Print

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

[FireChipmunks]

This is by no means I final product, I've just been fiddling around with this concept and I was wondering what you guys thought:

[4$ Action]
+1 Buy
While this card is in play, when you buy a card, gain a silver, putting it at the bottom of your deck.

The mechanic is ideally meant to work sort of like stash: Play enough of these in one shuffle, and you can accumulate enough silvers at the bottom of your deck and ensure you draw a hand with 4 silvers, thus giving you a province. I'm just wondering about what else the card should have. I think the + Buy is a necessary part of it, because it adds the decision sometimes of whether or not you want to actually use two buys (thus getting you another silver), or use only one, or use one buy to get a good card and also buy a copper, so that you get another silver. (If you have 3 at the bottom of your deck already, for example, getting a 4th one could help ensure you get a province)

So...what do you guys think? I'd love to hear any other ideas about how this mechanic could be implemented, or what other effects the card could have to make it more interesting.

[NoMoreFun]

I like the idea, but the +buy makes it a little too easy. If you have 2 of these in your deck you're guaranteed a province at the end of it, and the silvers you gain will balance out the coppers you buy to trigger the effect. With deck sifters it will work a little too well.

If you actually had to buy the silvers, it would be a more reasonable card, though obviously a lot weaker. The idea could also work as a reaction, though taking up a spot in your hand will be a tough ask.

As far as names go, Gravedigger and Hoarder would be suitable if not for their similarities to existing cards.

[NoMoreFun]

A similar idea I had:

Pearl
$5
Treasure
If this is the first treasure you played this turn, worth $3, otherwise worth $2.
---
When you clean up this card, place it on the bottom of your deck, and discard all other Pearls from play.

Individually it's a weakened gold because it finds itself at the end of every shuffle, but it can also have a "stash" effect when you buy multiples.

[Drab Emordnilap]

Individually it's a weakened gold because it finds itself at the end of every shuffle, but it can also have a "stash" effect when you buy multiples.

But it's not weakened, because it never misses a shuffle. Every once in a while, you even get the same one twice in a shuffle.

[eHalcyon]

I like the idea, but the +buy makes it a little too easy. If you have 2 of these in your deck you're guaranteed a province at the end of it, and the silvers you gain will balance out the coppers you buy to trigger the effect. With deck sifters it will work a little too well.

Not quite true.  Just having four Silver on the bottom of your deck does no guaranteed drawing all four of them.  You might draw two of them, with the other two remaining in your draw pile.

[NoMoreFun]

Individually it's a weakened gold because it finds itself at the end of every shuffle, but it can also have a "stash" effect when you buy multiples.

But it's not weakened, because it never misses a shuffle. Every once in a while, you even get the same one twice in a shuffle.

Always being at the back end of a shuffle is a flaw that would become more pronounced as the game goes on. The earlier you can access your power cards, the better. Also that only applies to a single pearl; other pearls will be seen twice in one shuffle (being worth $2 the 2nd time around), then almost always miss a shuffle. I'd say it's worse enough than gold to be $5.

[eHalcyon]

Individually it's a weakened gold because it finds itself at the end of every shuffle, but it can also have a "stash" effect when you buy multiples.

But it's not weakened, because it never misses a shuffle. Every once in a while, you even get the same one twice in a shuffle.

Always being at the back end of a shuffle is a flaw that would become more pronounced as the game goes on. The earlier you can access your power cards, the better. Also that only applies to a single pearl; other pearls will be seen twice in one shuffle (being worth $2 the 2nd time around), then almost always miss a shuffle. I'd say it's worse enough than gold to be $5.

It's only worse if you buy multiples.

Suppose you have just one Pearl.  You draw it.  You play it.  You put it on the bottom of your deck.  When you get to the reshuffle, this is equivalent to having "Stashed" a Gold on top of your deck.  So you see it once per shuffle.

But it's actually even better than that, in the case where your last hand before the reshuffle leaves no cards in the draw pile.

An example of that:

You have 9 cards.  You draw Pearl-4X.  After playing it, you put Pearl on the bottom of your deck.  Now you draw Pearl-4X again.  And once more you put Pearl on the bottom of your deck.  You just played Pearl twice in one shuffle, and have it for the third shuffle as well.

You think you are "missing" the reshuffle because it's on the bottom, but it's actually not.  You actually ensured that it would NOT miss the reshuffle.  It is just a Stash-style topdeck made right when you clean it up.

[NoMoreFun]

Guess it's back to the drawing board. I would think having to wait to the very end of a reshuffle would be a penalty; knowing your power treasure would come last, meaning whatever you buy with it missed a reshuffle.

I designed a treasure that missed it's own triggered reshuffle for the contest, but people couldn't get past it being worth $4 ($4 every 2 shuffles - that's a silver + right?), and $3 seemed too weak to me.

At any rate, the bottom of the deck is ripe for card ideas. It's a pocket for deck density that doesn't affect your next turn (as seen in the OP), a semi permanent place for cards to be stored, an opportunity to design mechanics around reshuffles, and putting the card there can be seen at least be seen as a "slower" discarding. It's very far from a gimmick IMO; I think a big box set could have it as its central theme

[Asklepios]

I agree that its a little too easy, because of the +buy.

4/3 split, buy this action and a silver. Each time it comes up, buy two different treasures (even copper). Hitting a deck full of $8 draw should take barely any time at all, though I think simulation would be needed to see just how fast it is. It'd also be another card that feeeds the Feodum madness.

On the other hand, I don't think it'd be significantly better than say Jack of All Trades and is probably only slightly ahead of Bureaucrat, so I wouldn't say its overpowered, just a little too straightforward to make the game more rather than less interesting. I suppose its interesting in the sense that on the turn you gain it you're probably adding four treasure cards with three of them being silvers, but the sort of games that produces are not terribly interesting to me.

I'd also agree though that gaining to the bottom of your deck is an idea that Dominion hasn't really explored yet, and is actually very interesting.

To me, simpler and more interesting would be a $6 action that just says "gain a gold to the bottom of your deck".

[Jimmmmm]

I'd also agree though that gaining to the bottom of your deck is an idea that Dominion hasn't really explored yet, and is actually very interesting.

It'd be nice to have something to combo with Pearl Diver.