Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2 3  All

Author Topic: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money  (Read 14613 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Tejayes

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 176
  • Respect: +132
    • View Profile
Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« on: October 04, 2012, 10:22:19 am »
0

Like Assassin, this card name shows up very frequently in fan card ideas. In most cases, it's basically the opposite of Ill-Gotten Gains, which is an expensive, weak Treasure that Curses your opponents.

In other words, most Blood Money cards carry these traits:
  • A Treasure, usually at least as powerful as Gold.
  • Rarely costing more than $3.
  • Either causes its player to gain at least one Curse or is a Curse card itself.

The main issue with making Blood Money a Curse-type is that it likely makes the card gainable via Cursing Attacks. Fan card creators have tried to circumvent this by either renaming the type or shoehorning it into a Victory card. Or, you know, by gaining a Curse whenever this is played.

Now, it's your turn. What does your ideal Blood Money card look like? Is it a Treasure like most cards with similar names, or do you dare try making it an Action card? Does it hurt your score for big financial gains, or does it do something entirely different? Does it deal with Curses at all?

Here's an idea that hurts VP acquisition without Cursing...

BLOOD MONEY
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
-
While this is in play, you may not gain Victory cards.

Since it's still good for acquiring Treasures and Actions, this would likely be too strong at cheaper costs.

If you want to know, blood money is often another word for "restitution", paid to the family of a victim by the murderer, slave owner, or whatever-they-did-er after the victim has already passed away. In that sense, here's how I envision a Blood Money card:

BLOOD MONEY
$3 - Treasure
When you play this, reveal your hand. The player to your left chooses a card for you to trash from your hand.
-
This card is worth $ equal to half the cost of the trashed card (rounded up).

Not the best idea, to be sure, but it'll hopefully help get the ball rolling.

With all that said, Card That Name!
Logged

Tables

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2814
  • Build more Bridges in the King's Court!
  • Respect: +3339
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #1 on: October 04, 2012, 11:02:05 am »
0

Blood Money
$5 - treasure
+$3
---
When you buy a card with this in play, gain a card costing $0.

A slight twist on my submission to the treasure card design contest. That one was interesting, but was far too strong when cursers are around and meh otherwise. Now, this is stronger in general. A gold that generates coppers, that's pretty bad, but it has some obvious (and some less obvious) combos: Bridge or Highway can obviously take advantage, but many decks that like coppers, or like gaining, could also benefit. Still, better be careful, in BM games it's probably worse than Cache.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2012, 03:33:30 pm by Tables »
Logged
...spin-offs are still better for all of the previously cited reasons.
But not strictly better, because the spinoff can have a different cost than the expansion.

Tejayes

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 176
  • Respect: +132
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #2 on: October 04, 2012, 12:05:43 pm »
0

Blood Money
$5 - action
+$3
---
When you buy a card with this in play, gain a card costing $0.

A slight twist on my submission to the treasure card design contest. That one was interesting, but was far too strong when cursers are around and meh otherwise. Now, this is stronger in general. A gold that generates coppers, that's pretty bad, but it has some obvious (and some less obvious) combos: Bridge or Highway can obviously take advantage, but many decks that like coppers, or like gaining, could also benefit. Still, better be careful, in BM games it's probably worse than Cache.

Is this supposed to be a Treasure? Because you have it listed as an Action.
Logged

Sakako

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
  • Respect: +14
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #3 on: October 04, 2012, 12:45:35 pm »
0

Is this supposed to be a Treasure? Because you have it listed as an Action.
Seems like it works as an Action, since Action cards usually stay in play until the end of the turn. Anyway, here's mine:

Blood Money
$4
Treasure
Worth $2

Choose one: +$2, and gain a Curse, putting it on top of your deck; or +$1, and gain a Curse.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2012, 12:48:43 pm by Sakako »
Logged

Jack Rudd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1286
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jack Rudd
  • Respect: +1333
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #4 on: October 04, 2012, 01:01:51 pm »
+2


Here's an idea that hurts VP acquisition without Cursing...

BLOOD MONEY
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
-
While this is in play, you may not gain Victory cards.
This needs to be "you may not buy Victory cards". Otherwise it has rules clashes with a number of cards.
Logged
Centuries later, archaeologists discover the remains of your ancient civilization.

Evidence of thriving towns, Pottery, roads, and a centralized government amaze the startled scientists.

Finally, they come upon a stone tablet, which contains but one mysterious phrase!

'ISOTROPIC WILL RETURN!'

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3207
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4287
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #5 on: October 04, 2012, 02:01:19 pm »
0

Is this supposed to be a Treasure? Because you have it listed as an Action.
Seems like it works as an Action, since Action cards usually stay in play until the end of the turn. Anyway, here's mine:

Blood Money
$4
Treasure
Worth $2

Choose one: +$2, and gain a Curse, putting it on top of your deck; or +$1, and gain a Curse.

This has the problem that a lot of Blood Moneys do, which is that it's overpowered after the Curses run out.
Logged

rinkworks

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1316
  • Respect: +936
    • View Profile
    • RinkWorks
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #6 on: October 04, 2012, 02:21:49 pm »
+5

My spiel on this idea is that it can't be balanced if the penalty is a one-time penalty.  So if it's a card that's worth -1 VP, that's a one-time penalty.  You lose a point, and thereafter it's a Gold equivalent.  It doesn't scale right, because different boards and indeed different playthroughs of the same board, vary SO wildly in terms of how much a single VP is worth.  It's not just a matter of "sometimes it's strong, sometimes it's weak," it's a matter of "usually it's overpowered or underpowered and only rarely just right by accident."

On the other hand, if the penalty is continuing, you can achieve some sort of rough parallel between the amount of benefit you get vs. the amount of drawback.  Buy an Embassy early, or buy one late -- either way, your opponents get the benefit of a Silver a roughly proportional amount of the time.  There's still room for strategy, because you can observe that buying an Embassy when you have a fat deck and your opponent has a slow deck will skew the balance in your favor.

Similarly, the penalties of Bishop, Vault, and Council Room all apply each time you play the card, not a flat penalty at the outset.  And again you can use strategy to swing the scales in your favor, like using Bishop after your opponent has already trashed down, or using Council Rooms when you might draw a Militia to play afterwards.

So the flat VP hit on Blood Money doesn't work.  Gaining a Curse when you gain Blood Money might, because the Curse in your deck will be a continuing detriment, but the fact that the Curses can run out so easily is problematic.

I really believe the best incarnation of the idea is Cache.  It's Coppers, not Curses, which are dramatically less likely to run out.  And the balance is better than most Blood Money fan cards, too, which overdiscount the card.  For two Coppers you only get a $1 discount on Gold.  That $5-$6 threshold is so important, though, that's all the discount you need.  And you can still pull off fancy tricks like using Watchtower to trash the Coppers, Trader to turn them into Silvers, and playing Big Money or an alt-VP rush where the Coppers aren't so bad.

Directly penalizing the score is, I think, a lot less interesting.  It skips over interfering with the machine you use to get points and just manipulates the points directly instead.  Yawn.  The heart of the game is the deck, not the scoreboard.  Nonetheless, I think a score-manipulating Blood Money ought to be doable if the penalty happens on-play, in keeping with the principles of balance I started this post talking about.  "When you play this, gain a Curse token."  A Curse token would be like a VP token but worth -1 point instead of 1.  Something along those lines can probably work.
Logged

Drab Emordnilap

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1832
  • Shuffle iT Username: Drab Emordnilap
  • Luther Bell Hendricks V
  • Respect: +1885
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #7 on: October 04, 2012, 02:31:47 pm »
+4

Nonetheless, I think a score-manipulating Blood Money ought to be doable if the penalty happens on-play, in keeping with the principles of balance I started this post talking about.  "When you play this, gain a Curse token."  A Curse token would be like a VP token but worth -1 point instead of 1.  Something along those lines can probably work.
You could also just have it give each other player a VP chip, and not need to create new components.
Logged

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8171
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9619
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #8 on: October 04, 2012, 02:40:34 pm »
+1

Blood Money - Treasure-Duration - $5

+2 Buys
$5

When you play this, reveal cards from the top of your deck until revealing one costing $3 or more.  If you find one, trash it, discard the other revealed cards, and trash this.  If you do not find one, at the start of your next turn, discard down to three cards in hand.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

Tables

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2814
  • Build more Bridges in the King's Court!
  • Respect: +3339
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #9 on: October 04, 2012, 03:37:15 pm »
0

Blood Money
$5 - action
+$3
---
When you buy a card with this in play, gain a card costing $0.

A slight twist on my submission to the treasure card design contest. That one was interesting, but was far too strong when cursers are around and meh otherwise. Now, this is stronger in general. A gold that generates coppers, that's pretty bad, but it has some obvious (and some less obvious) combos: Bridge or Highway can obviously take advantage, but many decks that like coppers, or like gaining, could also benefit. Still, better be careful, in BM games it's probably worse than Cache.

Is this supposed to be a Treasure? Because you have it listed as an Action.

Derp. Yes, I was thinking 'what if someone was crazy enough to make action Blood Money' and thus typed action _. Terminal gold for $5 needs no penalty. Probably needs a small bonus if anything.
Logged
...spin-offs are still better for all of the previously cited reasons.
But not strictly better, because the spinoff can have a different cost than the expansion.

One Armed Man

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #10 on: October 04, 2012, 04:10:18 pm »
0

That makes Tables Blood Money one of the forms of Count!
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3207
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4287
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #11 on: October 04, 2012, 04:17:41 pm »
0

I was thinking 'what if someone was crazy enough to make action Blood Money'

...It would be Death Cart?
Logged

Tables

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2814
  • Build more Bridges in the King's Court!
  • Respect: +3339
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #12 on: October 04, 2012, 04:23:28 pm »
0

Hm, yes, I suppose that's one.

OAM: No, not really. It's a treasure for a start, and even if it weren't, this activates on buy, not on play... do you realise how huge a thing that is? And even excluding THAT as well, it looks for a $0... also huge.
Logged
...spin-offs are still better for all of the previously cited reasons.
But not strictly better, because the spinoff can have a different cost than the expansion.

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7467
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10648
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #13 on: October 04, 2012, 04:31:12 pm »
0

Nonetheless, I think a score-manipulating Blood Money ought to be doable if the penalty happens on-play, in keeping with the principles of balance I started this post talking about.  "When you play this, gain a Curse token."  A Curse token would be like a VP token but worth -1 point instead of 1.  Something along those lines can probably work.
You could also just have it give each other player a VP chip, and not need to create new components.

I wish I could give this more '+1's. Brilliant! This is what I want to see for one of the Prosperity cards in the Treasure Chest expansion: a powerful card that gives opponents VP chips when played. That's two of Prosperity's themes right there. Seems perfect!
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9184
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #14 on: October 04, 2012, 04:33:09 pm »
0

Derp. Yes, I was thinking 'what if someone was crazy enough to make action Blood Money' and thus typed action _. Terminal gold for $5 needs no penalty. Probably needs a small bonus if anything.

I disagree.  I believe Mandarin is a good example of a terminal Gold with penalty.  The topdeck can sometimes be helpful, but it is generally considered a penalty (contrast with Courtyard, which has draw to make the topdeck actually useful; compare with Count, where topdecking is one of the three penalty choices).  Harvest is another one, with the drawback being unreliability (though it CAN hit $4 sometimes too).
Logged

Tejayes

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 176
  • Respect: +132
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #15 on: October 04, 2012, 04:40:53 pm »
0


Here's an idea that hurts VP acquisition without Cursing...

BLOOD MONEY
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
-
While this is in play, you may not gain Victory cards.
This needs to be "you may not buy Victory cards". Otherwise it has rules clashes with a number of cards.

You mean like Horn of Plenty, Border Village, etc.? That was the entire point of the wording change -- to prevent players who play this version of Blood Money to acquire Victory cards in ANY manner.
Logged

Tables

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2814
  • Build more Bridges in the King's Court!
  • Respect: +3339
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #16 on: October 04, 2012, 05:02:59 pm »
0

Derp. Yes, I was thinking 'what if someone was crazy enough to make action Blood Money' and thus typed action _. Terminal gold for $5 needs no penalty. Probably needs a small bonus if anything.

I disagree.  I believe Mandarin is a good example of a terminal Gold with penalty.  The topdeck can sometimes be helpful, but it is generally considered a penalty (contrast with Courtyard, which has draw to make the topdeck actually useful; compare with Count, where topdecking is one of the three penalty choices).  Harvest is another one, with the drawback being unreliability (though it CAN hit $4 sometimes too).

The single topdecking is a slight penalty, but it comes with a bonus on-buy effect, and on the whole, it's considered a weak $5. Count again, slight penalty, but it more than makes up for it with diversity of effect. And Harvest being unreliable is possibly a good thing, sure it averages probably just under $3 (but barely), but being able to hit $4 sometimes is a really good thing. Like, often you're gunning for Provinces, so hitting $7 or $6 doesn't matter (possibly even $5-7 being basically the same), so if you have $4+Harvest, that randomness is a good thing. Of course that's not always the case but eh. Oh, and Harvest is also considered one of the weaker $5's.
Logged
...spin-offs are still better for all of the previously cited reasons.
But not strictly better, because the spinoff can have a different cost than the expansion.

Jack Rudd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1286
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jack Rudd
  • Respect: +1333
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #17 on: October 04, 2012, 05:11:40 pm »
+1


Here's an idea that hurts VP acquisition without Cursing...

BLOOD MONEY
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
-
While this is in play, you may not gain Victory cards.
This needs to be "you may not buy Victory cards". Otherwise it has rules clashes with a number of cards.

You mean like Horn of Plenty, Border Village, etc.? That was the entire point of the wording change -- to prevent players who play this version of Blood Money to acquire Victory cards in ANY manner.
I was actually thinking Swindler. I play Village, Black Market (playing a Blood Money), Swindler. I hit your Colony. What happens?
Logged
Centuries later, archaeologists discover the remains of your ancient civilization.

Evidence of thriving towns, Pottery, roads, and a centralized government amaze the startled scientists.

Finally, they come upon a stone tablet, which contains but one mysterious phrase!

'ISOTROPIC WILL RETURN!'

WheresMyElephant

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 135
  • Respect: +63
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #18 on: October 04, 2012, 05:16:31 pm »
0


Here's an idea that hurts VP acquisition without Cursing...

BLOOD MONEY
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
-
While this is in play, you may not gain Victory cards.
This needs to be "you may not buy Victory cards". Otherwise it has rules clashes with a number of cards.

You mean like Horn of Plenty, Border Village, etc.? That was the entire point of the wording change -- to prevent players who play this version of Blood Money to acquire Victory cards in ANY manner.

In that case why not something like "While this is in play, when you would gain a Victory card, trash it instead/gain a Curse instead?" It seems confusing and awkward to just come out and say "When you would gain a Victory card, don't," but either of these should get the job done, and the former might even set up a few interesting edge cases as a bonus.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2012, 05:17:59 pm by WheresMyElephant »
Logged

Tejayes

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 176
  • Respect: +132
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #19 on: October 04, 2012, 05:21:37 pm »
0


Here's an idea that hurts VP acquisition without Cursing...

BLOOD MONEY
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
-
While this is in play, you may not gain Victory cards.
This needs to be "you may not buy Victory cards". Otherwise it has rules clashes with a number of cards.

You mean like Horn of Plenty, Border Village, etc.? That was the entire point of the wording change -- to prevent players who play this version of Blood Money to acquire Victory cards in ANY manner.
I was actually thinking Swindler. I play Village, Black Market (playing a Blood Money), Swindler. I hit your Colony. What happens?

I gain a Colony back. The wording states "While this is in play, YOU may not gain Victory cards." It says nothing about your opponents who don't have this version of Blood Money in play.
Logged

Sakako

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
  • Respect: +14
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #20 on: October 04, 2012, 05:22:46 pm »
0


Here's an idea that hurts VP acquisition without Cursing...

BLOOD MONEY
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
-
While this is in play, you may not gain Victory cards.
This needs to be "you may not buy Victory cards". Otherwise it has rules clashes with a number of cards.

You mean like Horn of Plenty, Border Village, etc.? That was the entire point of the wording change -- to prevent players who play this version of Blood Money to acquire Victory cards in ANY manner.

In that case why not something like "While this is in play, when you would gain a Victory card, trash it instead/gain a Curse instead?" It seems confusing and awkward to just come out and say "When you would gain a Victory card, don't," but either of these should get the job done, and the former might even set up a few interesting edge cases as a bonus.

What about something like "While this is in play, when you would gain a Victory card, instead gain a card costing no more than it that is not a Victory card"?
Logged

WheresMyElephant

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 135
  • Respect: +63
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #21 on: October 04, 2012, 05:32:20 pm »
0

^^^ Seems unneccessarily wordy for what will almost always be the same end result, especially in the Buy phase where this card would be played. I guess if you REALLY wanted to get rid of a HoP you could try to gain a Duchy and turn it into Silver? Otherwise you would just buy/gain the card you wanted in the first place. I mean if you could turn Count's "Gain a Duchy" into "gain any $5 card" then that might be neat, but there's nothing like that here as far as I can see.

Edit: Also LastFootnote is right: these combos look like fun, why are we doing this?
« Last Edit: October 04, 2012, 05:37:03 pm by WheresMyElephant »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7467
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10648
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #22 on: October 04, 2012, 05:33:47 pm »
+1


Here's an idea that hurts VP acquisition without Cursing...

BLOOD MONEY
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
-
While this is in play, you may not gain Victory cards.
This needs to be "you may not buy Victory cards". Otherwise it has rules clashes with a number of cards.

You mean like Horn of Plenty, Border Village, etc.? That was the entire point of the wording change -- to prevent players who play this version of Blood Money to acquire Victory cards in ANY manner.

I really like this idea, even though it's pretty similar to Quarry. That being said, it should definitely be 'buy' instead of 'gain'. It's a Treasure card anyway, and the number of situations in which you'd be gaining a Victory card without buying it during your Buy phase is small. In fact, it's so small that it's not worth the terrible rules interactions that 'you may not gain' would cause. Why in the world would you want to insert terrible rules interactions just to eliminate cool combos with Horn of Plenty and Border Village? Makes no sense.
Logged

Tejayes

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 176
  • Respect: +132
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #23 on: October 04, 2012, 05:37:34 pm »
0


Here's an idea that hurts VP acquisition without Cursing...

BLOOD MONEY
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
-
While this is in play, you may not gain Victory cards.
This needs to be "you may not buy Victory cards". Otherwise it has rules clashes with a number of cards.

You mean like Horn of Plenty, Border Village, etc.? That was the entire point of the wording change -- to prevent players who play this version of Blood Money to acquire Victory cards in ANY manner.

I really like this idea, even though it's pretty similar to Quarry. That being said, it should definitely be 'buy' instead of 'gain'. It's a Treasure card anyway, and the number of situations in which you'd be gaining a Victory card without buying it during your Buy phase is small. In fact, it's so small that it's not worth the terrible rules interactions that 'you may not gain' would cause. Why in the world would you want to insert terrible rules interactions just to eliminate cool combos with Horn of Plenty and Border Village? Makes no sense.

What terrible rules interactions? Other than HoP, BV, and the aforementioned Swindler interaction that isn't a Swindler interaction?
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7467
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10648
    • View Profile
Re: Card That Name! -- Episode 2: Blood Money
« Reply #24 on: October 04, 2012, 05:44:33 pm »
0


Here's an idea that hurts VP acquisition without Cursing...

BLOOD MONEY
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
-
While this is in play, you may not gain Victory cards.
This needs to be "you may not buy Victory cards". Otherwise it has rules clashes with a number of cards.

You mean like Horn of Plenty, Border Village, etc.? That was the entire point of the wording change -- to prevent players who play this version of Blood Money to acquire Victory cards in ANY manner.

I really like this idea, even though it's pretty similar to Quarry. That being said, it should definitely be 'buy' instead of 'gain'. It's a Treasure card anyway, and the number of situations in which you'd be gaining a Victory card without buying it during your Buy phase is small. In fact, it's so small that it's not worth the terrible rules interactions that 'you may not gain' would cause. Why in the world would you want to insert terrible rules interactions just to eliminate cool combos with Horn of Plenty and Border Village? Makes no sense.

What terrible rules interactions? Other than HoP, BV, and the aforementioned Swindler interaction that isn't a Swindler interaction?

The problem with 'you may not gain' is that there are cards effects that tell you to gain things. The rules do not cover what would happen when these two effects conflict. 'You may not buy' is fine, because no card forces you to buy things. There are tons of other threads in this forum where people list examples of why 'you may not gain' is bad, and I'm not going to waste time dredging them up for you.

Here's my question for you: why are you so stuck on using 'you may not gain'?
« Last Edit: October 04, 2012, 05:45:36 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  All
 

Page created in 0.097 seconds with 21 queries.