains apply in this situation however, e.g. Watchtower. When this card is played, the original buyer of this card will gain the Gold, and the "player to the left" gains the Silver.)

The wording is somewhat bogus. Does this prevent me from Ambassadoring this card if I have it or doesn't it? How are you supposed to keep track of the "original Buyer" if someone passes this via Masquerade. How do you know which Alleyn was originally gained by which player?
It would have been much simpler if it said something like "When you gain this, pass it to the player to your left", even if that removes the the interactions with reaction cards.

Shayne
$5 - Action
Trash this card. If you do, gain two action cards, the first to your hand, the second to the top of your deck. You cannot use this card to gain another copy of this card.

This might be a tad too strong with things like King's Court and Grand Market. Still, I like the concept and simplicity.

Hammer
$4 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a random card costing up to $2 more than this.

Is this just a one-shot self-remodel or are you really supposed to gain a random card costing $2 more?

Charles
$2 - Action
Trash this card.  Reveal your hand.  If there are no duplicate cards in it, gain a copy of each Action or Treasure you revealed this way.

This feels incredibly swingy without hand size reduction attacks in the Kingdom.

Wolfe
$2 - Treasure
Worth $1
When you play this, trash this together with any number of cards in play or from your hand costing $0.
--
When you gain this, you may play it immediately.

If I gain and play this outside of my turn, do I still get to keep the $1 for the buy phase of my next turn?
If no, why doesn't it simply has a price of $1 and is worth $0, because that would basically be the same thing unless you gain it via Remake/Upgrade/Governour.
Unless of course you gain it and do not play it immediately, but I don't really see any cases where I'd do that.

Beresford
$4 - Action
Choose one:
+2 Actions;
+$1, +1 Buy;
trash your hand.
--
When you gain this, set it aside; you may add it to your hand at the start of any of your future turns.
--
When you play this, return it to the supply.

I like it. Might be a tad to strong though.

Warshawski
$3 - Action
+$1
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this, choose one: trash up to three cards from your hand; or +3 Cards; or gain a Spoils.

Somewhat boring imho.

Withers
$3 - Action
+1 Action
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this card, set it aside. At the start of your next Buy phase, +1 Buy, +$3, and put this card in the trash.
--
(Rules clarifications: When you put this card in the trash after it was set aside, you are not trashing the card, so the "When you trash this card..." clause doesn't take effect.)

This might as well say "+1 Action, set this aside. at the start of your next buy phase: +1Buy, +$3, trash this". That would be a lot simpler and would save it from bogus interactions with eventual "when you trash a card" reactions.

Blackie
$3P - Action-Looter
Gain a Ruins to your hand.
Set this card aside. If you do, place a Ruins on it.
Return them to your deck at the end of the game.
--
When you play the first action of your turn, play it as if your set-aside Ruins' texts were added to the bottom of the card in the order you decide.

Do you put the Ruins from your hand on it or a Ruins from the supply?

Templar
$5 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Take an extra turn after this one.
This can't cause you to take more than two consecutive turns.
--
Worth 2 VP

Oneshot outpost that nets you VP in case you didn't get to play it. Awesome idea, I guess this might work out well. I like it.

Temple
$3 - Action
Name a card. Look through your discard pile and trash all copies of the named card.
Trash this card.

This might be a tad too swingy. I still ike the idea and suppose it could use a cost increase together with a "put your deck into your discard pile" phrase.

Falcon
[This Card]
$6 - Action
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
+$2
Trash this. If you do, each other player with 5 or more cards in hand draws a card, then passes a card from his hand to you.

This feels like it might be incredibly strong with trashing in the Kingdom, and incredibily weak without trashing in the Kingdom.

Drew
$3 - Action-Attack
+2 Cards
You may trash up to two cards from your hand.  If you trash at least one card in this way, every other player gains a Curse.
Return this card to the supply.

This is basically a one-shot Witch with the bonus of trashing for $3. I think it is too cheap and too redundant.

Mason
$5 - Action
+1 Action.
Trash this card. If you do, reveal an Action card from your hand and choose one: +coins equal to the card's cost and +1 buy OR gain a copy of the card and play it immediately.

If you have two of these in your hand, you can end a pile in one turn. Play a Mason, revealing a Mason, choosing to gain and play a Mason, revealing a Mason, choosing to gain and play a Mason, revealing a Mason, choosing to gain and play a Mason, etc.. On top of that, you get X Actions for doing that. I dislike the card solely because of that. Note how official cards (like Farmland) are carefully designed to not allow such things.

Drummond
$4 - Action
+$1
--
Setup: At the start of the game, place the [This Card] token on the [This Card] supply pile.
--
Whenever a [This Card] is played, play it as if were a copy of the card with the [This Card] token on it. The played [This Card] is that card until it leaves play. Then, its owner gets +$1, sets [This Card] aside, and moves the [This Card] token to an Action card in the Supply. Trash the set aside [This Card]s at the end of the game.
--
(Rules clarification: The [This Card] token cannot be moved to an empty supply pile. If the copied supply pile runs out, [This Card] is still a copy of that card. The +$1, setting aside, and moving happens after the effects of the copied action.)

I don't understand the wording. If I get the +$1 when Drummond leaves play I can't do anything with it, as it is not my turn anymore.

Moto
$2 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and a card from your hand. Name a card. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal the named card, and then trash it. Discard the other revealed cards.

Another oneshot Chapel variant that increases the search space. I like it more than the others because it is less swingy.

Bradley
$6* - Action
Trash this card and up to 4 cards from your hand. Gain 2 cards that together cost up to as much as the total cost in coins of all cards trashed this way (including this).
--
This costs $1 less for every copy of this card that is in the trash, but not less than $0.
--
(Special design considerations: This card is handled like a Prosperity card, so it increases the chances of playing with Platinum and Colonies if this is in the game.)

Sort of a one-shot Forge with added extra coins. If you play this as the first person and trash at least a Gold you can gain a Colony (as the worth of this card is $5 then because it is in the trash once) but unless you trash other things with costs higher than 0 have to take a Copper with that Colony. I like the price-reduction mechanic because of the balance between 'it is easier to pick up this card' and 'it is harder to pull of good turns with this card'. I also like how you can always at least get a Bradley when playing a Bradley. It somewhat looks like you can design strategies based on this card.

Monk
$2 - Action
Trash this. Trash a card from the supply that is not a Victory card.
+$1 per differently named card in the trash.

I don't like how this (probably) produces $11 (or even more) coins for the player with the last copy.

Silver
$6 - Action
You may choose an Action card from your hand. Play that card 4 times.
Trash this card as well as the card you chose.

2 of these (or one of these and a Throne Room) and 2 Bridges end a 2 Player game.
Seems somewhat easier to pull of than KC/Kc/Bridge/Bridge/Bridge, because of the price and the fact that you need one card less.

Quin
$5 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain up to 2 cards costing a total of 7. Put the cards on your deck.

And another one-shot Workshop/Feast variant. Imho the most interesting and balanced one, especially because you are not limited by the card types.

Lanyard
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
Trash this card.  Gain 2 Tokens on your [This Card] mat.
--
At the beginning of any turn, remove any number of tokens from your [This Card] mat.  +1 Action per token removed.

Good Village variant. I like it a lot.


[quoite]Spenser
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Choose one: Gain two cards costing up to $4 each; or gain three cards costing up to $3 each; or gain four cards costing up to $2 each.[/quote]
This one-shot Workshop variant is pretty neat too.

Morse
$P - Action
Choose one: +$3; or +$P.
Trash this card. If you do, choose one: put a [This Card] token on any pile without one on it; or remove a [This Card] token from any pile with one on it.
Cards in piles with [This Card] tokens cost $P less and $3 more if it has a Potion in its cost; otherwise, it costs $P more and $3 less (but not less than $0).
--
(Rules clarification: If no piles have a [This Card] token on it, you must put a token on a pile. Eligible piles for [This Card] tokens include Supply piles, non-Supply piles such as Madman, the Black Market deck, the trash, and players' decks. For tokens on players' decks, the effect extends to that player's hand, play area, and discard pile. Once a card is removed from a [This Card]ed pile, its cost reverts to normal until placed in another pile with a [This Card] token.)

I appreciate the idea, but I don't like it because of those relatively weird Remodel/Upgrade/Forge/ETC interactions with Potion and non-Potion cards.

Stone
$0 - Action-Victory
Return this to the supply.
Worth -1 VP
--
When there are at least two [This Card]s in the supply, when you buy a card, you may pay $1 less than its current cost. If you do, put into your discard pile two [This Card]s from the supply.

I think this would have been more interesting if you trashed the cards instead of returning them to the supply. I see very little reason to use the effect, especially because there is no way of circumventing it (with Watchtower or whatever) as it explicitly does not talk of gaining those Stones, but of putting them into my discard pile.

[angrybirds]

If peroit is placed on say the curse pile would it be gained instead of a curse when witch is played? The clarification only says bought but implies gained as well

[Graystripe77]

If peroit is placed on say the curse pile would it be gained instead of a curse when witch is played? The clarification only says bought but implies gained as well

It doesn't say 'Gain a card from the curse pile', the cards instruct to gain a curse. It'd be skipped.

[angrybirds]

If peroit is placed on say the curse pile would it be gained instead of a curse when witch is played? The clarification only says bought but implies gained as well

It doesn't say 'Gain a card from the curse pile', the cards instruct to gain a curse. It'd be skipped.

then I would assume boarder village gains could skip peroit as well?

[zahlman]

Ugh... Graverobber really changes the balance of some of these. :/

[One Armed Man]

Spenser
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Choose one: Gain two cards costing up to $4 each; or gain three cards costing up to $3 each; or gain four cards costing up to $2 each.

I thought about this a little more. $5 trash gainers are crazy openings. This would make Fools Gold/ Spenser the strongest opening in the game by miles!

[JFugue]

First off, hello everyone!  I've been lurking on the website for some time, but this contest finally convinced me to sign up and send in an idea.  So, fair warning, one of the below ideas is mine.

I will be slowly adding and editing to include all the cards.

Poirot
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Place this on top of any supply pile.
--
(Rules clarification: When this is on top of a pile, this must be bought before any cards underneath.)

Initial reaction: Neat!

Second reaction: Uh-oh!  I can easily imagine this leading to a massive slog, especially in the presence of multiple engine methods: each player tries to play as many Poirots in his deck on a given turn, while buying a Poirot from a stack critical to him, or grabbing cheap non-Poiroted stack to end the game on three stacks if he has the lead.

A variant I might be much happier with: to buy the top card of a stack you must pay +1$ for each Poirot on top of it; you then gain those Poirots.

Holmes
$3 - Action
When you play [This Card], trash it.
Choose one: place any number of Treasure cards from your hand on your [This Card] mat; gain a Gold, placing it on your [This Card] mat; or place all cards on your [This Card] mat in your hand.
--
Setup: each player gets their own [This Card] mat if [This Card] is in play.  At the end of the game, return all cards on [This Card] mats to their owner's deck.

A treasure map variant with an interesting twist.  It seems like a good way to play it might be to stack up a bunch of gold, pull those into your hand, and then toss as many copper as possible back onto the mat.  However, Holmes does this very slowly, requiring several purchases and plays of just this card to get it rolling, and on top of that, Holmes trashes itself instead of returning to the supply.  Interesting concept, but it feels too slow.

Marlowe
$5 - Action
Put your deck into your discard pile. Search your discard pile, reveal up to two cards costing up to $6 from your discard pile or hand and trash them. For each trashed card, gain a card costing at most $1 more than the trashed card. Then trash this card.
--
(Rules clarification: You are not restricted to either your hand or discard pile. You may choose to trash a card from your hand and a card from your discard pile.)

This and a later card both make me a little leery.  They both toss your deck into your discard pile and search it for trashing, basically allowing you to freely pick to trash whatever is not already in your hand, and that feels off.  Most trashers have hands where you wouldn't want to use them for fear of trashing something bad; this card has that, but to such a greatly reduced extent that there's little strategy the choice of whether to play it or not.  Of the two, I prefer this one's effect. 

Brown
$4 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Gain a Victory card costing up to $6.
--
Worth 2 VP

In most games, the only card this can gain is a Duchy, which feels narrower than Feast.  Maybe if the cost were reduced?

Hardy
$1 - Action
+$1
+1 Buy
Choose one: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Return this card to the supply.

The appearance of the +$1, +1 Buy seems to be that you can restock all the Hardys you used after playing them.  I feel like it would most frequently be bought/played as a +actions provider in an otherwise terminal-heavy kingdom.

Marple
$3 - Action
+$2
Trash this.
Reveal any number of Victory cards from your hand. +$1 per Victory card revealed.
--
When you buy this, put your deck into your discard pile.

I am very confused by this card.  Why Victory cards?  Why trash this?  Why put your deck into your discard pile on purchase?  The decks that would seem to get the most benefit from it (Gardens especially) are probably the same ones that don't want to be buying one-shot cards.

Spade
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a Gold on top of your deck. Each other player gains a Silver.

Very weak.  I have to agree with Schlippy and others on this one: given the difficulty in gaining $6 over $5 in hand, it would not be wrongly priced if the "Each other player gains a Silver" were completely removed.  But then, it would be rather plain.

Bobbsey
$2 - Action
Trash this. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal an Estate. Trash the Estate. Discard the revealed cards.

I like the idea of a $2 Estate trasher as a kind of consolation prize when you get a 5/2 split on sets with good 4/3 cost cards, or on later turns when you somehow only to end up with $2 in play.  It feels like it could do just a tiny bit more, like +2$ or maybe even just +1$, to make it better.

Columbo
$3 - Action
Trash this card and gain a card costing up to $1 more than the cost of this card.
You may also trash a card from your hand in addition to this. If you do gain an additional copy of the card gained.

Neat idea here, an Upgrade/Workshop mix.  This seems reasonably priced - even with the self-trashing - even if it is only used to turn a copper into two silvers.  That's a nice uptick in deck strength by itself.  The first time it is played in a game might be to turn copper/estates into more Columbos to quicken the pace of the upgrading.

Dupin
$4 - Action
+$1
Trash this card. If you do, you may put your deck into your discard pile and trash up to four cards from it. After sorting through it, reshuffle your draw pile.

Ah, this was the other card that worried me and much more so.  This annihilates Estates/Curses/Ruins/unwanted Coppers with such ease that there seems to hardly be any strategy involved in it.  I think the price would have to be raised a lot.  $6? I might buy this over Gold without much thought.  $7?  Might be balanced there.

(Also, why the last line?  We would reshuffle the draw pile anyways.)

Rockford
$4 - Action-Attack
Each other player reveals their hand and trashes half their treasure cards (rounded down). Put all treasure trashed in this way into your hand.
Trash this card. Put a tax token on top of a kingdom supply pile.
--
Kingdom cards cost $1 more per tax token on that pile.

This can easily decimate an opponent's turn and - in multiplayer especially - give you enough money to buy a province without any effort.  Far, far too powerful.

Magnum
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and 3 other cards from your hand.

This an another card later have +cards followed by trashing, which lets them sift through your deck to find the cards you want to trash a little bit easier (without the problem, as in Dupin, of removing luck from the equation almost completely).  Especially given that this only draws 2 and forces you to trash 3 others, this seems weak at $4.

Fletcher
$2 - Action
Trash this and another card from your hand.  All cards cost $2 less this turn, but not less than $0.

Early game can help to knock out some Estates/Coppers while making cards a tiny bit easier to buy (not much better than a terminal silver in that regard).  Late game applications seem a bit dangerous given the forced trashing of another card; it needs to be drawn with junk to be at its best. 

Odd turn possibility: Grand Market then Kings Court with Fletcher.  It'll trash the rest of your hand, but gives you an instant two provinces (or another province and a Fletcher if you want to repeat the process).




More to come later!

[eHalcyon]

Disclaimer on earlier reviews -- one of them was mine.

OAM's point about Marple was something I missed.  It basically guarantees $6 in the next reshuffle.  That makes it quite comparable to Vault.  For $3, that might mean Marple is too strong.  I am not sure.

OAM also makes a good point about how Spade is largely outclassed by Governor, though topdecking Gold is nice.  Nonetheless, one-shot makes it quite weak.

Schlippy makes a good point about cards that specifically mention Estate.  Depending on what it does, such a card can become useless in a Shelters game.  Baron at least still provides +Buy and will gain an Estate for you, but Bobbsey basically does nothing.  I suppose it just becomes a one-shot Chancellor without the +$2... but that's basically nothing, eh?

I just realized that I misread Queen.  I thought it forced the trashing of EITHER a Curse or a Ruin.  But it actually says NEITHER.  Whoops!  Um, this makes it better.  Might be OK for a one-shot attack... but probably not.  Pillage doesn't stack.  This does, and it will work with KC.

Haha, Schlippy makes a good point about Alleyn and Ambassador.  As it is intended, I think what would happen is that you return it to the Supply and then everyone except for the player to your left gains it.  That is, you would gain it too.  Hilarious.

Holy smokes, just realized that the wording on Wolfe means that you could potential trash opponent's cards IN PLAY.  Say opponent plays Ambassador, hitting some random $4 card.  You choose to gain a Wolfe... and play it immediately... and now you can trash any number of cards in play.  It doesn't specify whose cards.  Your opponents cards are in play.  Hilarious.

Schlippy brings up a good point about the ambiguity on Blackie.  I assumed you would use the Ruins from your hand.  I think the perma-Duration effect is still too strong, either way.

Nice catch on Mason by Schlippy.  Rats can immediately end a pile too, though it's harder to set up.

I think people are overrating Rockford.

[Schneau]

Holy smokes, just realized that the wording on Wolfe means that you could potential trash opponent's cards IN PLAY.  Say opponent plays Ambassador, hitting some random $4 card.  You choose to gain a Wolfe... and play it immediately... and now you can trash any number of cards in play.  It doesn't specify whose cards.  Your opponents cards are in play.  Hilarious.

At first I was wondering what the heck you are talking about, but I think you have a good point with some major typos. I think you mean "Saboteur", not "Ambassador", and since Wolfe costs $2 it would have to hit a card costing $5. But, then yes, you could gain it on someone else's turn, and as worded could trash their in-play cards. I'm guessing if this won, we would change the text to something like "trash this together with any number of your cards in play..."

[zahlman]

I think you mean "Saboteur", not "Ambassador", and since Wolfe costs $2 it would have to hit a card costing $5.

? Saboteur lets you replace with cards costing up to $2 less.

[Schneau]

I think you mean "Saboteur", not "Ambassador", and since Wolfe costs $2 it would have to hit a card costing $5.

? Saboteur lets you replace with cards costing up to $2 less.

Wow, brain fart. Anyway, he did mean Saboteur, not Ambassador.

[Schneau]

I'm about to post my reviews, but I noticed that I think Morse is way broken, and wanted to put a separate post for those who don't read through the detailed reviews. Here's what I have to say about it:

Why the heck would you make this work on any pile? I could maybe see any supply pile, but any pile is just wacko. In fact, I was starting to like the card until the rules clarification. Even if it were only supply piles, there is a major problem where someone who was able to get one of these and play it on the Potion stack before anyone else had a Potion could ruin the game, since at that point they would be the only one able to buy Potions and Morses - they could then put Morse tokens on all the Victory cards, making it so that only they could buy them! Insanity! So, every game you would be forced to open Potion to avoid this scenario. Anyway, this card MAY be ok (and may be interesting) if it can only be played on Kingdom cards, but is broken otherwise.

So anyway, I actually like the general idea, but as worded (and rules-clarified) it is definitely broken and I would recommend against voting for it. But, the author should fix it up - it could actually be a fine card, especially with other Potions cards.

[Schneau]

Lots of crazy rules and possibly broken cards here. It's a hard category, so I don't really blame anyone. I made some comments below to the effect of, "oh, you have to own Expansion X to play with this card", which I now realize is probably fine most of the time, since you need Potions for other cards in the set anyway.

A major pet peeve of mine is on many of these cards - cards that return to the supply instead of being trashed when played. Most of the time, the only thing this does is make it so that pile can never run out, which IMHO, is BAD NEWS. If you notice, almost none of the official cards can return themselves or other cards to the supply (Ambassador is the only one I can think of). This fundamentally changes the game - games don't move toward an end when you're buying cards you can return. Maybe there's a mechanic-specific reason to return them to the supply, but not on most of the cards I've seen here. So, unless you have a good reason, don't do it! Just trash it instead, it will make the card much more appealing!

I have a different pet peeve that appears on a bunch of these cards, which is the text "that costs $x more than this card" (or with "less" instead of "more"). If your card costs $4 and x=1, why not just say "that costs up to $5." This wording is simpler and easier and they are almost always the same. Only use this phrasing if absolutely necessary, which is usually not true.

Anyway, done with the grouchy ramblings, on with the card discussions.

Poirot
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Place this on top of any supply pile.
--
(Rules clarification: When this is on top of a pile, this must be bought before any cards underneath.)

I sort of like this - it is a mini-Embargo that must be gained before other cards can be. It definitely needs more consideration for the rules - for starters, the rules clarification should probably say "gained" rather than "bought". Additionally, what happens if you gain some card that empties a third pile, and then put this on top of it - is the game over? How about if you gain the last Province by Governoring a Gold into it, and then play this on the Province pile - is the game over then? It seems sort of weird if the answer is "no", but maybe it is.

Holmes
$3 - Action
When you play [This Card], trash it.
Choose one: place any number of Treasure cards from your hand on your [This Card] mat; gain a Gold, placing it on your [This Card] mat; or place all cards on your [This Card] mat in your hand.
--
Setup: each player gets their own [This Card] mat if [This Card] is in play.  At the end of the game, return all cards on [This Card] mats to their owner's deck.

I think one of the main uses of this card would be to get Coppers out of your deck early, possibly to be brought back for a mega turn later. It feels weird having a one-shot card that has this effect, since you are forced to buy multiples to get any use. I think this card will usually be ignored - buying and playing 2 terminal $3 self-trashers will rarely be worthwhile for getting a Gold or saving other Treasures for later.

Marlowe
$5 - Action
Put your deck into your discard pile. Search your discard pile, reveal up to two cards costing up to $6 from your discard pile or hand and trash them. For each trashed card, gain a card costing at most $1 more than the trashed card. Then trash this card.
--
(Rules clarification: You are not restricted to either your hand or discard pile. You may choose to trash a card from your hand and a card from your discard pile.)

I don't know if this is strong enough to be a one-shot $5. It is like a Remake that can Remake from outside of your hand, but is "at most $1 more" and not "exactly $1 more". This might actually make the card worse, since you can't freely trash Coppers with it. Granted, not having to trash from your hand is nice, since it doesn't reduce your handsize. But, I don't think the advantage of upgrading non-hand cards makes up for the disadvantages of "at most" and being one-shot, especially to make this cost $5.

Brown
$4 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Gain a Victory card costing up to $6.
--
Worth 2 VP

Most of the time this will be a cheaper, gimped Duchy that you have to play to get the 3 VP. I'm guessing it's balanced, and I enjoy the simplicity, though it's bordering on boring. I'd normally probably vote for this, but I think this set already has enough Victory cards. (Though, I'm sure this would interact nicely with some of them...).

Hardy
$1 - Action
+$1
+1 Buy
Choose one: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Return this card to the supply.

I'm not a big fan of $1 cards nor supply piles that can't run out. That said, this card is probably pretty strong for a $1 one-shot. Basically, it will make it so you can buy one of these every time you play it. With any other +Buys on the board, there is no real reason not to pick one of these up with any extra buys you have. I think it's dangerous to have +Buys on a $1 card, even if it is a one-shot; there aren't even that many at $2 for the same reason.

Marple
$3 - Action
+$2
Trash this.
Reveal any number of Victory cards from your hand. +$1 per Victory card revealed.
--
When you buy this, put your deck into your discard pile.

This is probably too weak. Even having the same card that didn't trash itself, it would probably be mostly balanced, though maybe too strong for $3. This will usually at best give you +$4, which is pretty low for a one-shot $3.

Spade
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a Gold on top of your deck. Each other player gains a Silver.

This seems a lot like a Feast for Golds. I think giving the other players a Silver is a little too much of a nerf here. Compare to Governor, which can do it many times among other things.

Bobbsey
$2 - Action
Trash this. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal an Estate. Trash the Estate. Discard the revealed cards.

Hmm, an Estate trasher only. This is probably WAY weak, and would rarely get any use - probably only on boards with Treasure-only trashers AND with tons of +Actions AND other great engine parts.

Columbo
$3 - Action
Trash this card and gain a card costing up to $1 more than the cost of this card.
You may also trash a card from your hand in addition to this. If you do gain an additional copy of the card gained.

First of all, why does this say "up to $1 more than the cost of this card" instead of "up to $4"? 99% of the time these are the same, and in the edge cases where you've played Highways or Bridges (or are actually playing a Band of Misfits), why not reward it? I've seen this wording on a few other cards recently, and unless there's a good reason, it really annoys me. That said, this card is probably fine, and would be nice to open with in low-cost engines.

Dupin
$4 - Action
+$1
Trash this card. If you do, you may put your deck into your discard pile and trash up to four cards from it. After sorting through it, reshuffle your draw pile.

1. You won't have a draw pile if you have just discarded it. 2. It's referred to as your deck, not your draw pile. 3. This card is wicked strong. Like, probably one of the best $4 cards. Definitely too strong. And the self-trashing might actually help here, since it then doesn't clog you further.

Rockford
$4 - Action-Attack
Each other player reveals their hand and trashes half their treasure cards (rounded down). Put all treasure trashed in this way into your hand.
Trash this card. Put a tax token on top of a kingdom supply pile.
--
Kingdom cards cost $1 more per tax token on that pile.

A one-shot Thief that will often just net you a bunch of Coppers in your hand? Not a fan. The tax token idea itself is fine and interesting (and something that I have thought of before, as I'm sure others have as well). But, not a fan of it attached to the rest of this card.

Magnum
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and 3 other cards from your hand.

Probably a super strong opener, and never bought after that. Like Chapel. Except it must trash 3 cards. I want to like it, and it may be ok (though a very strong opener), but there can only be one Chapel.

Fletcher
$2 - Action
Trash this and another card from your hand.  All cards cost $2 less this turn, but not less than $0.

A one-shot super-Bridge without +Buy? I actually sort of like it! It would be difficult to pull off a mega turn with these, since they require trashing of another card. You'd need 4, plus some +Buys, plus lots of +Actions and +Cards, to get multiple Provinces. So, I don't think it's too strong for mega turns. As an opener, it is probably decent for trashing Estates and getting something for it, though unless you have +Buy with it it is just +$2 and trash a card. I like it!

Chan
$2 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Trash this card. Move the [This Card] token to the top of a non-[This Card] Supply pile.
--
Cards from the Supply pile with the [This Card] token have no effect when played. At the beginning of each player's Buy phase, that player can discard from their hand any number of cards from that pile for +$1 each, +$2 each instead if they are Kingdom cards.

It took me a while to grok this card, but I think I like it! It basically makes the supply pile with the token into a Silver, or a Copper if it is a non-Kingdom card. This could make weak (or no longer usable) cards stronger, or strong cards weaker. It would probably be good to have a rules clarification that this can be on top of an empty supply pile, but I see no problem there. Nice!

Wimsey
$2 - Treasure-Victory
Worth $2 and 0.5 VP.  When you play this, return it to the supply.
--
When you gain a Scout, you may gain two [This Card]s.
--
Setup: Add Scout as an extra Kingdom card.  There are 20 [This Card]s.

Umm what. What is this. I'm sure it's a joke, but I'll review it seriously because why not?

We've never seen a 0.5VP card before - I don't see any technical reason not to, so why not? This pile won't likely ever run out, with there being 20 of these that are returned when played. It's very weak for a $2 one-shot treasure, but the when-gain-Scout clause adds a bit of strength. Overall I'd say it's too weak, but maybe you could get enough of these to make Scout better?

Carter
$1 - Action
+1 Action
Return this card to the supply.
--
If you gain this card during your turn, you may return it to the supply immediately. If you do, each other player gains a [This Card].

I guess this is sort of what some people thought Curses did, except with a different card? I don't like how close it is to giving away a one-shot Ruined Village. I don't like the $1 price point - too easy to spam these or buy them with unused extra buys. Maybe this could work at $2 or $3, but I'm not sure.

Queen
$5 - Action-Attack
Trash this. You may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from your hand; if you do, +1 VP. Each opponent may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from his hand. If he does, he gains a Curse in hand; otherwise, he discards his hand.

Whoa there, that's some powerful one-shot Attackage! Though actually, it will usually be a weak card, since it may even help opponents through its trashing. This may get crazy in 4+ player games, since you usually don't have too many cards to trash. So, this has FBI, where it's way powerful if your opponent doesn't want to trash any cards from their hand (5 Provinces?), but is weak otherwise.

Tracy
$6 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you play this, trash it.  If you do, gain a Prize or a Gold.  You may put your deck in the discard pile.
--
You cannot buy this if you have any Copper in play.

A new prize-getter. Why not? It's price point is equivalent to Grand Market. Essentially, it's a delayed Prize or Gold. If you get a Gold, you might as well have gotten it in the first place. So, is $6 with no Copper a good price for a delayed Prize? I'm guessing probably not. Maybe Followers, maybe Trusty Steed, but I don't know. People have said in the past that more Prizes would be nice, and I agree, especially with this card! Anyway, probably not worthwhile. (Plus, requires you to own Cornucopia (or fake it)).

Campion
$3 - Action
+$1
At the start of Clean-up this turn, if the +$X gained from all Action cards in play is greater than the coins provided by Treasure cards in play, gain a Treasure card costing up to the sum of all +$X in play and coins provided by Treasures in play. Otherwise, gain an Action card costing up to the sum of all +$X in play and coins provided by Treasures in play.
--
When this is in play, instead of discarding it during Clean-up, trash it instead.

I think I get it? Basically, you get a Treasure costing your total money if you've played more Treasure, and an Action if you've played more Action money. I have to say, this could never fit on a card nicely, and could definitely use a shorter wording. Plus, I'm a bit meh about it anyway.

Vance
$P - Action-Plague
+1 Card
+1 Action
Gain a Curse.
The person to your left gains this card.
--
If you trash this card, discard a card.
When you buy this card, return it to the supply. Everyone else gains a copy.

Another buy-is-attack-with-this-card. Thing is, it's almost never worth playing - you get a curse, and one opponent gets this pseudo-curse. Not a fan.

Dover
$4 - Action-Attack
+$1
Return this card to the supply.
Choose one: +1 Card, +1 Action, each other player gains a Curse; or, +2 Cards, +1 Buy, each other player draws a card, then discards two.
--
When you gain or trash this, each other player gains a Copper.

Why return this to the supply? Why not trash it? I see no reason, besides to have a pile that will rarely be empty. The choose your own Attack is somewhat interesting, but maybe too strong. Other players gaining Copper when you gain is also too strong.

Alleyn
$4 - Treasure
Worth $2
Trash this card. Gain a Silver, and the player to your right gains a Gold.
--
When you would gain this, the player to your left gains this card instead, and only that player can gain this card.
--
(Rules clarification: The player to the left cannot have the player to HIS left gain this card, he is the sole person gaining the card. Reactions to card gains apply in this situation however, e.g. Watchtower. When this card is played, the original buyer of this card will gain the Gold, and the "player to the left" gains the Silver.)

Besides the non-obvious rules clarification, I really don't like how strong this is for the player to your left in 3+ player games. Basically a Silver, when other players don't get anything. I don't think this will usually be worth buying, especially at $4 - it's at best a way-delayed Gold that your left opponent gets a Silver for.

Shayne
$5 - Action
Trash this card. If you do, gain two action cards, the first to your hand, the second to the top of your deck. You cannot use this card to gain another copy of this card.

Hmmm, any two Action cards? I guess it's probably ok, though CRAZY strong with cards like King's Court and Goons and Grand Market. Without other good Actions, it's not worth getting, but with them it's pretty strong. I guess it's probably fine, but not a huge fan.

Hammer
$4 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a random card costing up to $2 more than this.

I don't know how this works. Both rules-wise and physically. I could see mixing together the randomizers somehow to decide. But, does this mean you could gain a Curse from this? Can you gain a card not in the game? Plus, why not just say "up to $6"? Anyway, this card has rules issues and in my interpretation is probably super-weak.

Charles
$2 - Action
Trash this card.  Reveal your hand.  If there are no duplicate cards in it, gain a copy of each Action or Treasure you revealed this way.

I guess you just wouldn't play the card if you have duplicates, right? I sort of like it! I could see it being way strong - what if you can draw your deck, which has been trashed down to no-duplicates, and then play this to basically double your deck? Definitely seems worrying, but at the same time I like the simplicity and the idea.

Wolfe
$2 - Treasure
Worth $1
When you play this, trash this together with any number of cards in play or from your hand costing $0.
--
When you gain this, you may play it immediately.

So, you can trash Coppers, Curses, and Ruins from hand or play, and can play this immediately when you gain it? It may be a bit strong of an opener, since you can get a good buy while trashing stuff. Still, it's probably not too OP, but may be. I dunno? It doesn't make me excited.

Beresford
$4 - Action
Choose one:
+2 Actions;
+$1, +1 Buy;
trash your hand.
--
When you gain this, set it aside; you may add it to your hand at the start of any of your future turns.
--
When you play this, return it to the supply.

I'm sort of dubious about a card that can be set asside when you buy it. Again, I also don't know why this is returned to the supply - games gotta end folks. Also, the actual actions it can perform are pretty weak, besides trashing your hand in some situations. A crappy Herbalist / Native Village / Chapel that you can choose to add to your hand at the beginning of your turn? Not a fan.

Warshawski
$3 - Action
+$1
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this, choose one: trash up to three cards from your hand; or +3 Cards; or gain a Spoils.

I like the idea of trashing the card giving the bonuses, not playing the card. That way, you can do some crazy shenanigans with trash for benefits, or can just self-trash. All the options seem pretty balanced. I'm a bit wary that it could be a really strong trashing opener; also wary that it requires you to own Dark Ages. But, I like it!

Withers
$3 - Action
+1 Action
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this card, set it aside. At the start of your next Buy phase, +1 Buy, +$3, and put this card in the trash.
--
(Rules clarifications: When you put this card in the trash after it was set aside, you are not trashing the card, so the "When you trash this card..." clause doesn't take effect.)

Same thing for this card as Warshawski about liking the bonuses on-trash. It's a little convoluted about putting the card in the trash instead of trashing it, but I guess that's what you have to do to get the money and buy if it is trashed on another player's turn. Most of the time, this will just be +1 Action, +1 Buy, +$3, which is in some ways close to an Action version of Spoils.

Blackie
$3P - Action-Looter
Gain a Ruins to your hand.
Set this card aside. If you do, place a Ruins on it.
Return them to your deck at the end of the game.
--
When you play the first action of your turn, play it as if your set-aside Ruins' texts were added to the bottom of the card in the order you decide.

This should probably also be type Duration. I've never been a fan of permanent durations, and this is no exception. I have to give props for the interesting use of Ruins, but this is probably too strong at almost every price point. Also, you'll have to own Alchemy and Dark Ages to play it.

Templar
$5 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Take an extra turn after this one.
This can't cause you to take more than two consecutive turns.
--
Worth 2 VP

Two consecutive turns, even one-shot, is hugely huge. I'm guessing much more than a $5 price point. Add on 2 VP if you don't get to use it and this card is OP.

Temple
$3 - Action
Name a card. Look through your discard pile and trash all copies of the named card.
Trash this card.

I think this, like many of the other "trash lots of cards" submissions here, has major fancy balance issues (FBI). You hit this in the first hand of your first shuffle? SOL. Your opponent gets his in his second hand of that reshuffle, with 3 Estates in his discard? You lose. Basically, it seems like a hard to balance and fancy Chapel, and as we said before, we only need one Chapel.

Falcon
[This Card]
$6 - Action
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
+$2
Trash this. If you do, each other player with 5 or more cards in hand draws a card, then passes a card from his hand to you.

Why does it say "[This Card]" - is that a rinkworks typo? This should definitely be an Attack card. Masquerade isn't Attack because it would cause weird things with the passing; this card doesn't have that issue. This is very strong, but is maybe fine for a $6 one-shot. Thing is, if everyone is trashed down, this is probably OP, and if not, then it's sort of meh since you get a bunch of junk. Anyway, these FBIs probably make it hard to balance, but on first look I don't see any fundamental flaws.

Drew
$3 - Action-Attack
+2 Cards
You may trash up to two cards from your hand.  If you trash at least one card in this way, every other player gains a Curse.
Return this card to the supply.

Why return to the supply instead of trash? See my comment up top. Anyway, this card is probably way too strong, even for a one-shot. It combines drawing, trashing, and Cursing all in one package? Yeah, I'm totally buying 2 of these as an opener ANY time it's on the board, which means it's way OP.

Mason
$5 - Action
+1 Action.
Trash this card. If you do, reveal an Action card from your hand and choose one: +coins equal to the card's cost and +1 buy OR gain a copy of the card and play it immediately.

First of all, I'm not quite sure what the "play it immediately" refers to - is that the card you just gained, or the card you revealed? I think it's the gained card, but this should be clarified, especially to avoid blue dog issues. As for the rest of the card: If you take the first option (with a higher-priced card), you are basically taking money from when you bought Mason and applying it to this turn instead. If you reveal a cheap card, you're a chump. If you take the second option, you are basically trading Mason for a copy of a card in your hand and playing that card immediately, so it's a lot like if you had just bought the other card in the first place (unless that card costs more than $5). But, you have to line up those cards. Of course, you also get +1 Action. Anyway, I think this card has two options that are actually weaker than they look, but it gives you options, which is nice. Of course, you can run out the Mason pile with 2 of these, but I'm not too worried about that - you could always put on a "reveal a non-Mason Action card" clause. Anyway, it's probably fine, but less strong than it appears.

Drummond
$4 - Action
+$1
--
Setup: At the start of the game, place the [This Card] token on the [This Card] supply pile.
--
Whenever a [This Card] is played, play it as if were a copy of the card with the [This Card] token on it. The played [This Card] is that card until it leaves play. Then, its owner gets +$1, sets [This Card] aside, and moves the [This Card] token to an Action card in the Supply. Trash the set aside [This Card]s at the end of the game.
--
(Rules clarification: The [This Card] token cannot be moved to an empty supply pile. If the copied supply pile runs out, [This Card] is still a copy of that card. The +$1, setting aside, and moving happens after the effects of the copied action.)

This has waaaaaay too many confusing rules issues and possible other issues. I'm not even going to go into it.

Moto
$2 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and a card from your hand. Name a card. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal the named card, and then trash it. Discard the other revealed cards.

This is a lot like a weaker Drew without the cursing. This card is probably ok as a one-shot trasher, though it's pretty strong. I have to say, I'm not really a fan of these one-shot trashers in general - they leave me with a bad taste in my mouth. This is probably often pretty weak (trash 2 Estates or later Curses or Coppers). I'm guessing it's ok, but I'm not a fan.

Bradley
$6* - Action
Trash this card and up to 4 cards from your hand. Gain 2 cards that together cost up to as much as the total cost in coins of all cards trashed this way (including this).
--
This costs $1 less for every copy of this card that is in the trash, but not less than $0.
--
(Special design considerations: This card is handled like a Prosperity card, so it increases the chances of playing with Platinum and Colonies if this is in the game.)

Umm, I don't think you can just say "this card is in Prosperity!" Other than that, sort of meh? The whole thing feels weird. The first time one of these is played, does it contribute $5 or $6 to it's own play? I'm guessing $5, since it's already in the trash. Since it costs a ton, it's not going to be good for early trashing. Later, you are likely to trash this and 4 cheap cards to get 2 mediocre or 1 good and one Copper. Too weird.

Monk
$2 - Action
Trash this. Trash a card from the supply that is not a Victory card.
+$1 per differently named card in the trash.

Most of the time I'm not a fan of trashing cards from the supply, but this one has reasons to do so. The problem is, in trash-friendly games, these will quickly produce TONS of money. Like, too much. So, it might be decently balanced and interesting at $4 (or maybe $3), but I don't think it will work at $2.

Silver
$6 - Action
You may choose an Action card from your hand. Play that card 4 times.
Trash this card as well as the card you chose.

Ummm, wat. I don't see any way of balancing this correctly without major playtesting. Too many FBI.

Quin
$5 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain up to 2 cards costing a total of 7. Put the cards on your deck.

I like the general idea here. I'm afraid it might not be that great most of the time, but be solid (probably not OP) other times. Since it sounds like the total has to be exactly 7, this usually rules out gaining Gold. So, you'll have to get 5/2 or 4/3, and rarely 7 or 6/1. It would be fun if there are good engine parts at these levels, but otherwise dull. I think I'd be more of a fan if it said "Gain exactly 2 cards costing up to a total of $7". That way, you could gain Gold and Copper, or two $3 cards, etc. It would larely be the same, but would probably be a little less situational. Anyway, I sort of like it!

Lanyard
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
Trash this card.  Gain 2 Tokens on your [This Card] mat.
--
At the beginning of any turn, remove any number of tokens from your [This Card] mat.  +1 Action per token removed.

So, free Villages on any turn you want? You basically get 3 Village uses out of this, but 2 are whenever you like. It's probably fine, but maybe too strong at $4 and should cost $5.

Spenser
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Choose one: Gain two cards costing up to $4 each; or gain three cards costing up to $3 each; or gain four cards costing up to $2 each.

This is pretty crazy strong on boards with really good stackable $2s (Fool's Gold, Squire, etc.). Also, it can give you 3 Silvers, which is also pretty strong. Anyway, probably is fine, but will be super-combo-tastic in certain games. Though, it doesn't get me excited, and it also makes me a bit worried about FBI.

Morse
$P - Action
Choose one: +$3; or +$P.
Trash this card. If you do, choose one: put a [This Card] token on any pile without one on it; or remove a [This Card] token from any pile with one on it.
Cards in piles with [This Card] tokens cost $P less and $3 more if it has a Potion in its cost; otherwise, it costs $P more and $3 less (but not less than $0).
--
(Rules clarification: If no piles have a [This Card] token on it, you must put a token on a pile. Eligible piles for [This Card] tokens include Supply piles, non-Supply piles such as Madman, the Black Market deck, the trash, and players' decks. For tokens on players' decks, the effect extends to that player's hand, play area, and discard pile. Once a card is removed from a [This Card]ed pile, its cost reverts to normal until placed in another pile with a [This Card] token.)

What the crazy. Why the heck would you make this work on any pile? I could maybe see any supply pile, but any pile is just wacko. In fact, I was starting to like the card until the rules clarification. Even if it were only supply piles, there is a major problem where someone who was able to get one of these and play it on the Potion stack before anyone else had a Potion could ruin the game, since at that point they would be the only one able to buy Potions and Morses - they could then put Morse tokens on all the Victory cards, making it so that only they could buy them! Insanity! So, every game you would be forced to open Potion to avoid this scenario. Anyway, this card MAY be ok (and may be interesting) if it can only be played on Kingdom cards, but is broken otherwise.

Stone
$0 - Action-Victory
Return this to the supply.
Worth -1 VP
--
When there are at least two [This Card]s in the supply, when you buy a card, you may pay $1 less than its current cost. If you do, put into your discard pile two [This Card]s from the supply.

Ugg, negative VP? Isn't that a Curse by another name (which is just as not sweet)? Also, just sort of weird. Pass.

[nopawnsintended]

Short on time, so I'm commenting selectively.

Poirot
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Place this on top of any supply pile.
--
(Rules clarification: When this is on top of a pile, this must be bought before any cards underneath.)

I like the idea of targeted obstruction, but I think this needs to be less invasive.  I have played with a similar-minded fan card that has features that I like better than this one.  This seems like it would either sit on games and not let them proceed, or never be used because the investment is too great.  I can't tell what would happen without playing with it.

Brown
$4 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Gain a Victory card costing up to $6.
--
Worth 2 VP

Simple.  I like simple.  This is Feast-like for Duchies and Dukes and Fairgrounds, oh my.  Seems worthy. I know how other people feel about adding more victory types, but I like victory dual type cards.  There need to be more to make Scout stand up to its potential.

Marple
$3 - Action
+$2
Trash this.
Reveal any number of Victory cards from your hand. +$1 per Victory card revealed.
--
When you buy this, put your deck into your discard pile.

A pile of cash for a pile of green.  Feels expensive to me, especially given that you can only play it once.

Spade
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a Gold on top of your deck. Each other player gains a Silver.

I don't think it needs the Silver externality.  Maybe get rid of "on top of your deck.  Each other player gains a Silver" and then I'm sold.

Bobbsey
$2 - Action
Trash this. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal an Estate. Trash the Estate. Discard the revealed cards.

An Estate hunter.  Interesting idea, but I like Estates.

Columbo
$3 - Action
Trash this card and gain a card costing up to $1 more than the cost of this card.
You may also trash a card from your hand in addition to this. If you do gain an additional copy of the card gained.

mini-Feast meets Talisman... sorta.  Not sure if I like it.

Rockford
$4 - Action-Attack
Each other player reveals their hand and trashes half their treasure cards (rounded down). Put all treasure trashed in this way into your hand.
Trash this card. Put a tax token on top of a kingdom supply pile.
--
Kingdom cards cost $1 more per tax token on that pile.

Seems strong, but I guess a one-shot Thief-Cutpurse attack needs to be.

Wimsey
$2 - Treasure-Victory
Worth $2 and 0.5 VP.  When you play this, return it to the supply.
--
When you gain a Scout, you may gain two [This Card]s.
--
Setup: Add Scout as an extra Kingdom card.  There are 20 [This Card]s.

I love it.  Draw into hand with Scout.  Gain a couple when you buy a Scout.  Guarantee that Scout is in the kingdom.  It is even an Estate replacement in the late game, and it opens the possibility of winning by half a point.  I can see why people think this is a joke (it's about making Scout better, after all), but even so, it seems like a fun way to make Scout better.

Queen
$5 - Action-Attack
Trash this. You may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from your hand; if you do, +1 VP. Each opponent may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from his hand. If he does, he gains a Curse in hand; otherwise, he discards his hand.

"otherwise, he discards his hand."  Not a fan of this.  I suppose you need something devastating for a one-shot attack, but ouch.

Tracy
$6 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you play this, trash it.  If you do, gain a Prize or a Gold.  You may put your deck in the discard pile.
--
You cannot buy this if you have any Copper in play.

Another prize gaining card at the same price as Grand Market.  That's quite a price to pay for a Prize.  Then, if you lose the race to the Prizes, you can get a Gold as a consolation.  I like it!

Dover
$4 - Action-Attack
+$1
Return this card to the supply.
Choose one: +1 Card, +1 Action, each other player gains a Curse; or, +2 Cards, +1 Buy, each other player draws a card, then discards two.
--
When you gain or trash this, each other player gains a Copper.

Seems like a lot of stuff going on... not sure where I'd start with this one.

Alleyn
$4 - Treasure
Worth $2
Trash this card. Gain a Silver, and the player to your right gains a Gold.
--
When you would gain this, the player to your left gains this card instead, and only that player can gain this card.
--
(Rules clarification: The player to the left cannot have the player to HIS left gain this card, he is the sole person gaining the card. Reactions to card gains apply in this situation however, e.g. Watchtower. When this card is played, the original buyer of this card will gain the Gold, and the "player to the left" gains the Silver.)

Odd.  Lots of stuff going on with this one.  I'm not sure I'd ever want to play this card.  Maybe need to have gain the Silver in hand with the +$2... I'm not sure.  I'd love to Salvage this for +$4, or upgrade it into a $5 cost card.... or just trash it... yeah, that would be fun.

Hammer
$4 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a random card costing up to $2 more than this.

Not a fan of deliberate randomness.  Maybe other people are.  Also, I don't see how this would pay off in expectation --> Copper, Curse, Estate, Duchy, Silver, [This Card] and Gold are all guaranteed to be gainable.  I don't know the distribution of card costs, but suppose that half are $4 or less.  Then, you get a lottery were you're more likely than not to gain a card costing 0 to 4, otherwise, you gain a card costing 5 or 6.  Not strong at all... I'd much rather have Feast.

Charles
$2 - Action
Trash this card.  Reveal your hand.  If there are no duplicate cards in it, gain a copy of each Action or Treasure you revealed this way.

Sort of interesting.  Menagerie for gaining cards... works for a one shot, I think.

Wolfe
$2 - Treasure
Worth $1
When you play this, trash this together with any number of cards in play or from your hand costing $0.
--
When you gain this, you may play it immediately.

Seems useful.  Won't trash Estates like Chapel will, but it doesn't have the opportunity cost of not being able to use the coppers early to buy better stuff while still trashing.  I like it!

Warshawski
$3 - Action
+$1
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this, choose one: trash up to three cards from your hand; or +3 Cards; or gain a Spoils.

I like the options on this.  I'd love to see how it plays.

Templar
$5 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Take an extra turn after this one.
This can't cause you to take more than two consecutive turns.
--
Worth 2 VP

A one-shot and better Outpost.  On balance, I like it.  I'm not sure it needs the 2 VP.... makes it seem more expensive to play it.

Drew
$3 - Action-Attack
+2 Cards
You may trash up to two cards from your hand.  If you trash at least one card in this way, every other player gains a Curse.
Return this card to the supply.

A mild reusable curser.  As much as I don't like Cursers, this one seems kind of cool to me.

Moto
$2 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and a card from your hand. Name a card. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal the named card, and then trash it. Discard the other revealed cards.

A directed trasher.  Seems OK.

Monk
$2 - Action
Trash this. Trash a card from the supply that is not a Victory card.
+$1 per differently named card in the trash.

Weird.  A supply card trasher with some reason to trash diversity.  The fact that this is one-shot makes game acceleration less of an issue.  I'd like to try this one out.

Silver
$6 - Action
You may choose an Action card from your hand. Play that card 4 times.
Trash this card as well as the card you chose.

I would like this one better if it were

Silver
$3 - Treasure
Worth $2

But, then it wouldn't fit the one-shot category.

Quin
$5 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain up to 2 cards costing a total of 7. Put the cards on your deck.

Cool idea.  Do you go $7/$0 or $3/$4, or somewhere in between?  Would be fun to try.

Spenser
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Choose one: Gain two cards costing up to $4 each; or gain three cards costing up to $3 each; or gain four cards costing up to $2 each.

Wow.  I can gain 4 Estates!  Where do I sign up?   Not sure how I feel about this one.

Morse
$P - Action
Choose one: +$3; or +$P.
Trash this card. If you do, choose one: put a [This Card] token on any pile without one on it; or remove a [This Card] token from any pile with one on it.
Cards in piles with [This Card] tokens cost $P less and $3 more if it has a Potion in its cost; otherwise, it costs $P more and $3 less (but not less than $0).
--
(Rules clarification: If no piles have a [This Card] token on it, you must put a token on a pile. Eligible piles for [This Card] tokens include Supply piles, non-Supply piles such as Madman, the Black Market deck, the trash, and players' decks. For tokens on players' decks, the effect extends to that player's hand, play area, and discard pile. Once a card is removed from a [This Card]ed pile, its cost reverts to normal until placed in another pile with a [This Card] token.)

Honestly, my brain is getting tired, and that's a lot of text.  Potion cost + lots of words + bulky rules clarification... and I'm not really interested in that kind of complexity.

Stone
$0 - Action-Victory
Return this to the supply.
Worth -1 VP
--
When there are at least two [This Card]s in the supply, when you buy a card, you may pay $1 less than its current cost. If you do, put into your discard pile two [This Card]s from the supply.

Fun idea.  If you get $5/$2, you could open with a Gold, two of these, and Chapel (if it is on the board).  These Stones aren't curses (but they're Victory type), so they'll interact with Silk Road, Scout(!!!!), and Crossroads.  Plus, the card is a semi-clogger.  This seems like a reasonable price to pay to get an optional cost reduction of $1 when you want it.

[eHalcyon]

Holy smokes, just realized that the wording on Wolfe means that you could potential trash opponent's cards IN PLAY.  Say opponent plays Ambassador, hitting some random $4 card.  You choose to gain a Wolfe... and play it immediately... and now you can trash any number of cards in play.  It doesn't specify whose cards.  Your opponents cards are in play.  Hilarious.

At first I was wondering what the heck you are talking about, but I think you have a good point with some major typos. I think you mean "Saboteur", not "Ambassador", and since Wolfe costs $2 it would have to hit a card costing $5. But, then yes, you could gain it on someone else's turn, and as worded could trash their in-play cards. I'm guessing if this won, we would change the text to something like "trash this together with any number of your cards in play..."

Oops, yes, I meant Sab.





I think people are not "getting" Hardy.  It actually isn't advisable to pick up a bunch of these without a plan.  It is never a cantrip, so they don't harmlessly fit into just any deck.

People are underestimating Marple (I did too).  As OAM pointed out, early game this almost guarantees $6.  Note that it provides +$2 on its own.  If the rest of your hand is Copper/Estate (very likely in the early game), that was a one-shot Vault for $3.  That's pretty strong, I think.



@Schneau

I think you read Campion incorrectly.  You get an Action if you used more Treasure and you get a Treasure if you used more virtual coin.

Vance is usually worth playing.  If it's a dead card either way, might as well bring your opponent down with you.  If you play it, it isn't dead -- it's a cantrip.  The Curse you gain is easier to trash since Vance has a trashing penalty.

Shayne actually isn't THAT crazy.  It can't gain itself and it won't activate multiple times with KC.  Giving you KC-GM on top is pretty scary though.  So it is kinda crazy.

On Charles, if you manage to remove all duplicates from your deck and still draw it, I think you deserve the deck doubling.  That scenario is not easy or fast enough to accomplish that it is game breaking.

I think Wolfe is totally OP.  Compare with Loan and Mint's on-gain.

Really, really good point about Morse.  I didn't think of that possibility before.

[GendoIkari]

I think Shayne is way too good. Even if it both the cards it gained just went to your discard, it would still be absolutely crazy on certain boards. 2 King's Courts (delayed 1 shuffle) for $5? Or Goons? Grand Markets? I would even buy this over Governor or Minion every time just to get 2 for the price of 1. And then with the in-hand / on-deck ability, that's just nuts. On any board with action "X", it's just about strictly better than X in functionality, since you can get X on top of your deck (only delayed 1 turn, if that).

[eHalcyon]

I think Shayne is way too good. Even if it both the cards it gained just went to your discard, it would still be absolutely crazy on certain boards. 2 King's Courts (delayed 1 shuffle) for $5? Or Goons? Grand Markets? I would even buy this over Governor or Minion every time just to get 2 for the price of 1. And then with the in-hand / on-deck ability, that's just nuts. On any board with action "X", it's just about strictly better than X in functionality, since you can get X on top of your deck (only delayed 1 turn, if that).

Hm, OK.  Shayne is crazy.

[popsofctown]

I'm curious whether Shayne is inspired by a similar card in the Dominion clone, Puzzle Strike.

If so, it's a rather poor port, in Puzzle strike, you have to skip your whole action phase to play it, and every deck is an engine deck, and it costs 6 (there's a guaranteed 9 cost available, but no topdecking the gains..)

[Schneau]

I think Shayne is way too good. Even if it both the cards it gained just went to your discard, it would still be absolutely crazy on certain boards. 2 King's Courts (delayed 1 shuffle) for $5? Or Goons? Grand Markets? I would even buy this over Governor or Minion every time just to get 2 for the price of 1. And then with the in-hand / on-deck ability, that's just nuts. On any board with action "X", it's just about strictly better than X in functionality, since you can get X on top of your deck (only delayed 1 turn, if that).

Hm, OK.  Shayne is crazy.

Also: Play Shayne, gain 2 Border Villages and 2 Shaynes, rinse and repeat. Even crazier if you have a Watchtower in hand. Basically, this card is OP with certain cards, and probably boring with most others.

[rinkworks]

Drummond
$4 - Action
+$1
--
Setup: At the start of the game, place the [This Card] token on the [This Card] supply pile.
--
Whenever a [This Card] is played, play it as if were a copy of the card with the [This Card] token on it. The played [This Card] is that card until it leaves play. Then, its owner gets +$1, sets [This Card] aside, and moves the [This Card] token to an Action card in the Supply. Trash the set aside [This Card]s at the end of the game.
--
(Rules clarification: The [This Card] token cannot be moved to an empty supply pile. If the copied supply pile runs out, [This Card] is still a copy of that card. The +$1, setting aside, and moving happens after the effects of the copied action.)

Some timing issues:  "The played [This Card] is that card until it leaves play. Then [many things]."  The "Then" implies that the [many things] don't happen until it leaves play.  +$1 is meaningless at that point.  It's also unclear why you would set them aside instead of just trashing them outright.

The author tells me (s)he botched the rules clarification.  I agreed to post a corrected clarification and leave it up to voters to determine how to take it into account.  The corrected clarification should read:

Whenever a Drummond is played, play it as if were a copy of the card with the Drummond token on it. Then, its owner gets +$1, sets Drummond aside, and moves the Drummond token to an Action card in the Supply. The played Drummond is the copied card until it leaves play.

[eHalcyon]

@rinkworks you might want to replace the name of the card with "Drummond" in that rules clarification.

[rinkworks]

@rinkworks you might want to replace the name of the card with "Drummond" in that rules clarification.

Oops.

[Grujah]

Appears I've submited too late

[JFugue]

Continuing onward.  (Again, disclaimer that one of the cards is mine)

Chan
$2 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Trash this card. Move the [This Card] token to the top of a non-[This Card] Supply pile.
--
Cards from the Supply pile with the [This Card] token have no effect when played. At the beginning of each player's Buy phase, that player can discard from their hand any number of cards from that pile for +$1 each, +$2 each instead if they are Kingdom cards.

This has some fun effects: It can be played on a victory card you know you have lots of to turn them into coppers.  (Better still, drop it on Curses!)  But it also has some not so fun effects: It can be played on Golds, and in a kingdom without good money from actions, that could drastically slow down the speed of the game.

The fact that this trashes itself makes me a little leery: it means that whoever plays the last Chan has final control over where the token lands for the rest of the game.  Although unlikely that all 10 copies of this card would be played, if it came to that point, all players might hold on to one last copy of Chan, not wanting to play it so they could save it for last.  Buying a card just to hold onto it for brinksmanship's sake seems like unfun gameplay.

Wimsey
$2 - Treasure-Victory
Worth $2 and 0.5 VP.  When you play this, return it to the supply.
--
When you gain a Scout, you may gain two [This Card]s.
--
Setup: Add Scout as an extra Kingdom card.  There are 20 [This Card]s.

I was half-tempted to make a one-shot silver (Worth $0 or $1) as my card for this contest.

As it is, I don't like that it gives .5 VP.  That just feels awkward.  If I can get over my feelings about it requiring a specific extra kingdom card, this doesn't seem so bad otherwise.

Carter
$1 - Action
+1 Action
Return this card to the supply.
--
If you gain this card during your turn, you may return it to the supply immediately. If you do, each other player gains a [This Card].

I can see this card really bringing the pace of a 2-player game down with an easy source of +buy.  (Hamlet?) The optimal play seems to be to get rid of all of them that you have, then buy as many as you can to toss them back to your opponent, a kind of mini-ambassador.  (If you get too many in hand, then you likely won't have the buys needed and your opponent could refill your deck with even more next time.) 

I think it's a reasonable card, especially in the early game, but in order to prevent it from dragging down the mid-game, it might need to trash itself.

Queen
$5 - Action-Attack
Trash this. You may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from your hand; if you do, +1 VP. Each opponent may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from his hand. If he does, he gains a Curse in hand; otherwise, he discards his hand.

This feels swingy, not quite as swingy as the "trash the top card of your deck" example that comes up, but possibly not far off.  Discarding an entire hand is brutal, regardless of whether the attack is one-shot or not, so this feels like a forced trashing of a card in each opponent's hand.

Tracy
$6 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you play this, trash it.  If you do, gain a Prize or a Gold.  You may put your deck in the discard pile.
--
You cannot buy this if you have any Copper in play.

Fairly short and simple.  I like the return of Prizes and the Grand Market style mechanic.

Campion
$3 - Action
+$1
At the start of Clean-up this turn, if the +$X gained from all Action cards in play is greater than the coins provided by Treasure cards in play, gain a Treasure card costing up to the sum of all +$X in play and coins provided by Treasures in play. Otherwise, gain an Action card costing up to the sum of all +$X in play and coins provided by Treasures in play.
--
When this is in play, instead of discarding it during Clean-up, trash it instead.

As others have mentioned, this feels overly complex and perhaps self-defeating, as it gives treasures to engine decks and actions to BM decks.

Vance
$P - Action-Plague
+1 Card
+1 Action
Gain a Curse.
The person to your left gains this card.
--
If you trash this card, discard a card.
When you buy this card, return it to the supply. Everyone else gains a copy.

Another "instead of buying, ambassador it to all other players" card, which then becomes a self-harming hot potato.  This seems like a card for spiteful players, and the fact that it punishes you even for trying to trash it just adds more spite to it.

Dover
$4 - Action-Attack
+$1
Return this card to the supply.
Choose one: +1 Card, +1 Action, each other player gains a Curse; or, +2 Cards, +1 Buy, each other player draws a card, then discards two.
--
When you gain or trash this, each other player gains a Copper.

I am confused as to why this is a one-shot card.   The option to choose between two attacks (with alternate personal bonuses) does not seem one-shot worthy so much as it seems high-cost worthy.

Alleyn
$4 - Treasure
Worth $2
Trash this card. Gain a Silver, and the player to your right gains a Gold.
--
When you would gain this, the player to your left gains this card instead, and only that player can gain this card.
--
(Rules clarification: The player to the left cannot have the player to HIS left gain this card, he is the sole person gaining the card. Reactions to card gains apply in this situation however, e.g. Watchtower. When this card is played, the original buyer of this card will gain the Gold, and the "player to the left" gains the Silver.)

This seems to be a one-shot card only quite sneakily: as far as the player on the left is concerned, barring special circumstances, this is just a silver.  It does however suffer a bit from influencing the player on your left too much and them having too much influence on you, to the exclusion of the other players at the table.  It's an interesting idea, I'm just not sure this is the right implementation.

Shayne
$5 - Action
Trash this card. If you do, gain two action cards, the first to your hand, the second to the top of your deck. You cannot use this card to gain another copy of this card.

Potentially very crazy in the presence of $7 actions or Potion cost actions.  It seems a little imbalanced in that one can just keep grabbing Shaynes and tossing them on top of your deck, so the player who picked up Shayne first will have a potentially strong advantage.

Hammer
$4 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a random card costing up to $2 more than this.

Buy a $4 card, trash it, have a chance to gain a copper or curse?  No thanks.

Charles
$2 - Action
Trash this card.  Reveal your hand.  If there are no duplicate cards in it, gain a copy of each Action or Treasure you revealed this way.

This seems incredibly powerful in combination with Warehouse, Secret Chamber, or Vault to guarantee its primary action takes effect.  Even without gaining victory cards, it still seems like it could grab a gold and several powerful $5 actions with relative ease.

Wolfe
$2 - Treasure
Worth $1
When you play this, trash this together with any number of cards in play or from your hand costing $0.
--
When you gain this, you may play it immediately.

I worry the "play when gained" effect will generate a lot of rules-headache questions.  And, like some of the other cards above, this seems a little too effective at getting rid of unwanted Coppers/Curses.  Mid-game, one could conceivably draw a large hand, get most of your deck's coppers into it, play them all for their money, trash them with a purchase of Wolfe (along with any curses or ruins that might be lingering), and still have enough left over to purchase a strong card.  It doesn't feel horribly overpowered, but still feels too strong. 

Beresford
$4 - Action
Choose one:
+2 Actions;
+$1, +1 Buy;
trash your hand.
--
When you gain this, set it aside; you may add it to your hand at the start of any of your future turns.
--
When you play this, return it to the supply.

This card confuses me somewhat.  I could see the benefit of a one-shot action splitter that you add to your hand when you need it; a kind of insurance when your strong terminals collide without another village present.  I can likewise see the benefit of the "Trash your hand" clause.  But why +$1, +1 Buy?  Just for the +buy when needed?

Seems reasonable.  Not too showy.  My main concern is that in attempting to do too much it prevents itself from doing one thing well.

Warshawski
$3 - Action
+$1
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this, choose one: trash up to three cards from your hand; or +3 Cards; or gain a Spoils.

A curious set of choices: Improve the quality of your deck, improve the quality of your current hand, or improve the quality of one later hand.  Seems decent.

Withers
$3 - Action
+1 Action
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this card, set it aside. At the start of your next Buy phase, +1 Buy, +$3, and put this card in the trash.
--
(Rules clarifications: When you put this card in the trash after it was set aside, you are not trashing the card, so the "When you trash this card..." clause doesn't take effect.)

This card appears to be twisting itself to meet the requirements of this challenge.  Otherwise, not a bad card though.

Blackie
$3P - Action-Looter
Gain a Ruins to your hand.
Set this card aside. If you do, place a Ruins on it.
Return them to your deck at the end of the game.
--
When you play the first action of your turn, play it as if your set-aside Ruins' texts were added to the bottom of the card in the order you decide.

An interesting idea to tie in with the Alchemy action-heavy theme.  It might even be balanced since it only effects the first action you play on your turn.  Would it still be balanced if one were to remove all references to Ruins and instead just declare that it should give +1 card or +1 action etc. to the first action played?

Although Blackie does set itself aside like Island, since it still impacts your future turns, it seems an odd man out in this challenge.

Templar
$5 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Take an extra turn after this one.
This can't cause you to take more than two consecutive turns.
--
Worth 2 VP

The victory part seems tacked on.  Otherwise, seems fairly reasonable to me.

Temple
$3 - Action
Name a card. Look through your discard pile and trash all copies of the named card.
Trash this card.

From a balance perspective, it seems a more balanced "targeted deck trasher" than some of the other cards suggested here.  One has to draw it with certain cards already in the discard pile in order for it to be effective.  Without any cards in your discard pile, there's no point to play this whatsoever.

Falcon
[This Card]
$6 - Action
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
+$2
Trash this. If you do, each other player with 5 or more cards in hand draws a card, then passes a card from his hand to you.

A quirky masquerade variant?  Not sure what the presence of extra cards and money is supposed to do here.  The actions makes sense: gives you a chance to play the actions you may gain from other player's hand.  I suspect, most of the time, playing this will earn you a lot of junk; might be a good card to play on your last turn, just to pinch away a last few coins or grab some Estates.  Otherwise, I am not sure that I would buy it.

Drew
$3 - Action-Attack
+2 Cards
You may trash up to two cards from your hand.  If you trash at least one card in this way, every other player gains a Curse.
Return this card to the supply.

In contrast, this one seems to be a straight-forward ambassador variant.  Slightly more flexibility in getting rid of cards, more painful junk given to the opponent, plus drawing to make it more likely you have the cards you want to get rid of in hand.  I agree with what another commenter said that it seems one would want to purchase two of these at the start of the game, but I am not sure that's bad.  Double-ambassador is a fairly strong opening, but in order for Drew to be as punishing to an opponent's deck, you'd have to keep buying it on each turn (and not do anything else).  Perhaps under-priced?

Mason
$5 - Action
+1 Action.
Trash this card. If you do, reveal an Action card from your hand and choose one: +coins equal to the card's cost and +1 buy OR gain a copy of the card and play it immediately.

The first option seems wonky. It is only particularly strong if you trash a high-cost card, but in general you don't want to do that (Witch/Sea Hag after the curses run out may be an exception).  The latter effect seems better, but would the card played immediately consume an action?  If not, then it acts like a neat Throne Room variant; if so, then it seems to be a odd Workshop variant.

Drummond
$4 - Action
+$1
--
Setup: At the start of the game, place the [This Card] token on the [This Card] supply pile.
--
Whenever a [This Card] is played, play it as if were a copy of the card with the [This Card] token on it. The played [This Card] is that card until it leaves play. Then, its owner gets +$1, sets [This Card] aside, and moves the [This Card] token to an Action card in the Supply. Trash the set aside [This Card]s at the end of the game.
--
(Rules clarification: The [This Card] token cannot be moved to an empty supply pile. If the copied supply pile runs out, [This Card] is still a copy of that card. The +$1, setting aside, and moving happens after the effects of the copied action.)

Overall a little too complicated, also too slow.  It takes two plays of Drummond to turn it into a card you really want, but at that point, it seems like you would have been better served building up your deck and just buying the card outright.

Moto
$2 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and a card from your hand. Name a card. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal the named card, and then trash it. Discard the other revealed cards.

Seems just a little too powerful for $2.  Again, as targeted discards go, this might not be that bad. 

Bradley
$6* - Action
Trash this card and up to 4 cards from your hand. Gain 2 cards that together cost up to as much as the total cost in coins of all cards trashed this way (including this).
--
This costs $1 less for every copy of this card that is in the trash, but not less than $0.
--
(Special design considerations: This card is handled like a Prosperity card, so it increases the chances of playing with Platinum and Colonies if this is in the game.)

Neat cost reduction mechanic.  Seems perhaps a little expensive.  Yes, it works like Forge and even has some benefits to it that Forge does not, but since it is a one-shot card, it feels like it needs to be priced lower in order to be viable.

Monk
$2 - Action
Trash this. Trash a card from the supply that is not a Victory card.
+$1 per differently named card in the trash.

Trashing from the supply?  Interesting, but again, slow.  You have to have played several of these in order to make them strong enough to be worth the one-shot nature of them.  Might gain a lot of strength in a kingdom with Workshop.

Silver
$6 - Action
You may choose an Action card from your hand. Play that card 4 times.
Trash this card as well as the card you chose.

4 times!  Yeah, that seems strong enough that I don't know if this is balanced even with the one-shot nature of it.  This plus any cursers will drain the Curse pile without a problem. 

Quin
$5 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain up to 2 cards costing a total of 7. Put the cards on your deck.

Why not just "Gain a card costing up to $7"? Most of the time, I would wager, that's how it would be used

Lanyard
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
Trash this card.  Gain 2 Tokens on your [This Card] mat.
--
At the beginning of any turn, remove any number of tokens from your [This Card] mat.  +1 Action per token removed.

This feels much too powerful as is.  If the 2 tokens were dropped to 1 and the cost upped to $5, I think this would be better balanced. 

Spenser
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Choose one: Gain two cards costing up to $4 each; or gain three cards costing up to $3 each; or gain four cards costing up to $2 each.

In many kingdoms, this would just be used to nab 3 Silvers.  Is that worth the cost of this card?

Morse
$P - Action
Choose one: +$3; or +$P.
Trash this card. If you do, choose one: put a [This Card] token on any pile without one on it; or remove a [This Card] token from any pile with one on it.
Cards in piles with [This Card] tokens cost $P less and $3 more if it has a Potion in its cost; otherwise, it costs $P more and $3 less (but not less than $0).
--
(Rules clarification: If no piles have a [This Card] token on it, you must put a token on a pile. Eligible piles for [This Card] tokens include Supply piles, non-Supply piles such as Madman, the Black Market deck, the trash, and players' decks. For tokens on players' decks, the effect extends to that player's hand, play area, and discard pile. Once a card is removed from a [This Card]ed pile, its cost reverts to normal until placed in another pile with a [This Card] token.)

The rules clarification only makes things murkier.  I think it would work much better if it just affected supply piles.  But then, it's an interesting effect.  Without a consistent way of getting potions into your hand, though, I am not sure it would be very effective.

Stone
$0 - Action-Victory
Return this to the supply.
Worth -1 VP
--
When there are at least two [This Card]s in the supply, when you buy a card, you may pay $1 less than its current cost. If you do, put into your discard pile two [This Card]s from the supply.

Short, simple, neat.

[Polk5440]

You know rinkworks, I thought I had a great system for finding people's comments on specific cards: show all comments then search for the card name. But with card names like Silver and Chan, that is not working out so well this time. 

[Schneau]

You know rinkworks, I thought I had a great system for finding people's comments on specific cards: show all comments then search for the card name. But with card names like Silver and Chan, that is not working out so well this time. 

I had the same issue! Chan was especially bad.

[yuma]

You know rinkworks, I thought I had a great system for finding people's comments on specific cards: show all comments then search for the card name. But with card names like Silver and Chan, that is not working out so well this time. 

I had the same issue! Chan was especially bad.

Just add spaces to both sides of chan in the search and problem is solved, not as easy of a fix for silver though...

[Schneau]

You know rinkworks, I thought I had a great system for finding people's comments on specific cards: show all comments then search for the card name. But with card names like Silver and Chan, that is not working out so well this time. 

I had the same issue! Chan was especially bad.

Just add spaces to both sides of chan in the search and problem is solved, not as easy of a fix for silver though...

Doesn't work - there isn't a space after Chan if you copied the full cards, just a new line.

[yuma]

You know rinkworks, I thought I had a great system for finding people's comments on specific cards: show all comments then search for the card name. But with card names like Silver and Chan, that is not working out so well this time. 

I had the same issue! Chan was especially bad.

Just add spaces to both sides of chan in the search and problem is solved, not as easy of a fix for silver though...

Doesn't work - there isn't a space after Chan if you copied the full cards, just a new line.

blast!

[Polk5440]

So, I am concerned that a few of the cards will break when Throne Roomed or King's Courted because of a lack of an "If you do" clause giving the effect only if the card is trashed. Since this is an easy fix we can make to the wording of a card if it wins, I will ignore these problems when voting. 

"Feasts"

Brown
$4 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Gain a Victory card costing up to $6.
--
Worth 2 VP

Nice and simple. Seems balanced, and goes nicely with a VP theme for the set. However, this is very much a new Victory card, rather than a card that interacts with Victory cards. I would rather have the latter.

Quin
$5 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain up to 2 cards costing a total of 7. Put the cards on your deck.

I also like Quin. It combines some existing mechanics in a new and interesting way.

I agree with GendoIkari that Shayne is way to good -- and I think there is no price which would make it work. I also don't like Hammer (Random? Just put Feast in play instead, please) or Spenser (too many kingdoms break it).


Trash Other Cards for Benefit

Marlowe
$5 - Action
Put your deck into your discard pile. Search your discard pile, reveal up to two cards costing up to $6 from your discard pile or hand and trash them. For each trashed card, gain a card costing at most $1 more than the trashed card. Then trash this card.
--
(Rules clarification: You are not restricted to either your hand or discard pile. You may choose to trash a card from your hand and a card from your discard pile.)

Nice and simple in concept even though it takes a block of text to explain. I like it.

Bradley
$6* - Action
Trash this card and up to 4 cards from your hand. Gain 2 cards that together cost up to as much as the total cost in coins of all cards trashed this way (including this).
--
This costs $1 less for every copy of this card that is in the trash, but not less than $0.
--
(Special design considerations: This card is handled like a Prosperity card, so it increases the chances of playing with Platinum and Colonies if this is in the game.)

I like the idea, but I think I like Quin better.

Monk
$2 - Action
Trash this. Trash a card from the supply that is not a Victory card.
+$1 per differently named card in the trash.

I like the idea, but I think it's better implemented in the DA card Forager.

Silver
$6 - Action
You may choose an Action card from your hand. Play that card 4 times.
Trash this card as well as the card you chose.

I like this a lot, but I this is one of the cards I feel would benefit from an "if you do" clause after trashing before playing a card 4 times.

I just don't care for Columbo (too similar to Carpenter).

Cards that just Trash Other Cards

Magnum
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and 3 other cards from your hand.

Nice, simple, balanced. And boring.

Moto
$2 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and a card from your hand. Name a card. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal the named card, and then trash it. Discard the other revealed cards.

A little more exciting. Might be a little strong. Not the best card submitted, though.

Bobbsey would be bad in DA games. Dupin seems scary strong. Wolfe should probably read "your cards in play" and seems strong. Temple is swingy and strong.

One-Time Benefit

These are cards where you get a one-time benefit that does not involve gaining other cards or trashing other cards as the primary intent.

Warshawski
$3 - Action
+$1
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this, choose one: trash up to three cards from your hand; or +3 Cards; or gain a Spoils.

I like this. Simple, easy, and interesting choices.

Templar
$5 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Take an extra turn after this one.
This can't cause you to take more than two consecutive turns.
--
Worth 2 VP

I like the idea of taking another turn. This card seems under-priced, though -- I'm not sure why one should be allowed to open with it -- and I'm not sure why it needs the VP.

Mason
$5 - Action
+1 Action.
Trash this card. If you do, reveal an Action card from your hand and choose one: +coins equal to the card's cost and +1 buy OR gain a copy of the card and play it immediately.

This is one of my favorites submitted even though it has a couple of issues. Shouldn't be allowed to reveal Mason, for instance.

Beresford Maybe should be a permanent duration? Why return to the supply? Not for me. Withers should be a duration. Falcon should be an attack. Neither is a card I want to play.

Other Cheapo Cards

Hardy
$1 - Action
+$1
+1 Buy
Choose one: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Return this card to the supply.

I agree that even for a one-shot it seems too good; especially with the return to the supply part. I suspect too many kingdoms would just be broken with this card. Nice and simple, though.

Wimsey
$2 - Treasure-Victory
Worth $2 and 0.5 VP.  When you play this, return it to the supply.
--
When you gain a Scout, you may gain two [This Card]s.
--
Setup: Add Scout as an extra Kingdom card.  There are 20 [This Card]s.

I am surprised more cards didn't try to pair up with existing cards to get around rinkworks's restriction of submitting only one card. I particularly like the idea of pairing up with a weak card and giving it new life. I like this card and think it would be fun, add interesting play, adds a card designed to combo with Victory -- Scout --, and is great in this set to go with the Victory card theme, which makes Scout more likely to be useful, anyway. It also breaks a design rule that DA didn't break: the use of integers only on cards!

Fletcher
$2 - Action
Trash this and another card from your hand.  All cards cost $2 less this turn, but not less than $0.

Stone
$0 - Action-Victory
Return this to the supply.
Worth -1 VP
--
When there are at least two [This Card]s in the supply, when you buy a card, you may pay $1 less than its current cost. If you do, put into your discard pile two [This Card]s from the supply.

Fletcher and Stone have a similar cost reduction idea. I like Stone a lot better for balance reasons. I am quite confident Fletcher is not balanced. KC & TR problems (e.g. GM-KC-Fletcher) can be fixed with an "if you do clause," but then the benefit (mega cost reduction and trashing!) is just too good on too many boards, regardless. I also think Stone does a better job of dealing with the need of this card for some kind of plus buy -- you don't need an extra buy to use the ability! This makes its use more consistent across different kingdoms. And you get the ability right away. It seems like some people weren't understanding why the card would ever be used: to me, Stone allows you to apply a Cache-like ability to any card in the kingdom. Cache gives you a Gold for $1 less at the cost of two permenently clogging Coppers, while Stone lets you pick up any card for $1 less at the cost of gaining two temporarily clogging Curses. No end game issues of picking up a $7 Province, because you get minus VP to balance it out. It gives you an option of a $7 4VP card or a $10 8VP late in Colony games, if you really need it. Returning to the supply makes sense here so you can use the ability more than 4 times per game (since it's a VP card, there are only 8 in the supply for 2 players). Combos with Scout. I like Stone a lot.

On another note, I don't like what Carter would do to games. Seems too cheap. This should be an attack because of the way it junks up others' economies. Kind of appropriately named, though.

Dislikes

None of the cards requiring potions, new tokens, or new mats strikes my fancy this time. Sorry. That means no go for Holmes, Vance, Blackie, Drummond, Lanyard (though I do think the set could benefit from another Village, this isn't it), or Morse.

I just don't care for any of the cards that have players gain Treasure this time around. So no votes for Spade (Re: One Armed Man: bad Governor, indeed!), Rockford, Tracy (Seems way too dangerous to vote for without playtesting -- could be a more swingy, unbalanced Tournament; and who wants that? In practice, I suspect it will play just like Tournament since the Gold gain is not much of a consolation prize at all -- you could have just bought a Gold with $6, instead), Campion (too much text and bookkeeping to decipher your benefit), or Alleyn.

I also don't like the attacks. The attacks that wipe out other players' turns are kind of like Possession, right? And none of these cards are priced that high. I don't care for Rockford, Queen (disappointing for the player if opponents trash; disappointing for the opponents if they don't), Vance, or Dover or Drew (even as one-shots, they just seems too strong -- and they go back to the supply to haunt you agian another day? Yuck.).


Some Selfish Analysis

I like the idea behind Marple, but it's unbalanced and I have a card with a much better version of the mechanic I have been holding onto, just waiting for the right time to enter it! So I won't vote for this.

The two cards that "block," [/b]Poirot[/b] and Chan are interesting, but like with Marple, I have a much better, play-tested version I am just waiting to submit at the right time. So I won't vote for this, and I would encourage others to be open to a better version of them in the future.

Also, I submitted a card to the contest.

[eHalcyon]

I also don't like the attacks. The attacks that wipe out other players' turns are kind of like Possession, right?

Possession doesn't wipe out other players' turns.  It just lets you take an extra turn using their deck.  Sometimes Possession steals away a good hand, but it is neutral on average.  This is why Possession is not classified as an Attack.

Amb and Masq notwithstanding.

[zahlman]

So, I am concerned that a few of the cards will break when Throne Roomed or King's Courted because of a lack of an "If you do" clause giving the effect only if the card is trashed. Since this is an easy fix we can make to the wording of a card if it wins, I will ignore these problems when voting. 

"Feasts"

It seems worth noting that Feast itself does not have an "If you do" clause.

[Polk5440]

So, I am concerned that a few of the cards will break when Throne Roomed or King's Courted because of a lack of an "If you do" clause giving the effect only if the card is trashed. Since this is an easy fix we can make to the wording of a card if it wins, I will ignore these problems when voting. 

"Feasts"

It seems worth noting that Feast itself does not have an "If you do" clause.

Yeah, that comment was meant to be just a general comment, not necessarily reflecting on the "feast" cards. I really had in mind Silver, some of the attacks, and a cost reduction card.

[Polk5440]

I also don't like the attacks. The attacks that wipe out other players' turns are kind of like Possession, right?

Possession doesn't wipe out other players' turns.  It just lets you take an extra turn using their deck.  Sometimes Possession steals away a good hand, but it is neutral on average.  This is why Possession is not classified as an Attack.

Amb and Masq notwithstanding.

I was thinking in terms of power and thinking the discard everything attacks are under-priced. Possession lets you take your turn and then another turn using your opponent's deck. Making your opponent discard his whole hand usually means they can't do anything (Wharfs in play are a big exception), and you get to take another turn with your deck. So in a two player game, Possession gives you 2 turns, one with your deck and one with another, and attacks that make opponents discard entire hands give you two turns with your deck. Seems pretty equal in power to me to a first order. But these are one shots, so maybe being cheaper is okay....

On the point you brought up, I actually think Possession should be an attack because it does hurt your opponent on average by the way you play his cards: you may be able to remove cards from his deck, trigger a bad reshuffle, or otherwise make the top of his deck worse. Possession would be purchased a lot less often, though, if it could be countered easily by Moat or Lighthouse.

[Schneau]

I also don't like the attacks. The attacks that wipe out other players' turns are kind of like Possession, right?

Possession doesn't wipe out other players' turns.  It just lets you take an extra turn using their deck.  Sometimes Possession steals away a good hand, but it is neutral on average.  This is why Possession is not classified as an Attack.

Amb and Masq notwithstanding.

I was thinking in terms of power and thinking the discard everything attacks are under-priced. Possession lets you take your turn and then another turn using your opponent's deck. Making your opponent discard his whole hand usually means they can't do anything (Wharfs in play are a big exception), and you get to take another turn with your deck. So in a two player game, Possession gives you 2 turns, one with your deck and one with another, and attacks that make opponents discard entire hands give you two turns with your deck. Seems pretty equal in power to me to a first order. But these are one shots, so maybe being cheaper is okay....

On the point you brought up, I actually think Possession should be an attack because it does hurt your opponent on average by the way you play his cards: you may be able to remove cards from his deck, trigger a bad reshuffle, or otherwise make the top of his deck worse. Possession would be purchased a lot less often, though, if it could be countered easily by Moat or Lighthouse.

The difference between Possession and discard-everyones'-cards is that you can easily pin people if you can have them discard all their cards. This is no fun. Possession, even if you KC it, gives you a turn eventually - pins do not.

[Polk5440]

Oh, gosh! That makes it even worse, doesn't it?

[Schneau]

Oh, gosh! That makes it even worse, doesn't it?

If by "it" you mean attacks that can potentially make everyone discard all their cards, then yes, they are definitely worse than Possession.

[PenPen]

I'll be posting my quickie thoughts below. Sorry that I'm unable to blockquote on this, I was typing my thoughts (for voting) in Notepad and then kept on typing the whole thing. And I'm not too familiar with the cards from newer expansions. So apologies if I can't tell whether it's a variant of some other card.

Also one of the cards here is mine.

Poirot - Like this idea, pretty interesting.
Holmes - You really need to stack up on these for a megaturn, but gaining a Gold and putting it on the mat...not sure.
Marlowe - Seems too powerful since you can search for two different cards to trash.
Brown - Trash this for a Nobles/Harem or Duchy, maybe? Decent but not interesting enough.
Hardy - Too many functions for a $1 card
Marple - Awesome if your hand is stuffed with victory cards. Not sure...
Spade - Seems okay. You do get a Gold on your next turn, but may be able to do this on $4?
Bobbsey - This card is like a Terminator for Estates. It may also mean that you'll also be discarding a lot of useful cards if you play it, but at this cost, you can't really complain.
Columbo - Looks fine, not too sure of the second part though.
Dupin - Trash up to 4 cards that I choose? I suppose this is ok.
Rockford - Feels too powerful to me for a $4 card.
Magnum - Simple and may hurt your hand if you're unlucky. I'm ok with that.
Fletcher - If you can stack this like a KC or TR, or an engine, it feels broken.
Chan - Engine breaker, money breaker. I know there's only 1 token but I no likey.
Wimsey - Not sure if serious, but at least there's no problems of draw games if this is in the game!
Carter - Looks good for a $1 card.
Queen - This hurts so much since it either means the whole hand is discarded or trashing an otherwise useful card into a Curse. Too powerful.
Tracy - I suppose this is okay, but at $6 I would prolly just get the gold directly instead of this.
Campion - Feels complex, and what happens if I play a Coppersmith (or multiples)? Also swingy.
Vance - Feels like a plague that spreads out. One thing for certain is that this supply pile will run empty real quick once a player got a copy.
Dover - Multi-functional attack that pretty much does something bad to other players once it's involved. Not sure if like.
Alleyn - Interesting idea.
Shayne - I suppose this is okay, it also means I can gain ANY action card of any combinations? If there's two really awesome cards like KC, I'd trash this asap and get them. Really depends on the board.
Hammer - A random card doesn't feel right. Also this also means a random card up to $6...that's a lot of cards.
Charles - I like this but at $2 it's too low for my liking.
Wolfe - Copper/Curse killer I guess, you might need just 1 copy early to clear out your Coppers or Curses later on.
Beresford - Pretty flexible card made by the set aside section of the card. I think that probably would worth more than $4.
Warshawski - Feels good.
Withers - I think you can call this an Action-Duration? I can't tell if +$3 next turn for $3 is the right cost. I think it could be more expensive.
Blackie - I really like the concept (since I had a similar one from the Cursed Village thread). This also makes Ruins go away from the deck.
Templar - VP feels tacked on. I think it's ok otherwise.
Temple - Pretty simple. I like.
Falcon - Wha...this card is too good.
Drew - $3 for a +2 card and curses for other guys is too cheap.
Mason - I like this one.
Drummond - So is this a +$2 card? It feels weird. Also I find it hilarious if the Drummond token is put on the Drummond pile.
Moto - Feels similar to a card up there.
Bradley - I like this idea, but not sure how it really works in play. If I trash a Province I can replace it with another Province or a Colony, and trigger a faster endgame?
Monk - This feels pretty strong in a heavy trashing game.
Silver - King's Court with Red Bull, getting wings that last for a second and then falling off a cliff immediately afterwards. Feels a bit too powerful.
Quin - This limits my combinations (probably intentional). So if I get a Gold, I'm forced to find a $1 card that is probably non-existant in the game. I might be able to get two decent action cards, or maybe a Silver and an action card.
Lanyard - I think I really like this card.
Spenser - I'm not sure if this is too powerful or not. I think it is, but this needs to be playtested.
Morse - I...am confused.
Stone - This looks pretty intriguing.

[Kirian]

Results!!  My breath is bated.

[nopawnsintended]

Results!!  My breath is bated.

Your post got me all excited, then I saw that it wasn't the results, but a call for results.  *sigh*

[popsofctown]

I'm sure everyone has voted already.  Would Charles have been better at 3$ instead of 2$?  I figured you can't open it 5/2, and I didn't feel too concerned about 4$ +1 buy double purchases of it, so it could be okay at 2 as a "Do you want this at all" question.  It'd be fine at 3$ though, or 4.

Feast would be a much more interesting card at 2-3$, imo.

[rinkworks]

The results are in!  As a reminder, here was the objective for this challenge:

Create a one-shot card.  This is a card that trashes itself, returns itself to its pile, or sets itself aside permanently when played.  The card must always do this when played; it can't, for example, only trash or return itself under certain circumstances, or if the player chooses a particular option.  You may only submit a single card -- that is, you can't submit multiple cards that work together (such as Pillage and Spoils).

You may not include an event clause that undoes the effect of the trashing/returning.  For example, "When you trash this, gain a copy of this card from the trash."

Let's not delay.  Your winner is....


#1 - Mountain Pass by eHalcyon with 18 points (Fletcher)
$2 - Action
Trash this and another card from your hand.  All cards cost $2 less this turn, but not less than $0.


It was a close one, but eHalcyon ekes out the win by a single point.  It's a one-shot Bridge-type card that also trashes.  Without +Buy, it's a one-shot Silver with light trashing; late in the game, you can perhaps put together a megaturn, although getting all the pieces in place is a touch tricky since you have to have a card in hand to sacrifice to it.

The rest of the ballot:


#2 - Thanksgiving by Tdog with 17 points (Quin)
$5 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain up to 2 cards costing a total of 7. Put the cards on your deck.

#3 - Diplomat by Kirian with 15 points (Warshawski)
$3 - Action
+$1
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this, choose one: trash up to three cards from your hand; or +3 Cards; or gain a Spoils.

#4 - Foundry (1) by Archetype with 12 points (Magnum)
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and 3 other cards from your hand.

#5 (tie) - Loan Shark by Polk5440 with 10 points (Stone)
$0 - Action-Victory
Return this to the supply.
Worth -1 VP
--
When there are at least two Loan Sharks in the supply, when you buy a card, you may pay $1 less than its current cost. If you do, put into your discard pile two Loan Sharks from the supply.

#5 (tie) - Full House by popsofctown with 10 points (Charles)
$2 - Action
Trash this card.  Reveal your hand.  If there are no duplicate cards in it, gain a copy of each Action or Treasure you revealed this way.

#7 (tie) - Sparkly Vampire by Bella Cullen with 9 points (Tracy)
$6 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you play this, trash it.  If you do, gain a Prize or a Gold.  You may put your deck in the discard pile.
--
You cannot buy this if you have any Copper in play.

#7 (tie) - Manservant by jamespotter with 9 points (Mason)
$5 - Action
+1 Action.
Trash this card. If you do, reveal an Action card from your hand and choose one: +coins equal to the card's cost and +1 buy OR gain a copy of the card and play it immediately.

#9 (tie) - Windmill by angrybirds with 8 points (Columbo)
$3 - Action
Trash this card and gain a card costing up to $1 more than the cost of this card.
You may also trash a card from your hand in addition to this. If you do gain an additional copy of the card gained.

#9 (tie) - Magistrate by One Armed Man with 8 points (Chan)
$2 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Trash this card. Move the Magistrate token to the top of a non-Magistrate Supply pile.
--
Cards from the Supply pile with the Magistrate token have no effect when played. At the beginning of each player's Buy phase, that player can discard from their hand any number of cards from that pile for +$1 each, +$2 each instead if they are Kingdom cards.

#9 (tie) - Squatter by Saucery with 8 points (Carter)
$1 - Action
+1 Action
Return this card to the supply.
--
If you gain this card during your turn, you may return it to the supply immediately. If you do, each other player gains a Squatter.

#12 (tie) - Badge by nopawnsintended with 7 points (Wimsey)
$2 - Treasure-Victory
Worth $2 and 0.5 VP.  When you play this, return it to the supply.
--
When you gain a Scout, you may gain two Badges.
--
Setup: Add Scout as an extra Kingdom card.  There are 20 Badges.

#12 (tie) - Foundry (2) by PurplePotato with 7 points (Spenser)
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Choose one: Gain two cards costing up to $4 each; or gain three cards costing up to $3 each; or gain four cards costing up to $2 each.

#12 (tie) - Facade by Graystripe77 with 7 points (Poirot)
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Place this on top of any supply pile.
--
(Rules clarification: When this is on top of a pile, this must be bought before any cards underneath.)

#15 (tie) - Usurper by Watno with 6 points (Silver)
$6 - Action
You may choose an Action card from your hand. Play that card 4 times.
Trash this card as well as the card you chose.

#15 (tie) - Piste Town by NoMoreFun with 6 points (Hardy)
$1 - Action
+$1
+1 Buy
Choose one: +2 Cards or +2 Actions.
Return this card to the supply.

#15 (tie) - Grandkid by Guy Srinivasan with 6 points (Bobbsey)
$2 - Action
Trash this. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal an Estate. Trash the Estate. Discard the revealed cards.

#18 (tie) - Leper by Adrienaline with 5 points (Vance)
$P - Action-Plague
+1 Card
+1 Action
Gain a Curse.
The person to your left gains this card.
--
If you trash this card, discard a card.
When you buy this card, return it to the supply. Everyone else gains a copy.

#18 (tie) - Henge by Mecherath with 5 points (Templar)
$5 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Take an extra turn after this one.
This can't cause you to take more than two consecutive turns.
--
Worth 2 VP

#18 (tie) - Supremacy by Qvist with 5 points (Monk)
$2 - Action
Trash this. Trash a card from the supply that is not a Victory card.
+$1 per differently named card in the trash.

#18 (tie) - Freedom Village by Powerman with 5 points (Lanyard)
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
Trash this card.  Gain 2 Tokens on your Freedom Village mat.
--
At the beginning of any turn, remove any number of tokens from your Freedom Village mat.  +1 Action per token removed.

#18 (tie) - Archduchy by Sakako with 5 points (Brown)
$4 - Action-Victory
Trash this card. Gain a Victory card costing up to $6.
--
Worth 2 VP

#18 (tie) - Lifeboat by RobertJ with 5 points (Beresford)
$4 - Action
Choose one:
+2 Actions;
+$1, +1 Buy;
trash your hand.
--
When you gain this, set it aside; you may add it to your hand at the start of any of your future turns.
--
When you play this, return it to the supply.

#24 (tie) - Rag-and-Bone Man by Davio with 4 points (Temple)
$3 - Action
Name a card. Look through your discard pile and trash all copies of the named card.
Trash this card.

#24 (tie) - Expedition by dnkywin with 4 points (Spade)
$5 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a Gold on top of your deck. Each other player gains a Silver.

#24 (tie) - Pyromancer by JFugue with 4 points (Drew)
$3 - Action-Attack
+2 Cards
You may trash up to two cards from your hand.  If you trash at least one card in this way, every other player gains a Curse.
Return this card to the supply.

#27 (tie) - Keep by Schneau with 3 points (Withers)
$3 - Action
+1 Action
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this card, set it aside. At the start of your next Buy phase, +1 Buy, +$3, and put this card in the trash.
--
(Rules clarifications: When you put this card in the trash after it was set aside, you are not trashing the card, so the "When you trash this card..." clause doesn't take effect.)

#27 (tie) - Druid by Fragasnap with 3 points (Moto)
$2 - Action
+2 Cards
Trash this and a card from your hand. Name a card. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal the named card, and then trash it. Discard the other revealed cards.

#29 (tie) - Donation by heatthespurs with 2 points (Wolfe)
$2 - Treasure
Worth $1
When you play this, trash this together with any number of cards in play or from your hand costing $0.
--
When you gain this, you may play it immediately.

#29 (tie) - Voodoo Hut by ignorentmen with 2 points (Shayne)
$5 - Action
Trash this card. If you do, gain two action cards, the first to your hand, the second to the top of your deck. You cannot use this card to gain another copy of this card.

#29 (tie) - Old Tree by brokoli with 2 points (Marple)
$3 - Action
+$2
Trash this.
Reveal any number of Victory cards from your hand. +$1 per Victory card revealed.
--
When you buy this, put your deck into your discard pile.

#29 (tie) - Redecorate by Tables with 2 points (Marlowe)
$5 - Action
Put your deck into your discard pile. Search your discard pile, reveal up to two cards costing up to $6 from your discard pile or hand and trash them. For each trashed card, gain a card costing at most $1 more than the trashed card. Then trash this card.
--
(Rules clarification: You are not restricted to either your hand or discard pile. You may choose to trash a card from your hand and a card from your discard pile.)

#29 (tie) - Piggy Bank by DWetzel with 2 points (Holmes)
$3 - Action
When you play Piggy Bank, trash it.
Choose one: place any number of Treasure cards from your hand on your Piggy Bank mat; gain a Gold, placing it on your Piggy Bank mat; or place all cards on your Piggy Bank mat in your hand.
--
Setup: each player gets their own Piggy Bank mat if Piggy Bank is in play.  At the end of the game, return all cards on Piggy Bank mats to their owner's deck.

#29 (tie) - Pantry by yuma with 2 points (Dupin)
$4 - Action
+$1
Trash this card. If you do, you may put your deck into your discard pile and trash up to four cards from it. After sorting through it, reshuffle your draw pile.

#29 (tie) - Blessing by Destry with 2 points (Blackie)
$3P - Action-Looter
Gain a Ruins to your hand.
Set this card aside. If you do, place a Ruins on it.
Return them to your deck at the end of the game.
--
When you play the first action of your turn, play it as if your set-aside Ruins' texts were added to the bottom of the card in the order you decide.

#29 (tie) - Investment by PenPen with 2 points (Alleyn)
$4 - Treasure
Worth $2
Trash this card. Gain a Silver, and the player to your right gains a Gold.
--
When you would gain this, the player to your left gains this card instead, and only that player can gain this card.
--
(Rules clarification: The player to the left cannot have the player to HIS left gain this card, he is the sole person gaining the card. Reactions to card gains apply in this situation however, e.g. Watchtower. When this card is played, the original buyer of this card will gain the Gold, and the "player to the left" gains the Silver.)

#37 (tie) - Tax by Michaelf7777777 with 1 point (Rockford)
$4 - Action-Attack
Each other player reveals their hand and trashes half their treasure cards (rounded down). Put all treasure trashed in this way into your hand.
Trash this card. Put a tax token on top of a kingdom supply pile.
--
Kingdom cards cost $1 more per tax token on that pile.

#37 (tie) - Brush Fire by zahlman with 1 point (Queen)
$5 - Action-Attack
Trash this. You may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from your hand; if you do, +1 VP. Each opponent may trash a card that is neither a Curse nor a Ruins from his hand. If he does, he gains a Curse in hand; otherwise, he discards his hand.

#37 (tie) - Transform by Tejayes with 1 point (Morse)
$P - Action
Choose one: +$3; or +$P.
Trash this card. If you do, choose one: put a Transform token on any pile without one on it; or remove a Transform token from any pile with one on it.
Cards in piles with Transform tokens cost $P less and $3 more if it has a Potion in its cost; otherwise, it costs $P more and $3 less (but not less than $0).
--
(Rules clarification: If no piles have a Transform token on it, you must put a token on a pile. Eligible piles for Transform tokens include Supply piles, non-Supply piles such as Madman, the Black Market deck, the trash, and players' decks. For tokens on players' decks, the effect extends to that player's hand, play area, and discard pile. Once a card is removed from a Transformed pile, its cost reverts to normal until placed in another pile with a Transform token.)

#37 (tie) - Royal Wedding by Fuu with 1 point (Falcon)
$6 - Action
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
+$2
Trash this. If you do, each other player with 5 or more cards in hand draws a card, then passes a card from his hand to you.

#37 (tie) - Charlatan by ashersky with 1 point (Dover)
$4 - Action-Attack
+$1
Return this card to the supply.
Choose one: +1 Card, +1 Action, each other player gains a Curse; or, +2 Cards, +1 Buy, each other player draws a card, then discards two.
--
When you gain or trash this, each other player gains a Copper.

#37 (tie) - Mercantile Exchange by Darthcaboose with 1 point (Campion)
$3 - Action
+$1
At the start of Clean-up this turn, if the +$X gained from all Action cards in play is greater than the coins provided by Treasure cards in play, gain a Treasure card costing up to the sum of all +$X in play and coins provided by Treasures in play. Otherwise, gain an Action card costing up to the sum of all +$X in play and coins provided by Treasures in play.
--
When this is in play, instead of discarding it during Clean-up, trash it instead.

#37 (tie) - Shape Shifter by Schlippy with 1 point (Bradley)
$6* - Action
Trash this card and up to 4 cards from your hand. Gain 2 cards that together cost up to as much as the total cost in coins of all cards trashed this way (including this).
--
This costs $1 less for every copy of this card that is in the trash, but not less than $0.
--
(Special design considerations: This card is handled like a Prosperity card, so it increases the chances of playing with Platinum and Colonies if this is in the game.)

#44 (tie) - Banquet by Rush Clasic with 0 points (Hammer)
$4 - Action
Trash this card. Gain a random card costing up to $2 more than this.

#44 (tie) - Shapeshifter by Titandrake with 0 points (Drummond)
$4 - Action
+$1
--
Setup: At the start of the game, place the Shapeshifter token on the Shapeshifter supply pile.
--
Whenever a Shapeshifter is played, play it as if were a copy of the card with the Shapeshifter token on it. The played Shapeshifter is that card until it leaves play. Then, its owner gets +$1, sets Shapeshifter aside, and moves the Shapeshifter token to an Action card in the Supply. Trash the set aside Shapeshifters at the end of the game.
--
(Rules clarification: The Shapeshifter token cannot be moved to an empty supply pile. If the copied supply pile runs out, Shapeshifter is still a copy of that card. The +$1, setting aside, and moving happens after the effects of the copied action.)

[eHalcyon]

...maybe I should stop entering.  Or enter crazier things.

[eHalcyon]

By the way, the name "Mountain Pass" is meant to be evocative of several other cards.  "Mountain" relates to Quarry and Mining Village (price reduction, one-shot) while "Pass" makes it a means of travel, like Highway/Bridge (price reduction).

[PenPen]

Congrats eHalcyon!

I thought my idea (Investment/Alleyn) would be interesting enough. The wording probably got a bit convoluted and lost points as a result.

[popsofctown]

You lost my vote to the multiplayer issues, PenPen.  I care little for multiplayer, but multiplayer issues that large will lose my vote.

[Robz888]

.... EHalcyon wins again??? Bwah?

This is getting silly impressive.

[eHalcyon]

Some people brought up that the price reduction on Mountain Pass could be abused because it will stack with KC.  I didn't want to put up a big defense while it was still in voting, but I'll discuss it now.

Stackability was fully intended.  Since MP is one-shot, it is awkward to word it such that it doesn't stack.  Lacking +Buy and being one-shot actually hurts a lot while you are building your deck.  With Bridge, you can play it and build up your deck quickly.  You can't do that with MP -- if you use it, it disappears and you'll have to buy a new one.  To use MP effectively, you'll need to build an effective engine without it and  THEN bring it in for one big turn.  You can do the same with Bridge, except it needs less support (coming with its own +Buy) and it can help you during the ramp-up.

MP would be most used as support for a cool engine with +Buy, probably in a mega-turn strategy.  If there is cheap +Buy on the board (Market Square, Hamlet), it can also be a nice slingshot.  I thought it would be good for the set, which has plenty of expensive cards.  We still need +Buy though!

[Polk5440]

eHalcyon is in tune with what fans want!

[eHalcyon]

.... EHalcyon wins again??? Bwah?

This is getting silly impressive.

I have to give major props to the contest itself for this.  I did really, really poorly in the first few I entered, but critiquing all those entries helped me improve my own game.

[Robz888]

You are truly the Marin of fan card design.

[Kirian]

Grats to eHalcyon again!  I was hopeful about mine, but I'll take the #3 slot as well.  I don't know how many people looked at it and said "Oh hey, it's a high-power one-shot Steward that also works vs. Swindler, etc."

I definitely liked Mountain Pass, and I quite like the name as well.  Good job on a fourth card!

[eHalcyon]

I am still least pleased about Harbinger though, for various reasons.  Since it tied, and we have quite a lot of non-terminal draw in the set anyway... maybe we could just drop it from the set?  I'd love to make room for other entrants.

[eHalcyon]

Some people brought up that the price reduction on Mountain Pass could be abused because it will stack with KC.  I didn't want to put up a big defense while it was still in voting, but I'll discuss it now.

Stackability was fully intended.  Since MP is one-shot, it is awkward to word it such that it doesn't stack.  Lacking +Buy and being one-shot actually hurts a lot while you are building your deck.  With Bridge, you can play it and build up your deck quickly.  You can't do that with MP -- if you use it, it disappears and you'll have to buy a new one.  To use MP effectively, you'll need to build an effective engine without it and  THEN bring it in for one big turn.  You can do the same with Bridge, except it needs less support (coming with its own +Buy) and it can help you during the ramp-up.

MP would be most used as support for a cool engine with +Buy, probably in a mega-turn strategy.  If there is cheap +Buy on the board (Market Square, Hamlet), it can also be a nice slingshot.  I thought it would be good for the set, which has plenty of expensive cards.  We still need +Buy though!

Oops, actually, the easy wording to limit it would be "if you do".  But again, I think it is better without that limit.  There is a soft-limit in that it forces you to trash another card from your hand.  That can screw up your hand if you're not careful.

[PenPen]

Some people brought up that the price reduction on Mountain Pass could be abused because it will stack with KC.  I didn't want to put up a big defense while it was still in voting, but I'll discuss it now.

Stackability was fully intended.  Since MP is one-shot, it is awkward to word it such that it doesn't stack.  Lacking +Buy and being one-shot actually hurts a lot while you are building your deck.  With Bridge, you can play it and build up your deck quickly.  You can't do that with MP -- if you use it, it disappears and you'll have to buy a new one.  To use MP effectively, you'll need to build an effective engine without it and  THEN bring it in for one big turn.  You can do the same with Bridge, except it needs less support (coming with its own +Buy) and it can help you during the ramp-up.

MP would be most used as support for a cool engine with +Buy, probably in a mega-turn strategy.  If there is cheap +Buy on the board (Market Square, Hamlet), it can also be a nice slingshot.  I thought it would be good for the set, which has plenty of expensive cards.  We still need +Buy though!

Oops, actually, the easy wording to limit it would be "if you do".  But again, I think it is better without that limit.  There is a soft-limit in that it forces you to trash another card from your hand.  That can screw up your hand if you're not careful.

I'll have to admit that my eyes failed me and I thought that it didn't require you to trash another card! 

My bad on that one.

[nopawnsintended]

Wow!  eHalcyon is the designer to beat!

I was a little sad that people thought my Badge/Whimsey was a joke submission.  I'd like to chalk it up to the card being named "Whimsey" but I think the fact that Badge is related to Scout might have been the culprit there...

[Tdog]

2nd place! So when I submitted I had intended it to be able to gain golds on top of the deck but then was worded wrong for the purpose.  Would it be better worded something else? I feel the concept is good but the execution poor.

[rinkworks]

I have to admit, I am very doubtful about Mountain Pass not having an anti-TR/KC clause.  I am less doubtful after reading a thoughtful defense from eHalcyon, but I just don't know.  I'm very intrigued to try this out in test games.

[rinkworks]

2nd place! So when I submitted I had intended it to be able to gain golds on top of the deck but then was worded wrong for the purpose.  Would it be better worded something else? I feel the concept is good but the execution poor.

I think an "up to 7" would have helped a lot.  I actually liked the card a lot, but I don't know how many times you'd skip buying a $5 because if you buy your card first, you can get a $5 AND a free $2!  Or say what you really want is a $3/$4 pair (Fishing Village/Conspirator, maybe?)  I don't know if buying your card instead of one of those cards is necessarily the right move.  True, you'd get to pair them up on the same turn the first time.  Maybe I'm underestimating that.

But it just seemed underpowered or overpriced, one of the two.  With "up to" instead of "exact," maybe that would be enough of a boost?

[popsofctown]

I mirror your thoughts.  I'm surprised it got second..

[Schneau]

2nd place! So when I submitted I had intended it to be able to gain golds on top of the deck but then was worded wrong for the purpose.  Would it be better worded something else? I feel the concept is good but the execution poor.

I think an "up to 7" would have helped a lot.  I actually liked the card a lot, but I don't know how many times you'd skip buying a $5 because if you buy your card first, you can get a $5 AND a free $2!  Or say what you really want is a $3/$4 pair (Fishing Village/Conspirator, maybe?)  I don't know if buying your card instead of one of those cards is necessarily the right move.  True, you'd get to pair them up on the same turn the first time.  Maybe I'm underestimating that.

But it just seemed underpowered or overpriced, one of the two.  With "up to" instead of "exact," maybe that would be enough of a boost?

My only problem with this suggestion is that it can basically be a one-turn-later Gold if you have the action to spare. Sure, it takes up a spot in your hand and makes you use an action to get the Gold, but that's still pretty strong for $5. In my comments I suggested the wording "Gain exactly 2 cards costing up to a total of $7". With this change, you have to get 2 cards, but they can be Gold and Copper, or 5/2, or 3/3, etc. I think forcing the Copper with the Gold takes down the power a little. Maybe it would be fine with your suggestion, but if it's too strong my suggestion probably would help.

[Schneau]

#27 (tie) - Keep by Schneau with 3 points (Withers)
$3 - Action
+1 Action
Trash this card.
--
When you trash this card, set it aside. At the start of your next Buy phase, +1 Buy, +$3, and put this card in the trash.
--
(Rules clarifications: When you put this card in the trash after it was set aside, you are not trashing the card, so the "When you trash this card..." clause doesn't take effect.)

I'm a bit disappointed that commentators thought that this should be a Duration card. Since the "when trash" takes effect at the start of your next Buy phase, if you play it and trash it, it will take effect that turn - not next turn. The only reason I had to have it set aside was for cases when you trash it during another player's turn - I think it would be confusing if it gave "+1 Buy, +$3" immediately when trashed during someone else's turn. But, you'll never play this and have it around until your next turn, so I don't think it should be a duration.

Most of the time, this card will just be "+1 Action, +1 Buy, +$3". But, it's more interesting if you can trash it without playing it, since it will still get the bonus. Maybe I was trying to be too tricky - Kirian had a well-implemented card using the same idea of on-trash bonus and did well at the polls.

[rinkworks]

2nd place! So when I submitted I had intended it to be able to gain golds on top of the deck but then was worded wrong for the purpose.  Would it be better worded something else? I feel the concept is good but the execution poor.

I think an "up to 7" would have helped a lot.  I actually liked the card a lot, but I don't know how many times you'd skip buying a $5 because if you buy your card first, you can get a $5 AND a free $2!  Or say what you really want is a $3/$4 pair (Fishing Village/Conspirator, maybe?)  I don't know if buying your card instead of one of those cards is necessarily the right move.  True, you'd get to pair them up on the same turn the first time.  Maybe I'm underestimating that.

But it just seemed underpowered or overpriced, one of the two.  With "up to" instead of "exact," maybe that would be enough of a boost?

My only problem with this suggestion is that it can basically be a one-turn-later Gold if you have the action to spare. Sure, it takes up a spot in your hand and makes you use an action to get the Gold, but that's still pretty strong for $5. In my comments I suggested the wording "Gain exactly 2 cards costing up to a total of $7". With this change, you have to get 2 cards, but they can be Gold and Copper, or 5/2, or 3/3, etc. I think forcing the Copper with the Gold takes down the power a little. Maybe it would be fine with your suggestion, but if it's too strong my suggestion probably would help.

I think you're right here.  "Gain exactly 2 cards costing up to a total of $7" is a good way to nerf the buff and come out in a good place.

[eHalcyon]

#1 - Mountain Pass by eHalcyon with 18 points (Fletcher)
$2 - Action
Trash this and another card from your hand.  All cards cost $2 less this turn, but not less than $0.


It was a close one, but eHalcyon ekes out the win by a single point.  It's a one-shot Bridge-type card that also trashes.  Without +Buy, it's a one-shot Silver with light trashing; late in the game, you can perhaps put together a megaturn, although getting all the pieces in place is a touch tricky since you have to have a card in hand to sacrifice to it.

The last line here is actually incorrect.  As currently worded, you don't have to have an extra card to sacrifice.  If you play off a bunch of Markets and such and end up with just KC and Mountain Pass in hand, you can KC-MP and get the full benefit without trashing any other cards.  The forced trashing just means that you're probably not going to be playing many more cards after you KC-MP.

That said, I think that could be a good nerf if the current version proves too strong.

"Trash a card from your hand.  If you do, all cards cost $2 less this turn, but not less than $0.  Trash this."

That means it can still stack, but it is more difficult to do so.

[eHalcyon]

2nd place! So when I submitted I had intended it to be able to gain golds on top of the deck but then was worded wrong for the purpose.  Would it be better worded something else? I feel the concept is good but the execution poor.

I think an "up to 7" would have helped a lot.  I actually liked the card a lot, but I don't know how many times you'd skip buying a $5 because if you buy your card first, you can get a $5 AND a free $2!  Or say what you really want is a $3/$4 pair (Fishing Village/Conspirator, maybe?)  I don't know if buying your card instead of one of those cards is necessarily the right move.  True, you'd get to pair them up on the same turn the first time.  Maybe I'm underestimating that.

But it just seemed underpowered or overpriced, one of the two.  With "up to" instead of "exact," maybe that would be enough of a boost?

My only problem with this suggestion is that it can basically be a one-turn-later Gold if you have the action to spare. Sure, it takes up a spot in your hand and makes you use an action to get the Gold, but that's still pretty strong for $5. In my comments I suggested the wording "Gain exactly 2 cards costing up to a total of $7". With this change, you have to get 2 cards, but they can be Gold and Copper, or 5/2, or 3/3, etc. I think forcing the Copper with the Gold takes down the power a little. Maybe it would be fine with your suggestion, but if it's too strong my suggestion probably would help.

I think you're right here.  "Gain exactly 2 cards costing up to a total of $7" is a good way to nerf the buff and come out in a good place.

Would it be OK compared to Cache?  This Thanksgiving can give you Gold+Copper for $5, but Cache comes along with two Copper.

[Schneau]

2nd place! So when I submitted I had intended it to be able to gain golds on top of the deck but then was worded wrong for the purpose.  Would it be better worded something else? I feel the concept is good but the execution poor.

I think an "up to 7" would have helped a lot.  I actually liked the card a lot, but I don't know how many times you'd skip buying a $5 because if you buy your card first, you can get a $5 AND a free $2!  Or say what you really want is a $3/$4 pair (Fishing Village/Conspirator, maybe?)  I don't know if buying your card instead of one of those cards is necessarily the right move.  True, you'd get to pair them up on the same turn the first time.  Maybe I'm underestimating that.

But it just seemed underpowered or overpriced, one of the two.  With "up to" instead of "exact," maybe that would be enough of a boost?

My only problem with this suggestion is that it can basically be a one-turn-later Gold if you have the action to spare. Sure, it takes up a spot in your hand and makes you use an action to get the Gold, but that's still pretty strong for $5. In my comments I suggested the wording "Gain exactly 2 cards costing up to a total of $7". With this change, you have to get 2 cards, but they can be Gold and Copper, or 5/2, or 3/3, etc. I think forcing the Copper with the Gold takes down the power a little. Maybe it would be fine with your suggestion, but if it's too strong my suggestion probably would help.

I think you're right here.  "Gain exactly 2 cards costing up to a total of $7" is a good way to nerf the buff and come out in a good place.

Would it be OK compared to Cache?  This Thanksgiving can give you Gold+Copper for $5, but Cache comes along with two Copper.

But, you have to play Thanksgiving as an Action to get the Gold, and it takes up a place in your hand before you play it. Sure, it may be slightly better than Cache, especially considering you have the option for taking non-Gold cards, but man, Cache isn't that good of a $5. It got 44/48 on Qvist's latest ratings, so it's probably fine to be slightly better than it.

[brokoli]

Well, my idea was completely unbalanced. However, I really like the idea of a terminal silver with a chancellor effect when you buy it. It can add subtle strategic elements.

Congrats to eHalcyon.

[eHalcyon]

@Schneau -- good point.  OK, that does look good then!

Well, my idea was completely unbalanced. However, I really like the idea of a terminal silver with a chancellor effect when you buy it. It can add subtle strategic elements.

Marple/Old Tree was an interesting entry, if only because almost everyone thought it was too weak (I thought it was average, maybe a little weak) but it's actually likely to be too strong as an opener (nice catch by OAM there).

For people that don't see how:

Turn 1: Buy OT.  You put your deck into discard.
Turn 2: If you draw OT, you are guaranteed Gold!  If you miss it, there is still a high chance you'll get it before the next reshuffle.

[Tdog]

I'd vouch for the two cards up to 7 if a best of the second contest happens.

[Titandrake]

My card is what happens when you start with a neat idea (buying cards for cheaper than they are, but with the risk of opponents changing them into terrible ones). Then I realized that wasn't a one shot. Then I added way too much stuff to make it a one shot while still making it desirable.

I kinda like the idea of "Copy a card, get a bonus +$1 in exchange for one-shot", but it seems far too unworkable.

[Archetype]

Another win for eHalcyon! I personally liked Tdog's better, but I'm glad a low costing card won.

I got 4th! Wow! I thiought Wildfire/Arcensic was better than Foundry/Magnum, but if that's what the people want…

The origin of my card is from the card'Sacrafice' in my original Woodlands expansion. It is a card that solves the problem that Chapel has of hanging around once all the trashing is done. But this card ended up playing a lot different from Chapel.

I'd also like to thank eHalcyon for helping me tweak Wildfire and Foundry. This guy really knows his Dominion!

[RobertJ]

Congratulations to the winner. I voted for both the top two cards this time.

My card (Lifeboat/Beresford) wasn't popular but I'm interested to see if anything can be salvaged from it.

I do still like the set aside to play when you want mechanic but the details obviously weren't quite right here. The point (as the name alludes to) was to resuce you from having several terminals but no village or lots of money but no +Buy. The trashing option was a late addition to make it a bit more flexible and perhaps this was a mistake. Anyway it would be great to hear anyone's ideas for how to improve this card.

[rinkworks]

Congratulations to the winner. I voted for both the top two cards this time.

My card (Lifeboat/Beresford) wasn't popular but I'm interested to see if anything can be salvaged from it.

I do still like the set aside to play when you want mechanic but the details obviously weren't quite right here. The point (as the name alludes to) was to resuce you from having several terminals but no village or lots of money but no +Buy. The trashing option was a late addition to make it a bit more flexible and perhaps this was a mistake. Anyway it would be great to hear anyone's ideas for how to improve this card.

I think there were just too many pieces.  I would isolate the "play when you want" feature and strip away all the distractions.  So what simplified top half would be most useful on a "when you need it" basis?  All of those things, really:  the +2 Actions, the +Buy, the +$, and the trashing.  So let's narrow it down to the most situational two or so options, and drop the price accordingly.

Next, you don't need a "when you play this" clause, because everything is "when you play this" by default.  Thus, we get:

Lifeboat
$2 - Action
+2 Actions
+1 Buy
Return this to the supply.
--
When you gain this, set it aside; at the beginning of any future turn, you may add it to your hand.

At this point, what's jumping out at me is the "return to supply" piece making the card too weak.  But forcing such a weak card to stick around might not be great either.  So how about this?

Lifeboat
$2 - Action
+2 Actions
+1 Buy
You may trash this.
--
When you gain this, set it aside; at the beginning of any future turn, you may add it to your hand.

Now it no longer qualifies for this challenge, but that doesn't matter anymore.  Anyway, now we have a card that you can use when you need it once, and then whenever it comes up normally, unless you actually want to get rid of it.  I'd say that's a pretty fair $2 card, but there may well be room for further improvements, and I'm positive there are other directions to take your original card in and fix it up a different way.

[JFugue]

First off, congratulations to eHalcyon for the win!

I will admit I did not vote for it, in part because I felt this slight unease that there was some very unbalanced aspect to the card that I was unable and unskilled enough to spot.




To explain my own card idea, Pyromancer/Drew, in slightly more detail, I wanted to try and design a card that acted both as a curser and fairly cheap source of trashing to get rid of curses; Sea hag/Witch/Familiar kingdoms without trashing are some of my least favorite games to play, so I wanted to have a card that guaranteed both the cursing and the trashing.  The +2 cards was to serve as a way of finding the curses a little easier.  Originally my design for the card had it costing $4 but after some discussions with a friend (Anton on Isotropic), he suggested I lower the cost and I eventually agreed (if it was to be a low-cost way of getting a trasher when your deck is being pounded with curses, then $3 cost is more reasonable).  The low cost/power seems to have been the reason most people disliked it, however.

Ah, well.  Live and learn.  Thanks for the fun and congratulations to eHalcyon again!