Print

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

[sitnaltax]

It seems likely that Guilds will have a curse-giver available. Based only on Baker, here's my guess:

$5 - Action
Choose one: +1 Action, or gain a coin token.
Each other player may discard one coin token. Any player who does not gains a Curse.

I don't think this is quite as powerful as Witch/Mountebank (I don't think a Coin is worth quite $2, and the Curse is conditional) but I think it's playable. And it provides coins itself, so there's no awkwardness of a card that refers to coins with no coin-givers in the Kingdom.

[SirPeebles]

My guess is that it will employ the other new mechanic, and will be a card which curses on gain if you pay extra.  Could use both, potentially.

[Serialian]

I doubt a curse on overpay. IGG needed to be a copper+ to make it fair at a 5 price point. Tossing a curse into a deck with a buy is powerful.

You're talking costing at least +2 more for the curse effect, putting the cost around 7 or 8

[achmed_sender]

Maybe you need to overpay money AND +buys to deal out curses...

Action
Effect: X
-------------------
You may overpay: For each $1+buy you overpaid, your opponents gain a curse

[Just a Rube]

Maybe you need to overpay money AND +buys to deal out curses...

Action
Effect: X
-------------------
You may overpay: For each $1+buy you overpaid, your opponents gain a curse

But then it's extremely weak in sets with +buy. And curses make +buys harder to match up with significant quantities of money in general.

More broadly, one reason IGG is so powerful is because it drains the curse and IGG piles at the same time; that's one reeason why it gets weaker with other cursers present. If you can make the piles different (and here you can do so by just buying one or two copies of the new card without overpaying) it plays very differently.

That said, I'm not sure a curser on overpaying really makes sense in general. I suspect a more "boring" curser like:
"Action-Attack $5
Gain 1 coin token
All other players gain a curse"

Slogs will generally value coin tokens more in general (since they will probably have a harder time spiking to key price points, and have a lower expected return on +cards), so something like this might be reasonable. At the same time, moneyish or enginey decks would get more return from witch's +cards, so this would seem weaker than witch against decent trashing.

Edit: Obviously this would be an attack

[DG]

The overpay for giving out a curse would need to be pretty steep. You don't want games decided by early incomes spikes that allow one player to get value from overpayment when the opponents cannot. This problem is already seem with border villages and strong 5 cost cards like wharves or witches where border village +witch > witch > gold.

[LastFootnote]

The set may not even have a Curse-giving attack, or a junker at all. Cornucopia had two. I wouldn't mind if we didn't get one in Guilds.

[Drab Emordnilap]

$5 - Action
Choose one: +1 Action, or gain a coin token.
Each other player may discard one coin token. Any player who does not gains a Curse.

This seems super weak. Imagine this card:


$5 - Action - Attack
Choose one: +1 Action, or gain a coin token.
Each other player gains a curse.


This is not a strong card, but your card is even weaker.

[GendoIkari]

The set may not even have a Curse-giving attack, or a junker at all. Cornucopia had two. I wouldn't mind if we didn't get one in Guilds.

I would! Every set has had at least one Curser, except Dark Ages which had the Looters instead. Not having a Curser would seem really strange to me.

[jonts26]

How about this:


Action-Attack $5

Gain 2 coin tokens
Each other player gains a curse
-----
When you gain this, each other player gains a curse and a coin token.

[Watno]

$4 Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player gains a curse and takes 2 coin tokens.

[jsh357]

How about this:


Action-Attack $5

Gain 2 coin tokens
Each other player gains a curse
-----
When you gain this, each other player gains a curse and a coin token.

It's like Mountebank except you die

[SirPeebles]

Gaining a Curse and a coin token is way better than gaining a Curse and a Copper.  Yup.

[WanderingWinder]

The set may not even have a Curse-giving attack, or a junker at all. Cornucopia had two. I wouldn't mind if we didn't get one in Guilds.

I would! Every set has had at least one Curser, except Dark Ages which had the Looters instead. Not having a Curser would seem really strange to me.

Now I find this funny, since I would say that Cornucopia had no cursers, really. I assume LF is counting Followers (but it's a prize!) and Jester (which I wouldn't really call a curser, even though it *can* sometimes give curses).

How about this:


Action-Attack $5

Gain 2 coin tokens
Each other player gains a curse
-----
When you gain this, each other player gains a curse and a coin token.

Other than being the best card in the game, by a good stretch? I mean, compare to mountebank: Two tokens is significantly better than two coin-for-this-turn (well, clearly better; I think it's probably significant, particularly on a card like this), they can't moat it with a curse, and they gain a curse when you buy this. Now, to compensate, you don't give them coppers, and they get one coin token when you buy it. Yeah, the on-buy is good for you (until the curses run out) overall, and the no copper I just don't see as *nearly* worth it, largely because there's no curse-moating.

$4 Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player gains a curse and takes 2 coin tokens.

This seems very interesting. I don't know about the particular execution (though maybe it's great), but it's very cool that, for instance, it's *generally* not going to be something you want to play after the curses are gone. Or at least there's a nice tension there.

[Watno]

I think he's counting Young Witch.

[WanderingWinder]

I think he's counting Young Witch.

Oh right, duh.

[LastFootnote]

I think he's counting Young Witch.

Yes, I was counting Young Witch and Jester as junkers.

[soulnet]

$4 Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player gains a curse and takes 2 coin tokens.

Nice idea, but this seems way weaker than Sea Hag. In general, giving everyone (including yourself) the same bonus is better for them than for you (especially true in a terminal action), unless the bonus has specific synergy with the rest of the card or with a particular deck (for instance, giving everyone Copper benefits sloggers but hurts engineers). Basically, why Council Room is worse than Smitty if you don't have discard attacks, unless you really need the Buy.

In this case, the bonus for the rest is +$2 without spending the action AND it can be saved for later if it happens to be timed wrong for them. Timing of the bonus is the only thing in favor of the player playing the card, but in this case, that's closer to a disadvantage.

Also, Sea Hag puts the Curse on top of the opponent's deck, so the attack on this card is weaker.

I would give them just 1 coin.

For the curse on-buy, I'd said this would be done just if overpaid (just to mantain the theme), but I bet we won't see another curse on-buy (especially since its been mentioned that the benefit of overpaying was going to be proportional to the overpaid amount, and giving out more than 1 curse on-buy seems terrible). I guess it could be something like "for each $3 you overpay, curse the others", so that multiple curses are really difficult to do, even impossible early in the game, and difficult later because you are going to be single-cursed a lot at the beginning.

[WanderingWinder]

I think overpay-for-curses could work, potentially (though I tend to doubt we'll see it?)

Something like:
CARDNAME
Cost: $2+
+1 card, +$1
______________
When you buy this, you may overpay for it. For every $2 you overpaid, each opponent gains a curse.

Thus at 4 it's like IGG, but terminal and you get a card, instead of treasure and can gain a copper. At $2, it's a card that would probably be nobody's favorite but also not the worst ever 2-cost. At 6 you get to give 2 curses and have a not-too-useful card. At 8.... well, etc. Probably this is a little above the power curve, but I am not entirely sure. And some variation ought to be do-able.

[Warfreak2]

At $8, it would be strongly preferable to a Province - but in games using this, the Curses will be gone long before anyone hits $8.

[MainiacJoe]

Two ideas.  I'm not experienced enough to accurately cost these thing so please be gentle on that account.

1. A card where you pay coin tokens to distribute curses.  This particular one, like Sea Hag, does not benefit you at all.
cost:4
Assassin
You may discard a coin token.  If you do, each other player gains a curse.

2. With the coin tokens floating around to ease purchases, maybe we'll see a 6-cost curser.  Would this be too strong?
cost: 6
Master Warlock
+1 card
+1 action
Each other player gains a curse.

[WanderingWinder]

Two ideas.  I'm not experienced enough to accurately cost these thing so please be gentle on that account.

1. A card where you pay coin tokens to distribute curses.  This particular one, like Sea Hag, does not benefit you at all.
cost:4
Assassin
You may discard a coin token.  If you do, each other player gains a curse.

2. With the coin tokens floating around to ease purchases, maybe we'll see a 6-cost curser.  Would this be too strong?
cost: 6
Master Warlock
+1 card
+1 action
Each other player gains a curse.

The first one wouldn't work very well, because there probably won't be any cards that generate coin tokens in whatever game you are playing - in general, for a card to use something like this, it needs to have some way to ensure that it is in the game. Beyond that, it just doesn't seem like a very fun card (and is also a lot weaker than sea hag even if you have coin tokens).

The second one's biggest problem is that it's just the same as familiar, just with a different cost.

[soulnet]

I like the non-terminal cheap Curser. And Assassin seems like a perfect name.

Assassin $4
+1 Action
Choose one: Gain a coin token, or discard all your coin tokens and each other player gains a Curse per token discarded this way.

This seems like its weak but usable when Curses are out, and the fact that is non-Terminal is not as strong when a Curser is present.

Variant:

Assassin $4
+1 Action
+$1
Discard any number of coin tokens. Each other player gains a Curse per token discarded this way.
---
When you buy this, you may overpay for it. For each $1 you overpay, gain a coin token.

[HiveMindEmulator]

1. A card where you pay coin tokens to distribute curses.  This particular one, like Sea Hag, does not benefit you at all.
cost:4
Assassin
You may discard a coin token.  If you do, each other player gains a curse.

This is the kind of effect I was thinking, probably with some kind of vanilla bonus and an on-buy effect to give you coin tokens. Maybe costing $3 and giving 1 coin token per coin you overpay for it? So you can buy it for $3 if you have another source of coin tokens, but otherwise need to overpay to get use out of it.

EDIT: Yeah, pretty much just what soulnet posted...

[MainiacJoe]

Assassin $4
+1 Action
Choose one: Gain a coin token, or discard all your coin tokens and each other player gains a Curse per token discarded this way.

I think that any card that let's you give out more than one curse at a time without help like TR/KC is going to be too powerful.  But this:

Assassin $4
+1 Action
Choose one: Gain a coin token, or discard a coin token and each other player gains a Curse.

Would be more reasonable I think.  Or even,

Assassin $4 (or $5?)
+1 Action
+1 coin token
You may discard a coin token.  If you do, each other player gains a Curse.

One problem with these, though, is that they make the generic coin-token-gainer, which there has to be somewhere, also the curser of the set.