Print

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

[fp]

It is a silly question; however, consider that drawing 3 cards causes more shuffling and hence, less use.

[rrenaud]

At +3 cards, I think it would be absolutely insane.

[Eagle]

I agree, it would be a bit overpowered.  And way too cheap at $3.

[fp]

What if it cost $5?

[chwhite]

A Masquerade which drew 3 cards and was the same in all other respects would be the best card in the game.  Better than Chapel, better than King's Court, better than Goons. Masquerade-plus, even just leading into into Big Money, would likely be absolutely dominant in every setup, maybe even against an optimized Gardens rush.

It would still be very powerful at $5.

[david707]

It is a silly question; however, consider that drawing 3 cards causes more shuffling and hence, less use.

+ 3 Cards is almost always better than +2 Cards, which is why Smithy costs 4 and moat casts 2. Masquerade would be far better at +3 cards. It'd need play testing, but  I go with about $5.

[Teproc]

Masquerade is already overpowered, be thankful that most people are filling their decks with actions instead of just buying Provinces turn 9 onwards (just made that statistic up, but it honestly feels like that when I'm playing Big Money Masquerade).

So yeah, 3 cards would make it worse because nobody would ever buy actions along with it.

[rrenaud]

So yeah, 3 cards would make it worse because nobody would ever buy actions along with it.

Logic fail .

[chwhite]

Masquerade is already overpowered, be thankful that most people are filling their decks with actions instead of just buying Provinces turn 9 onwards (just made that statistic up, but it honestly feels like that when I'm playing Big Money Masquerade).

So yeah, 3 cards would make it worse because nobody would ever buy actions along with it.

Masquerade as it is is probably the best single action for a Big Money-esque strategy.  Better than Smithy/Envoy, which are its primary competition.  I won't always go Big Money with Masquerade, but I consider it a tremendous incentive to pursue that sort of strategy, and probably should do it even more than I already do.

[papaHav]

It is a silly question.

+shuffle speed = more use for all cards including itself


Noise/signal ratio anyone?

[Teproc]

So yeah, 3 cards would make it worse because nobody would ever buy actions along with it.

Logic fail .

Worse in the sense of overpowered. I admit it wasn't clear in this sentence though ^^.

[fp]

+shuffle speed = more use for all cards including itself

That is actually not true. For example, suppose Masquerade drew 3, and you played it on turn 4 (when you only have 2 remaining cards in your deck), then you would shuffle your previous hand from turn 3 to form your deck resulting in 4 card remaining. Hence, you delay the next shuffle which has a Masquerade available by 1 turn. In the early game this actually translates into about 20% less usage.

[guided]

Better. By lots. And lots and lots. Full stop.

Next question?

[papaHav]

Apologies... allow me to qualify - I am not controlling for big money or turn 5 horizon.
But rather in practice, each torturer leads to constant shuffling and more playing of every torturer at a rate far exceeding witches.

2 "+3 masquerades" and 2 villages chains faster, drawing the whole deck sooner, leading to "more plays of itself" than a +2 version...

It also needs less trashing to do so, has significantly more buying power, trashes from a better selection of cards and passes worse cards on average to your opponent

Best thing about such a hypothetical +3 engine card is that the trash is optional - i.e. it refines super fast and theres no refinement fears of forced trashing and no need to buy copper/curses to pass (although i probably would lol)

[Axe Knight]

It certainly would make that whole KC + KC + Masquerade more wild...

[theory]

This topic is a bit like: "What if Ambassador also gave you +$3?  What if Grand Market was worth 4VP each?"  If anything, Masquerade should be nerfed instead of boosted.

I do think it is interesting to look in the Secret Histories to see what cards used to be ridiculously overpowered.  King's Court, for instance, used to cost $5...

[WanderingWinder]

A more realistic change might be what I've often wondered about pawn. What if the choices didn't have to be different? With the recent release of Cornucopia, and specifically the wording of remake, this has become more concrete, i.e. the wording would be:
Do this twice. Choose one: +$1 +1Card +1Action +1Buy
Obviously this card is stronger than Pawn as printed, but how much stronger? I think it would be fairly costed at $4. It would be Dominion's 1st +2Buy card. Other than that, it doesn't do anything particularly well - it draws like moat, it gives actions like village without the card, it gives money like a terminal silver. But the flexibility is big, as is the fact that under this wording, you can choose to draw, and then look at that card before you figure out what you want to do next.