JudgmentWrangler by mandioca15A goatherd-like piggybacking card where the reward is Horses. I think this is probably fine balance-wise and I could see it being an actual card, but it doesn't seem particularly interesting to me.
Councillor by AquilaI like this as a concept, but I agree with others that it's probably too similar to Monument, and also pretty much worse than it. Discarding a Copper puts you at the same level as Monument, but I imagine more often than not you'll be discarding something worse than Copper. I get the argument that with +$4 and a Throne Room it just means you can discard (almost) your hand for a Province, but I doubt that would happen much anyway, because it would only be that straightforward in a big money game, where you probably wouldn't be buying throne room anyway. In any case, I think the idea has potential, but probably needs some tweaking to work.
Investor by LittleFishThis is a novel concept, but I don't think it works well in practice. Due to the limited range of prices (which is pretty much necessary), they will only ever name $3, $4 or $6, and I imagine that, based on the board, the decision will be pretty much constant throughout the game. In fact, I think it compares unfavorably to Workshop: If they name $4, the +$2 you get is more or less a wash with the +2 coffers they get, so it's just a Workshop with a +buy for $5, which is already bad; but then it's even worse, because they have the option to name $3 or $6 instead. I don't know if there's a way to make the idea work.
Judge by spineflu(I assume the victory type in the card image is meant to be action-attack, as in the text below.) This seems like a bit of a combination between Witch and Courtier, but with another player making the decisions...I think I like it, though there is a lot of text on the card. And the fact that it has two types gives you a consolation prize if drawn dead, and also means it's never strictly worse than Witch. I do think it will generally be worse than Witch though, but Witch is a strong card anyway so I think that's okay.
Commune by NoMoreFunThis is a very cool card, it has a built-in self-synergy that rewards everyone (including yourself) when you take advantage of it. I think the self-synergy might make it too game-warping (everyone will start turns with huge hands), though it might be okay power-wise, because the benefit to other players is pretty significant. Regardless, this card is novel, unique, and clever. I love it!
Runner-upCouncil by majiponiAside from the clunky wording, I think the idea of "bidding" to offer the best card to a player is neat, but inherently political and will make games un-fun. In a 2-player game, this is nearly strictly worse than Butcher, and the entire value of the card comes from the political nature of it, where pitting the players against each other incentivizes them to offer better cards. I don't think this idea really works well in practice.
Extortionist by chronostrikeI think I like this, except that it seems too weak to me. The idea is kind of like a Torturer, except that the vanilla bonus is also tied to the attack being chosen by another player. You usually want to play draw and payload at very different times in your turn, which means that not knowing which one you're getting (or worse, knowing that you'll generally get the worse of those two options) when you play it is a significant drawback, as well as the fact that you'll probably have to rely on other cards to do its jobs for it, since it will only ever be doing whichever job you don't want it to do. I think maybe if it were cheaper, or if the vanilla bonuses were stronger, it would work. Overall, I like it.
Draper by FragasnapThis is deceptively interesting. I like that it provides +buy, so that there's a good chance that it gets weaker as the game goes. I imagine it's strong early and rapidly turns into an Herbalist, but the early momentum boost might be enough to make it worthwhile.
Surveyor by Doom_SharkI normally do not like Boons, but I think this is a really good way of making them interesting. I like the card, but as others pointed out, it will be very slow to resolve, because you have to read 3 boons every time you play it, and the other player has to make a decision regarding those 3 boons as well. As a strong cantrip, you'll probably be playing it a lot. So I think it might be better to have a different vanilla bonus (and even then, I imagine it's a bit slow).
Atlantis by gambit05This is one of the best hot potato-like cards I've seen. I don't like the wording, but I understand why you did it that way (I think it would be better to just make it an Action-Victory card and put two lines on it). I always like situational villages, and I think it would be really interesting to see how a game plays out where this is the only village. If you start building an engine, another player can hoard them all, but then they've effectively got a bunch of estates in their deck. It might encourage you to try to build a deck that can function well both with or without villages. I'm not sure if the 1 VP on buy is enough of an incentive to buy it; perhaps it could cost less.
Fanatic by silverspawnThis is very cool! It's a super powerful effect, but potentially shuts down the rest of your turn. It encourages you to have lots of variety, which I like, but does so in a novel and indirect way. I think it will lead to lots of new types of gameplay decisions that we haven't encountered before. My main concern is that it may favor big money too much, as it's generally hard to build an engine without whatever the strongest action on the board is. But what I hope (and this card is unique enough that you would probably only be able to determine whether this is the case by playtesting) is that it really encourages hybrid, "unstable" but adaptable engines, that won't run smoothly but will still do better than a deck without Fanatic.
Runner-upDeveloper by anordinarymanThis is another brilliant card! I already think the idea of a trash-for-benefit where the benefit is to simply play a card from the supply based on the cost of your trashed card is very cool and original, but then pushing that choice onto the other player packs some player interaction into that concept, while also letting cards that would otherwise be too weak see some play. That's a lot of very nice principles packed into one card! My only concern is that it seems weak to me, though it's hard to judge its strength since it's so different from existing cards.
Runner-upObserver by X-traI'm not sure if I understand this. Do they steal your card after playing it? There's no "leaving it there", but I don't think you would ever buy this (except maybe in big money?) if it meant you'd be handing all your actions out to the next player, so I assume it's not meant to go to the next player. Is it meant to stay in your hand, or go to your play area? Regardless, it seems somewhat political that only one player gets the bonus, and I don't like that it discourages you from getting lots of Actions, but I do kind of like the idea of letting other players play a card from your hand as a penalty on an otherwise strong card.
Regent by D782802859I really love the elegance of this. It can either be a Smithy, or else a Moat with +$ or +buy; but always (what your opponent judges to be) the worst of those options. I also love conditional +buy, and I think this will make for very interesting games and interesting decisions, and it's a wonderfully simple design.
Runner-upFruitcake by Xen3kTechnically doesn't fit the challenge, but fits the spirit of the challenge, so I'll allow it. This is kind of a bizarre hot potato. It gets passed around between the players who have bought the fewest of them all game. I think I like the way it plays out, but not enough to justify all the text and the extra tokens.
Buffoon by CarlineThis is like a more interactive variant of Jester, where they choose what they reveal, and you have more options for what to do with it. So I think usually they'll try to reveal middling cards like Silver, so either you give everyone a Silver and a Copper, or else you take +$4. If they reveal a victory card you can gain a copy of it, so there's good options whether they reveal a victory or non-victory card. I think I like this one a lot.
Runner-upEscrow by BbobbThe choices are very similar to each other, so it's a much more specific decision for the player to your left than most of the other entrants we've had. Basically they're just judging what they think you want to buy this turn. I think this card is fine, though I'd guess it's pretty weak. It could probably cost $3, maybe $2.
Gangster by LibraryAdventurerI think this is a fine card, except possibly swingy, which I guess is what the +1 coffers reward is for if they discard a "good" card. But it is somewhat unique, and I could see it being an official card.
There were lots of great submissions this time! Here are my picks:
Runners-up:4. Buffoon by Carline
3. Regent by D782802859
2. Commune by NoMoreFun
1. Developer by anordinaryman
And the winner is...0. Fanatic by silverspawn
This was a tough choice, because I really loved all of the runner-ups, but I think Fanatic creates some really fresh and interesting gameplay. Congratulations silverspawn!