Print

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

[ehunt]

I suppose you could buy two with 4 and two potions, but if you've got 4 and two potions and two buys early enough in the game that you want two familiars, more power to you. What other disadvantage is there? (Of course, you can still miss the early familiar in this world by missing your potion. But even then, at least you can buy a familiar with curse silver potion estate estate.)

[Davio]

I think it's well priced as it is right now.

Making it cost $3+P makes the non-Potion buy more critical, like the obvious Silver or some other $3 terminal Silver.
You really need that extra cash, because getting stuck with $2+P is really harmful.

Make it that cheap and it becomes a bit too easy to pick up, imagine drawing $7+P with 2 Buys.
With Familiar costing $3+P you only get a measly $4 card with it, instead of say a Hunting Party with the Familiar.


I often think of Potions as $2.5, but that's mainly because they cost $4, the Potions have a drawback that you can only buy Potion-costing cards with them and you can only buy one such card with every Potion, which makes them closer to $2 for me. Well, this puts Familiar at about $5 while I think it's slightly better than a Witch. Making it a $4 and putting it in the same range as Sea Hag is absurd, because it's way better than Sea Hag.

Nah, I like it how it is.

Now, if they'd make Adventurer cost $4, someone might even buy it!

[ehunt]

I think the 7 and a potion and 2 buys scenario is pretty contrived. The difference in probability between this happening (early enough that I still want a familiar) and the situation where you get 8 and a potion and 2 buys (in which case you could get a 5 and a familiar anyway) is much less than the difference in probability between the scenarios that you draw potion copper copper estate estate and potion copper copper copper estate on turn 3; this latter difference is the end of the game for one player.

In general, regardless of how potion costs compare to coin costs, I never buy the argument that card X should cost more than card Y because card X is better than card Y; the only constraint on the cost of a card should be that it optimizes the fun of the game.

I do buy the argument that the 3P cost makes you more likely to buy a non-terminal 2 or a silver on the opening turn, but I don't see why this is good (or bad).

Also, I like adventurer at 6! The moral here is that everyone's different!

[WanderingWinder]

Familiar's amazingly powerful as it is. Make it cheaper, and it would be ridiculous, to the point of possibly being broken.

[chwhite]

I think it's well priced as it is right now.

Making it cost $3+P makes the non-Potion buy more critical, like the obvious Silver or some other $3 terminal Silver.
You really need that extra cash, because getting stuck with $2+P is really harmful.

Make it that cheap and it becomes a bit too easy to pick up, imagine drawing $7+P with 2 Buys.
With Familiar costing $3+P you only get a measly $4 card with it, instead of say a Hunting Party with the Familiar.


I often think of Potions as $2.5, but that's mainly because they cost $4, the Potions have a drawback that you can only buy Potion-costing cards with them and you can only buy one such card with every Potion, which makes them closer to $2 for me. Well, this puts Familiar at about $5 while I think it's slightly better than a Witch. Making it a $4 and putting it in the same range as Sea Hag is absurd, because it's way better than Sea Hag.

Nah, I like it how it is.

Now, if they'd make Adventurer cost $4, someone might even buy it!

Potion costs are incredibly non-linear, but it seems to me that the general rule of thumb is that the cheaper the non-potion cost of an Alchemy card, the more "expensive" the Potion is.  Vineyard and Transmute would be way better and way cheaper if they cost $4 rather than a potion: Vineyard would go from "good in the right situation" to "abusively good in a wider variety of situations" and Transmute would go from "horrible" to "strong opener, makes Baron look horrible".  For those cards, Potion is worth more than $4.  But that doesn't mean Possession is worth $10.

I think once you get up to Familiar, though, the "potion = $2.5" roughly holds.  You can't get it on the first shuffle but it's easier to get on Turn 3 than Gold if that's what you're gunning for: yeah, I'd call Familiar about equal to five-and-a-half.  And that's exactly where it deserves to be priced: it's a better Witch, after all.

As for Adventurer, yes it's super weak at $6, but it would be way too strong at $4.  I suspect it would be a strong but not overpowering $5, maybe a hair better than Venture.  I'm sure it would be fairly priced at $3P, but we're probably not seeing any more potion cards and I think I'm okay with that.  I bet the reason it's at $6 is that it "has" to be more expensive than Venture, in fact, even though that makes it look worse and get bought far less frequently.  Sort of like Smithy vs. Library, maybe.

[timchen]

I haven't come to think of it, but yeah, 2+P sounds like a good idea for Familiar. It is kind of broken of course, but that is just, on general grounds. I personally does not mind as much a card overpowering, as much as it is rectified but more swingy. Note that the argument that 3+P enforces a silver buy does not really hold: in the case when you draw both buys together, it is overwhelmingly more likely that the rest of the cards are 2C+1E rather than 1C+2E. Therefore, as long as the card can provide $1 it shall be fine.

On the other hand, there is really not much you can do about drawng P+2C+2E. The problem is, with familiar on board, I am not sure of the prospect of ignoring it. If it is 2+P maybe it becomes a must to open potion (not that I am saying at 3+P it is not a must); but at least I feel the luck factor is reduced.

[DG]

Some of the changes that you get from a 2+potion cost seem minor but probably impact play a great deal. Rather than removing the risks with 3+potion, players would just take more risks on 2+potion and open workshop/potion, trade route/potion, herbalist/potion, loan/potion, etc.

[timchen]

True, but one important point I am trying to make is that +2 coin card and +1 coin card make little difference here. ie, if you are aiming for 3+P, herbalist and loan are not really a risk. Workshop and Trade route are more of a problem, though.

[rod-]

Mis-mind-interpreted the question, retracted.