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.
Author
Topic: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #13: One-Shot Card! (Read 38787 times)