Print

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

[AJD]

Gemstone
Types: Treasure
Cost: $4
Worth $1. Rarity cards cost $6 less this turn, but not less than $0.
Setup: Add an extra Kingdom card pile costing $5 or more to the Supply. Cards from that pile are Rarity cards and cost $5 more.

The supply pile thing is cool, but making it cost $5 more is too much. Gemstone is realistically the only way to get that card, so it's almost like Gemstone isn't in the supply at all, but is an awkward embargo to a card you'd really rather have.

I think the point is to make the Rarity card extra good for TfB, and extra easy to get with Gemstone.

Aw, I thought it was just to make relevant that line in the Dark Ages FAQ about what to do if Band of Misfits copies King's Court.

[mail-mi]

I make no apologies for submitting an insane card. No apologies, I say!!!

Just because it combos with Scout doesn't make it insane.

His isn't the one that combos with scout. 

[ConMan]

I make no apologies for submitting an insane card. No apologies, I say!!!

Just because it combos with Scout doesn't make it insane.

His isn't the one that combos with scout. 

I'm still waiting for Robz to do his traditional "How every card comboes with Scout" analysis. Because clearly all of the cards here are either Scout-enablers (imba!) or Scout-nerfers (boo!).

[SirPeebles]

Oh man, Rarity Band of Misfits!  That would be something.

[markusin]

Some of my thoughts.

Relic
Types: Treasure
Cost: $6
Worth $2. When you play this, you may trash up to 2 cards from your hand and play area. If you trashed at least one Action card, +$2 and +1 VP.

This can be a super Moneylender, but it's more versatile that Moneylender, And Counterfeit for that matter. Maybe it can use another bonus in lieu of the +vp bonus. I think vp tokens should be a bit more massable.

Usurer
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+1 Card. +1 Action. Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Treasure. Discard the rest. Trash the Treausre; gain a Treasure costing up to $3 more than it, putting it on top of your deck. Each other player may gain a Copper, putting it into his hand.

looks like a mine for next turn, but not quite. Mine (and Taxman) are terminal, but this isn't. Any cantrip can let you draw the treasure, including another Usurer. In fact, it might be too good at platinum flooding if you buy more usurers with the new treasure.

Treasure Chest
Types: Treasure
Cost: $4
Worth $1. When you play this, discard the top card of your deck. If it is a Treasure, gain a Silver

It doesn't get more thematic for the treasure chest expansion that this. Maybe better for another set, but still has my vote. Unfortunately, curses block the treasure gaining where the silver flooding might be most useful.

Metropolis
Types: Action
Cost: $7
+1 Card. +2 Actions. Treasure cards other than Copper produce an extra $1 this turn.

I hope this gets a "while in play" clause if it wins, but great concept I think. It's not quite Bank either. I like how it gives reward for having silvers, and gives reward for getting Kingdom treasures. Exactly what Prosperity can use. Too strong with the village effect?

Charity (A)
Types: Treasure
Cost: $7
Worth $4. +1 Buy.
While this is in play, when you buy a card, each other player gains a card costing at most $2 less than it.

With a "may gain" everyone gets Duchy when you get province and province when you get Colony. Or worse, causes a 3-pile when things just start coming together. Not so good. With a forced gain, it's practicaly GG if you pile out Pearl Diver or something.

Wedding
Types: Action
Cost: $7
+1 Action. Reveal cards from the top you your deck until you reveal an Action card, a Treasure card and a Victory card. If you do reveal a card of each of these types, put an Action card, a Treasure card and a Victory card from among the revealed cards into you hand. Discard the other revealed cards.

It seems pretty clear to me that the card refers to 3 distinct cards.

Cathedral
Types: Action
Cost: $7
Gain two action cards costing less than this and a Gold.

Should be more balanced with one action card gain. Good where Explorer is good. Even the most reliable engines might want gold to double province. Also good for BM-ish decks that just want 1 province a turn or something.

King's Greed
Types: Action
Cost: $10
Put your deck into your discard pile. Look through your discard pile and set aside up to 3 Action cards from it. Play them in any order.

Way too good, even at 10. This is one of those effects that just doesn't
lend itself to balance.

Mediator
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $3
+$3. Reveal 3 cards from your hand. The player to your left selects one of them. Discard it or put it on top of your deck.
When another player plays an Attack, you may set this aside from your hand. If you do, +1 Card, +1 VP, and at the start of your next turn, discard this.

Better than Mandarin, even if your opponent was the one who got to decide whether you discard or topdeck the card.
It can't give $3. The reaction wording is kind of weird. It should just be discard this from your hand, like Beggar.

Prospector
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Buy. Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Treasure cards into your hand. Discard the rest. Each other player may discard a Treasure. If he does, he draws a card.

Aqueduct (A)
Types: Action
Cost: $7
+2 Buys. +$2. Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Treasure cards into your hand and discard the rest.

These cards are two versions of the same thing. If I had to pick one, I'd pick the more modest Prospector. That vault-like benefit to your opponents seems important to keep it from being a super envoy, though it might already be a super envoy.

Forum
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Draw until you have 6 cards in hand.
While this is in play, when you play a Silver, you may trash that Silver. If you do, +1 VP.

Again, I prefer having vp tokens be more accessible. It's all about being able to get 50+ vp tokens in a game. Nevertheless, I like the bottom effect that gives a benefit for trashing Silvers once they've outlived their usefulness

Dividends
Types: Treasure
Cost: $6
Worth $1. When you play this, gain a Treasure card costing less than this, putting it into your hand.

The presence of Venture in the kingdom would make this too strong. Otherwise it's kinda like Explorer and Masterpiece.
Hmmmm....

Inheritance
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Buy.
While this is in play, Treasure cards costs $3 less, but not less than $0.

The treasure quarry. Simple, but nice. Quarry makes it look bad. It fits into BMU, but doesn't help buy
VP cards, so it would require some decision making.

Standard Bearer
Types: Action
Cost: $7
Trash this card. Put your deck (not including your discard pile) into your hand.

Needs a 10-card cap or something. Even then I'd be wary of this card. It's easy to trigger reshuffles with lots of cantrips and cheap sifters like warehouse and cellar. It might as well say draw everything. The extra swinginess isn't worth it in the end when it's a mega-turn enabler.

Charity (B)
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $1. When you play this, choose one: Each player gains a Copper; or each player gains a Silver. Either way, put the card you gained into your hand.

Gravitates the entire game towards BM when players go for this.

Fountain
Types: Treasure
Cost: $6
Worth $0. When you play this, if you have no other Treasures in play, +2 VP. You may trash this immediately. If you do, +$2.

Probably my favourite vp token generator of the bunch. The anti-stack makes it work. The online version should add a line that says something like "ATTENTION, IT IS CRITICAL THAT YOU PLAY THIS BEFORE PLAYING ANY OTHER TREASURES"

Savant
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+3 Cards. +1 Action. Each other player draws a card, then reveals and discards one or more cards. He gets +1 VP per Action or Treasure card he discards.

Sort of like Governor, but I think I like this better. The vp chip penalty might be enough to make this cost $5. Does anyone else have thoughts about that?

Queen's Palace
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+1 Action.
You may return a VP token. If you do, +3 Cards, +1 Buy, and each other player gets +1 VP.
Setup: Each player gets +2 VP.

Never thought about trading in vp chips for stuff, but this implementation seems neat. Reminds me of The Traders and Barbarians scenario for Catan. That's a good thing for me.

Witch's Trove
Types: Treasure
Cost: $6
Worth $2. When you play this, reveal you hand and discard all revealed Curses. +$3 for each Curse discarded. You may gain a Curse.

Seems too heavy handed of a curse counter card, no?

Reputation
Types: Treasure
Cost: $10*
Worth $4.
Unless in play, this costs $2 less per card costing $6 or more you have in play, but not less than $0.

Grand Market can be a frustrating card due to it's strong snowball effect. This also has a powerful snowball effect, but maybe not as bad since it's a treasure and therefore anti-engine.

Indulgence
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $2. +1 Buy. When you play this, the player to your left names a card in the Supply costing between $3 and $6. If you buy that card this turn, +2VP.

Also quite thematic for this treasure chest expansion. Maybe I will finally have a good reason to buy scout. You know what, this is really funky, in a good way. One of my favourites here.

[Schneau]

I don't know if anyone else has said this since I haven't read most of the posts yet, but I really am not a big fan of the vanilla bonuses being all on one line with the other on-play things. Having them each on their own line makes them much easier to parse IMHO.

[ConMan]

Golden Touch
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Trash the top card of your deck. Gain a Gold, putting it on top of your deck.

Very, very swingy. I don't think this will work. Although, what if you added a traditional self-Spy effect? That reduces the risk a little, at the expense of often discarding a good top card.

Aqueduct (B)
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. +$2. Discard a card. If you do, +1 Card.
While this is in play, Attack cards you play have no effect on other players.

Eh. I've noticed other people saying this doesn't feel too "Prosperity-ish", and I agree. It's a slightly better Oasis with a reverse-Moat. In which case, I'd probably either build a deck without Attacks, or without Aqueducts, and only very rarely would I bother trying to use both.

Inheritance
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Buy.
While this is in play, Treasure cards costs $3 less, but not less than $0.

Ah, the Prosperity-Quarry (except Quarry was Prosperity already, so ... *brain explodey*). Let's try that again. Ah, the Treasure-Quarry, but instead of providing coin it gives a Buy, meaning you can always double-Silver on a play of this. Or with two of these, you can triple-Gold. Um, that's probably a bit too powerful, since getting two $5s and a Village is not an uncommon thing to do. Maaaaybe if it only dropped Treasure prices by $2, or if it didn't have the +Buy.

Crown (B)
Types: Treasure
Cost: $7
Worth $4.
When you gain this, each other player gets +2 VP.

This is a very Prosperity card. Big cost for big effect, positive player interaction, VP tokens. Fairly vanilla, but I like it. Probably needs a bit of balancing, but the concept is good.

Standard Bearer
Types: Action
Cost: $7
Trash this card. Put your deck (not including your discard pile) into your hand.

Another one-shot super-swingy card. It kind of puts me in mind of Madman, but I think this is easier to pull off (except for the timing swinginess of needing to play it just after a reshuffle). I don't think this will be useful enough, often enough to justify purchasing it and then waiting to get it in hand to play.

Griffin
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
When you play this, reveal your hand. This is worth $1 per Victory card revealed.
Once per turn, while this is in play, when you buy a Victory card, +1 Buy and +$1.

Incentivises early greening, and top and bottom synergise well. Really nice when there are multiple of these in play, it's like a this-turn Merchant Guild (sort of). Probably a decent card.

Charity (B)
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $1. When you play this, choose one: Each player gains a Copper; or each player gains a Silver. Either way, put the card you gained into your hand.

Also a very Prosperity card. Sort of like the Treasure-gaining option of Governor, but not quite, but it doesn't help get to really big money as much so I'm not 100% sold on it.

Fountain
Types: Treasure
Cost: $6
Worth $0. When you play this, if you have no other Treasures in play, +2 VP. You may trash this immediately. If you do, +$2.

Could result in a bit of an infinite loop state if you decide to just play this and buy nothing. Anti-synergises quite heavily with a lot of alt-Treasures, especially Counterfeit, Venture and Bank. I don't think this one works.

Savant
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+3 Cards. +1 Action. Each other player draws a card, then reveals and discards one or more cards. He gets +1 VP per Action or Treasure card he discards.

I don't know about this one. I think I want to see it in action, because I'm not sure what the right play style is. Especially nasty after a hand-reducing attack.

Patent
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $2.
While this is in play, when you buy a card that is not a Victory card, you may gain a copy of it, putting it on top of your deck. If you do, trash this.

Does it need the "not a Victory card" rider? I suppose you do, just to prevent double-Provincing and breaking PPR, but otherwise you're gaining an extra Victory card but junking the top of your deck. I like this one, and it probably does work nicely as it is.

[LastFootnote]

I don't know if anyone else has said this since I haven't read most of the posts yet, but I really am not a big fan of the vanilla bonuses being all on one line with the other on-play things. Having them each on their own line makes them much easier to parse IMHO.

Sorry! For me it makes the cards easier to parse. The fact that Artist's and Mediator's +$3 components were on their own line when submitted was what caused me to gloss over them. Not that that excuses it. My apologies to the two people who submitted those cards! I will endeavor to be more careful in the future.

Having all that stuff on one line also saves space, for what that's worth. With 52 submissions, I'm all about saving space where I can.

But mostly I'm going to keep putting them on one line because TYRANT!

[eHalcyon]

Sophisticated is not one of the things I would describe myself as, but I suppose it's a compliment so thank you.

All British people are sophisticated.

Comment on Tables' comments (can't believe I watched the whole thing):

Relic -- as others have commented, there ARE existing cards that trash from play -- Counterfeit and Procession.

Wedding -- good point that it lets you dig for ANY action and treasure card if you have no victory cards in your deck.

Crown (A) -- your reaction is hilarious.

Crown (B) -- your musings about Thief were interesting.  I think what you were looking for is the cute Ambassador trick, especially in 4p.

Palladium -- did you catch that, as written, it should trash itself?

Reputation -- you've got it wrong.  Reputations DO cost less per Reputation in play; the "unless in play" clause is to prevent paradoxes where Reputation is reducing the cost of Reputation until it can no longer actually reduce the cost of Reputation, etc.

Silk Merchant -- oh, is the trashing a reference to Spice Merchant?  I did not think of that.

I have a guess for which card is yours.  I will send a PM.

[Asper]

Wow, the feedback makes me think my card is so horrible even i shouldn't vote for it... 
Well, at least it also made me change my mind on something i thought was a good idea, so... I guess it had some good effect.

By the way, when will we know the next expansion? Wednesday?

Well, I already knew my card stank, so...

We can't all always be brilliant. Personally i had a bad feeling for Prosperity all along, probably because the set is my least favourite. I still tried, and i learned i shouldn't force things just to participate. Well, at least i can help my favourite cards with my vote, and at Hinterlands it's a new game, anyhow.

Sophisticated is not one of the things I would describe myself as, but I suppose it's a compliment so thank you.

Wedding -- good point that it lets you dig for ANY action and treasure card if you have no victory cards in your deck.

Not true. You need to reveal one of each type to get them in hand.

[eHalcyon]

Sophisticated is not one of the things I would describe myself as, but I suppose it's a compliment so thank you.

Wedding -- good point that it lets you dig for ANY action and treasure card if you have no victory cards in your deck.

Not true. You need to reveal one of each type to get them in hand.

Errr.... bad point, Tables.  Tsk tsk.

[Beyond Awesome]

This is my first time participating in one of these contests. How do I go about voting. Do I PM LF with my votes?

[ConMan]

Statue
Types: Action
Cost: $7
Discard up to 3 cards from your hand. +1 VP per card discarded.

3VP per turn with no move into endgame? Sign me up! This needs something to limit its power, particularly if you have a good draw+village engine going. As-is, it requires too much modification to work properly.

Aqueduct (A)
Types: Action
Cost: $7
+2 Buys. +$2. Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Treasure cards into your hand and discard the rest.

Treasure-Scout! Only not really. More like a limited dig-for-Treasure, so it's kind of like a hybrid Scout-Adventurer. Which I can dig (hahaha I'm so witty). Really, really nice Tunnel interaction. Probably needs a name change, though, especially if you try to mix this with the other set design contest.

Deed
Types: Treasure – Reaction
Cost: $5
Worth $2
When you gain a Victory card, you may discard this from your hand. If you do, +2 VP.

Nice for Gardens/Silk Roads decks and other slogs, where you can deal with being a bit short of cash as long as the game keeps going for longer. As others have pointed out, this could also be written as a Guilds-style overpay with little modification. Not bad.

Philanthropist
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+3 VP. Each other player gains a card costing up to $5.

I have no idea if this is balanced. It looks incredibly unbalanced, but that depends a lot on what cards there are to gain. In some cases this could be barely short of an attack, particularly against decks that don't want a lot of cheap cards in them. It's interesting enough that I'd like to see it in play to work out how well it actually works.

Clearing House
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+2 Cards. +1 Action. You may trash any number of Treasure cards from your hand. +1 Card per card trashed in this way.

Powerful, especially in Colony games I suspect. It would definitely be worth buying on most boards, since it's common enough to at least consider buying a Lab for $6 and this adds potentially strong trashing to the mix. I'd play with it.

Workhouse
Types: Action
Cost: $7
+$4.

Eh. Sure, it's a powerful vanilla, but there's no "wow" factor. Or to put it another way, it's "lacking a certain something".

Gemstone
Types: Treasure
Cost: $4
Worth $1. Rarity cards cost $6 less this turn, but not less than $0.
Setup: Add an extra Kingdom card pile costing $5 or more to the Supply. Cards from that pile are Rarity cards and cost $5 more.

So ... it basically makes a Kingdom pile almost-unobtainable in exchange for playing merry havoc with cost-related cards. I kind of like what I think the creator was trying to do with it, but it doesn't really work.

Ascetic
Types: Action
Cost: $2
Trash this and any number of Treasures from your hand. +1 VP for each Treasure trashed this way.

Is this good? I can't tell if it's good or not. This would be pretty crazy to add to a Goons deck, since you'd be buying up all the Coppers then trashing them away, getting a VP both times. Not to mention it would be the best Copper-trasher in the game by a reasonable margin

Dividends
Types: Treasure
Cost: $6
Worth $1. When you play this, gain a Treasure card costing less than this, putting it into your hand.

Hmm. Really good with most alt-Treasures, and in their absence it's roughly equivalent to "Gold now plus gain a Silver". Which should be fine, since the decision between this and Gold (or Hoard) would then depend on whether you want stacks of Silver in your deck. Probably not a standout, but not a bad mechanic.

Villa
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Play up to 2 Treasures from your hand. Draw until you have 4 cards in hand.

Combo with Poor House, I guess? Probably provides moderate filtering if there's no trashing on the board (sort of like a weak Warehouse-Storeroom kind of thing). I feel like it's either slightly overpriced or underpowered (maybe needing draw-to-5), but I'd happily be proven wrong.

[eHalcyon]

There does not seem to be a card named Aqueduct among the winners of the previous design contest.  Strangely, I had the same thought that there was.  Maybe we were both thinking of Canal?

[Tables]

Sophisticated is not one of the things I would describe myself as, but I suppose it's a compliment so thank you.

All British people are sophisticated.

Well, they did always tell us to keep one of these on us at all times, just in case.

Comment on Tables' comments (can't believe I watched the whole thing):

Relic -- as others have commented, there ARE existing cards that trash from play -- Counterfeit and Procession.

Good point. I most likely forgot about them, but those cards are a bit different since they pick a card from hand, play it and then trash it. Still I should probably give it another think as a result.

Crown (B) -- your musings about Thief were interesting.  I think what you were looking for is the cute Ambassador trick, especially in 4p.

Yeah, that sounds more likely. Ambassador them (no need to return them) and get a net +2 VPs. Hmm... actually, this just made me think of a cute pet trick (in official Dominion) in 3-4p games. Play Ambassador - an opponent reveals moat - return IGG, giving out a curse to him anyway (+yourself but you have a Trader).

Palladium -- did you catch that, as written, it should trash itself?

Good call. That's definitely worth a reconsider.

Reputation -- you've got it wrong.  Reputations DO cost less per Reputation in play; the "unless in play" clause is to prevent paradoxes where Reputation is reducing the cost of Reputation until it can no longer actually reduce the cost of Reputation, etc.

I stand by what I said (or at least thought - you guys can read my thoughts as well right?) about it being too complex then . Okay, so that means it's cost drops every time you play a card costing $6 or more, or a reputation. Makes sense, seems reasonable. It still doesn't seem that exciting when there's Peddler doing something similar already, although the $6+ clause definitely changes how it would play.

Also thanks for watching everything (even though I already said that in replying to the PM)

[LastFootnote]

Ballot change:

Surveyor
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card. +1 Action. +$1. You may discard a Province or Colony. If you do, +1 VP. You may return 3 VP to the supply. If you do, gain a Province.

EDIT: Fixed Surveyor. You discard a Province or Colony, not just reveal it from your hand.

[XerxesPraelor]

After thinking some more, everyone should vote for Indulgence and nothing else.

It adds really cool player interaction into the game, and seems like a great way of making sure Dominion doesn't become multi-player solitaire without overt antagonistic actions.
P.S. Don't worry, it's not my card.

[scott_pilgrim]

Yeah, at this point I would actually be pretty surprised if Indulgence doesn't win.  Everyone seems to love it (myself included).  I really think it's the best card here.

Not my card either (although I wish I had come up with it)...

[Just a Rube]

Yeah, at this point I would actually be pretty surprised if Indulgence doesn't win.  Everyone seems to love it (myself included).  I really think it's the best card here.

Not my card either (although I wish I had come up with it)...

I agree, it's certainly the most interesting.

My only concern is how well it would stack; if they name the same card twice, do you gain 4 VP? That makes whatever you pick a much better duchy.  Alternatively, there can only be so many "bad" cards in a set to pick; silver becomes a harem for instance. But those are all concerns that probably can be play-tested and tweaked if needed.

Also not my card (obviously).

[LastFootnote]

I was writing up a whole critique of all these cards, but I ran into two problems. First, it takes forever. Second, because I'm so picky, I found myself mostly just saying why I didn't like most of the cards. That's a downer. Instead, I'm just going to highlight the cards I think are the stars of this contest. Some of the other cards I didn't like because they were clunky. Some I didn't like because I felt they weren't interesting. Some I liked but felt they weren't the best fit for Prosperity.

Full disclosure: I did not submit a card to this contest.

Here are the two cards I thought really stood out above the rest:

Philanthropist
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+3 VP. Each other player gains a card costing up to $5.

Indulgence
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $2. +1 Buy. When you play this, the player to your left names a card in the Supply costing between $3 and $6. If you buy that card this turn, +2VP.

In general I'm really leery of VP-chip cards. Before this contest, I felt like Goons and Bishop had covered all of the VP-chip gaining mechanics that still moved the game forward. These two cards changed my mind.

Philanthropist is a really interesting card and the most unique card submitted, I feel. It really provides a fascinating new way to build a VP-chip deck while still moving the game forward. That being said, I foresee some possible issues with the card. First, the bonus to your opponents is huge. I'm not saying that the card is unbalanced, but from what I've read, people generally don't like to give their opponent gifts, and this gift is huge. Second, this could still devolve into a VP-gaining stalemate with both (or all) players going for a Philanthropist deck and trying to keep the game from ending. Goons helps to give you the ability to end the game on your VP-chip megaturn while you're ahead. Philanthropist doesn't. Overall, though, an awesome idea.

Edging out Philanthropist is Indulgence. The name is the only thing I don't love about this card. Well, that and the fact that it executes similarly to Contraband. However, I think that changing anything about the card to differentiate it would be a mistake. It's a brilliant idea that I think will really work.

I wouldn't even change any of the numbers on it. 2 VP seems like just enough to be worth going for without making the decision automatic. The $5 price point makes the card difficult to amass, which I think is good because it definitely stacks. You're rewarded if you can amass them since your opponent is probably going to name progressively better cards as you play more of these. Very cool.

As an honorable mention, I'd like to talk about this one:

Forum
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Draw until you have 6 cards in hand.
While this is in play, when you play a Silver, you may trash that Silver. If you do, +1 VP.

As it happens, I independently came up with the idea for a card that let you trash Silvers you played for a benefit. My version is different since it wasn't meant for this contest. Instead of getting VP chips, it gains a card costing up to $5. I'm really curious if the card's creator invented the mechanic by coming at it from the same angle that I did, which is as a Coppersmith for Silver. I was trying to create such a card, but I thought that just giving more coins (like Coppersmith) was both dull and not a great fit. I thought of gaining a card when you played a Silver, but gaining a card costing up to $4 seemed weak and gaining a card costing up to $5 seemed too powerful. Finally I hit on the idea of trashing the Silver when you gained the card. As it turns out this made it an even better fit for my Enterprise set because it effectively makes Silvers into one-shots. But I'm rambling.

I think it's a cool mechanic and the only reason I'm not in love with Forum for this contest is that I don't think Silver-interaction cards are a really great fit for Prosperity simply because Silver is so much worse in Colony games. Maybe the fact that this trashes the Silver makes up for that, I don't know. Cool idea, though.

[eHalcyon]

Not including my own, these are the cards I like the most in approximate order from best to least best.  There are some cards I like that aren't in this list.

Indulgence
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $2. +1 Buy. When you play this, the player to your left names a card in the Supply costing between $3 and $6. If you buy that card this turn, +2VP.

Very neat interaction with opponents.  Looks decently balanced already, with avenues for easy tweaks.  +Buy should probably be dropped because it is not at all necessary, and if it's still too strong the +2VP could be +1VP instead.  Not sure about the name.

Deed
Types: Treasure – Reaction
Cost: $5
Worth $2
When you gain a Victory card, you may discard this from your hand. If you do, +2 VP.

I just like the concept of being able to squeeze out some more VP from the Victory cards you buy.  This card does it in a very clean and elegant fashion.  Name fits, though it does feel a bit bland.

Villa
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Play up to 2 Treasures from your hand. Draw until you have 4 cards in hand.

I quite like that it lets you play Treasures during the action phase, but it does it in a way that isn't ham-fisted.  A very novel lab variant.  Name could be more exciting, but that's a very minor thing.

Philanthropist
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+3 VP. Each other player gains a card costing up to $5.

Just a very odd, interesting concept.  Good thematic name.  Kind of funny in that it heavily anti-synergizes with cost reduction.

Charity (A)
Types: Treasure
Cost: $7
Worth $4. +1 Buy.
While this is in play, when you buy a card, each other player gains a card costing at most $2 less than it.

Also an odd concept that is well named, along the same lines as Philanthropist.  I am assuming that, if it wins, the gain will be made optional, lest it be used an attack.  Someone mentioned that it can hurt you when you green, e.g. by letting others gain Province off of your Colony.  That hurts it a bit, but it could be fixed with a non-Victory card clause.  Or maybe that's just a risk you have to take and this card is simply better for buying more engine components than for getting VP.

Strong Room
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+4 Cards. +1 Action. You may return up to 4 VP tokens. Discard 4 cards, minus 1 card per VP token returned.
In games using this, at the beginning of each turn of the player who went first, each player gets +1 VP.

I like how powerful it can be, at great cost.  The constant gain of VP tokens is nice and changing that does change the flow of the card.  Unfortunately, that may be necessary for practical reasons.  It may also be too slow for the AP-prone.

Silk Merchant
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+$2. You may trash two cards from your hand. If you do, +1 VP per token on the Trade Route mat.
Setup: Put a token on each Victory card Supply pile. When a card is gained from that pile, move the token to the Trade Route mat.

Clarification: The Trade Route mat and tokens referred to by Silk Merchant are the same as those referred to by Trade Route.  If both Trade Route and Silk Merchant are in the kingdom and/or Black Market deck, use only one token on each victory card pile.

I like the idea of using the Trade Route mat for more things, and the name is a great thematic fit.  The specific implementation could be better, but I think the concept is clever enough to go past that.

[scott_pilgrim]

Yeah, at this point I would actually be pretty surprised if Indulgence doesn't win.  Everyone seems to love it (myself included).  I really think it's the best card here.

Not my card either (although I wish I had come up with it)...

I agree, it's certainly the most interesting.

My only concern is how well it would stack; if they name the same card twice, do you gain 4 VP? That makes whatever you pick a much better duchy.  Alternatively, there can only be so many "bad" cards in a set to pick; silver becomes a harem for instance. But those are all concerns that probably can be play-tested and tweaked if needed.

Also not my card (obviously).

I was concerned about that too, but then I thought, "Well if you can get them to stack, then you kind of deserve a 2 VP bonus on the second worst $3 to $6 card".  With two of them in play, you have at least $4, probably more like $6+, so if there's no +buy, they can just name two $3's and you'd probably rather buy Gold or a $5.  Also there's a good chance you hit $8 and just buy a Province regardless of what they name.  It would probably be quite good in engines where you want to pick up lots of cheap components, but even then the bonus is never quite on the card you want, which is what makes it so interesting.

I'm guessing it's fine as it is, but if not, it can be tweaked.

Edit: It has +buy, missed that...

[LastFootnote]

Indulgence
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $2. +1 Buy. When you play this, the player to your left names a card in the Supply costing between $3 and $6. If you buy that card this turn, +2VP.

Very neat interaction with opponents.  Looks decently balanced already, with avenues for easy tweaks.  +Buy should probably be dropped because it is not at all necessary, and if it's still too strong the +2VP could be +1VP instead.  Not sure about the name.

Even though we both like this card best, I strongly disagree with your proposed changes. The +1 Buy is huge and is a big part of what makes the card work. Say you've got $7 to spend and your opponent has named Chancellor. Without that +1 Buy, you'll probably just buy a King's Court. With the +1 Buy, you're tempted to buy a Chancellor and a Worker's Village instead.

If the card needs a nerf, reducing the reward to +1 VP is not the way to go, as it moves the card closer to a boring Silver-with-a-buy. That makes the card that much less interesting. The first thing I'd try is making it worth $1 rather than $2. If that didn't work out, I'd try raising the cost to $6 instead.

[Robz888]

Indulgence? Please, BO-RING.

Crown (A) is where it's at.

 

Disclaimer: I am voting for Indulgence and only Indulgence.

[eHalcyon]

Indulgence
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $2. +1 Buy. When you play this, the player to your left names a card in the Supply costing between $3 and $6. If you buy that card this turn, +2VP.

Very neat interaction with opponents.  Looks decently balanced already, with avenues for easy tweaks.  +Buy should probably be dropped because it is not at all necessary, and if it's still too strong the +2VP could be +1VP instead.  Not sure about the name.

Even though we both like this card best, I strongly disagree with your proposed changes. The +1 Buy is huge and is a big part of what makes the card work. Say you've got $7 to spend and your opponent has named Chancellor. Without that +1 Buy, you'll probably just buy a King's Court. With the +1 Buy, you're tempted to buy a Chancellor and a Worker's Village instead.

If the card needs a nerf, reducing the reward to +1 VP is not the way to go, as it moves the card closer to a boring Silver-with-a-buy. That makes the card that much less interesting. The first thing I'd try is making it worth $1 rather than $2. If that didn't work out, I'd try raising the cost to $6 instead.

Perhaps +1VP would be too small a bonus to be compelling.  I'm still not convinced that the +Buy is essential.  Yeah, sometimes it will tempt you into buying a weak card for the VP bonus.  But there are also boards where the $3-$6 cards are all decent and you have to choose between an OK card with a VP bonus and the stronger card without it.  I think the choice can still be interesting even without +Buy, especially considering that the situation you describe can still happen if there is, for example, Market Square on the board.

I think your suggestion of increasing the price to $6 (if necessary) is fine as well.