Contest JudgingI tried hard in my judgement to think of ways for the cards to improve. I appreciate everyone's submissions. There were some really great ones! My overall note is that some card-shaped-things could have benefited from additional costs (costs besides $, like Lost City helping other opponents). Also, quite a few designs didn't incorporate the strength of Pathfinding.
Legacy by 4est
Judgement:
I like the concept of this, though I think it's a little strong as is. We can interpret this as an event that gives +VP. Let's compare it to "Salt the Earth" which costs $4 and a Buy and nets you 1vp. This card costs $5 and a Buy and nets you
at least 1vp, and in many situations in will functionally give you at least 4vp. But wait, this event doesn't really cost a buy, not in the same way that Salt the Earth does, because you gain a $4 with it. So, using salt the earth for comparison, it seems too strong, even when costing $1 more. I do like $5 cost events that gain you $4s like Summon and Demand. Power level wise compared to those events, it feels in better company, though compare a Horse to +4vp... anyway those $5 events make you question in the early game, oh should I buy
this instead of a $5? And that's an interesting question and it's good design. But Legacy does nothing for you in the early game, so you don't have that painful (and interesting) decision. You just buy this later when you have enough $ that the choice between that event and a new $5 isn't agonizing. There's one more angle to look at how this isn't balanced -- Duchy. The first buy of this event is almost always strictly better than Duchy. Which I find kind not very good. In fact, that shows how the buying decision here isn't so in-depth. You can just wait until you would buy a duchy, then buy this instead. Or you see that the pile is getting low and you realize, hey 4-5vp plus another one of these cards that I already have a lot of (and therefore probably want more of) is totally worth $5.
I do like the complexity of this card making it better to spam a certain card, that is interesting for sure. Although most often you'll just put it on a card you wanted to spam already (Village) or an allies split-pile for more VP.
So, how could we make this better, at least in my opinion of "better"? I think there's a couple design areas to explore -- pressures to make you buy this early, or make a later buy more complicated? For example adding "if you have no copies in play" all the sudden makes this a lot more challenging to buy late. Another thing to do would be to let opponent to your left choose where you put the VP token on (that version of the event should be cheaper and maybe grant a +Buy)
Overall, it's an interesting card, and I hope you iterate on the design.
Fletcher by Augie279
Fletcher
Action - $5
Gain a card costing up to $4. If any Tokens are on its pile, +1 Action. Otherwise, move your Trashing token to its pile. (When you gain a card from its pile, you may trash a card from your hand.)
Judgement:
I'm glad to see more uses of the Trashing token which only had one before. This card is definitely weakened by gaining happening first, so you'll have to gain a second copy to trash. But I think that's an interesting "weakening" of design. I also find the "if any tokens are on it" a really brilliant mechanic and making your gainer suddenly non-terminal is nice. I think this card is a bit weak for a $5 cost $4 gainer (see Carpenter, Hill fort, Quartermaster, Falconer, Sculptor,...); however the brilliant design here is you don't really need to buy a lot of these. You get one when to move the valuable trashing token. The second one is a lot weaker, and that's fine. In fact, it promotes deck diversity, which I like a lot. In many games you will still want to get a second Fletcher
Finalist
Scaffolding by czzzz
Scaffolding $3 - Action
+1 Action
Name a card.
Reveal the top card of your deck and put it into your hand.
If it matches, put your +1 Card and +1 Action tokens on its pile.
At the start of your Buy phase, remove the tokens from its pile.
Judgement:
Okay, so this is a cantrip, that if it hits, works like a lost city+. You ideally want your tokens on something you have a lot of, and the "if it matches" guarantees that probablistically, when you hit, it's something you have a lot of. I also like that once the card is on something you want, you just keep naming that card with future Scaffoldings. I think this is a little on the powerful side, especially if we compare it to wishing well. If wishing well hits, it's a lab, but you need every wishing well to hit to be a lab. If a single scaffolding hits, it's a lost city, and subsequent scaffoldings essentially become a lost city given you have enough copies of that first card you hit. The one way it's worse than wishing well is with copper -- since you can't get your bonuses out of Copper. I think that lends to more frustrating moments than Wishing Well, which I don't like. I think the "At the start of your Buy phase, remove the tokens from its pile." is a brilliant bit of design which makes this card not absurdly broken. I think I'd prefer to go a little more different than wishing well, perhaps making it a +2 Cards instead of +1 Card +1 Action.
One big criticism is "remove the tokens from its pile" is not clear. Does this remove ALL players's tokens from the pile? Does this remove debt tokens (for instance, Tax)? Trade route tokens? It probably should be "At the start of your Buy phase, remove your +1 Card and +1 Action tokens from its pile."
Future Greatness by fika monster
Future Greatness | Event | $7
Move your Future token to an non-Duration Action Supply pile. (Cards from this pile are during your turns also Duration cards first saying "Now and at the start of your next turn")
Judgement:
This is wildly powerful. Think about putting your future token on Smithy, it becomes crazy strong. And there's lots of very strong cards to put this on. This reminds me of Kings Court, which is also explosivey strong, and costs $7. However Kings Court has two major drawbacks -- you have to draw your Kings Court with the card you want to triple, and it takes two buys of King Courts at a minimum to really build up the engine. Future Greatness, requires no lining up of cards -- it immediately activates and upon one buy. I like the idea a lot but it seems super strong. For this to be a good design, it has to be an interesting decision when to buy it, and what card to place it on. But I feel that in most Kingdoms it will be, buy as soon as possible, and then it's fairly simple to choose which card it's on. I'll generate a few Kingdoms to test this theory out.
First Kingdom: Ranger, Merchant Camp, Market, Moneylender, Mystic, Advisor, Jack of All Trades, Oasis, Bridge, Wharf. With wharf, merchant camp as village, and advisor you got plenty of draw. So it's an easy decision to put this on payload and letting your Bridges play more easily seems like the clear answer. I did have some debate of putting it on Market as well to give more villages. So there is an interesting decision here a bit.
Second Kingdom: Coin of the Realm, Magpie, Catacombs, Wandering Minstrel, Stockpile, Captain, Stash, Bank, Hoard, Monument. Ultimately this needs to land on Catacombs; however, there's some debate whether it's worth it on an early $7 to put it on Magpie to win that split, especially with no trashing, you need the Magpies. So it's a bit interesting then, but that's assuming you spike an early $7, which you can go for with Stockpiles
Third Kingdom: Storyteller, Remake, Poor House, Spice Merchant, Mining Village, Animal Fair, Goatherd, Hunting Lodge, Shaman, Royal Seal. Storyteller Poor house combo giving you $ and draw, with some fun trashing shenanigans of Goatherd/Shaman/Spice Merchant/Remake. Interesting board. I think there's a lot of directions to put your Future tokens on, Hunting Lodge or Storyteller for more stability, Animal Fair for more consistent $. Hm
Okay, after looking at some sample Kingdoms, I've been convinced that there are more interesting decisions than I thought. It still seems a little disproportionately strong, but could be fun to play with, like Kings Court.
Finalist
Demolition by grep
Demolition
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Look at the top card of your deck, you may trash or discard it.
-
When you gain this, move your Invincible token to any Supply pile (when you trash a card from this pile not in play, put in into your hand).
Judgement:
First, I wanted to analyze this card without the Invincible token mechanic. It's a non-terminal trasher that doesn't decrease hand-size. This already makes it super strong. Because it doesn't force you to trash cards, there's many reasons where I take this over Junk Dealer. Of course there's the down-side of not being to trash from hand. And at $4, this card could likely make me skip Sentry entirely. But there's a frustration where I only get to trash from the top of my deck. Then add in the fact that this could become a Lab for your good Invincible cards, and I just see this as too strong. I love the concept though, Invincible is really cool. Some ways to make it more interesting would be weakening it. Either making it fully terminal (reveal the top 2 cards from your deck, trash any number and put the rest in your hand is one such idea), or removing the +1 card. I also like the idea of adopting a Sentry-like multi top-of-deck trasher, to make it less frustrating when you keep revealing your good, but not Invincible cards, meanwhile my opponent landed on their only curse. You could also try adding compulsory trashing to it -- I had no problems with lookout, it's one of my favorites, but some people are adverse to it.
Overall, I think it's super interesting design, I just think making it a base cantrip leads to a less interesting card. I hope you iterate on the design because the Invincible token is great, and your thought around "not in play" shows you have thought deeply about the mechanic.
Semifinalist
Mutate by grrgrrgrr
Mutate (Event, $5)
Move your Amplify token to an Action Supply pile. (During your turns, all numbers in the instructions of cards from that pile, except 0 and 1, are increased by 1)
Judgement:
Wow, this is another really exciting one. And the "except 0 and 1" is a super brilliant design, such that cantrips don't become super labs. Wonderful design. I feel like it's balanced and fun, but I'm going to have to investigate some Kingdoms to see.
Kingdom 1: Port, Village, Catacombs, Masterpiece, Pawn, Supplies, Cemetery, Pendant, Monument, Watchtower. First off, it's striking how many cards that you cannot Amplify. Port and Village get an extra action which could be helpful in a low village deck, but that won't apply. So, we are left with Catacombs, Monument, and Watch towere. Pay $5 and a buy to turn Monument into terminal gold? I like it! Make your Catacombs draw even bigger --very appealing. Or turn Watchtower into a cheaper library. All of these are nice, and I think the cost of $5 is worth it, it's just a matter of when and which card.
Kingdom 2: Coin of the Realm, Sycophant, Feodum, Overlord, Paddock, Wayfarer, Monastery, Jeweled Egg, Captain, Armory. From this Kingdom we see some cards could potentially get worse, like Sycophant, although it's probably better in most scenarios. It also boosts the Favors you get on gain. Armory all the sudden becomes a $5 gainer... and Captain gets to play $5s. In this board with Paddock as the only $5 it doesn't seem that much stronger, although when you move your token to Paddock, it's now almost +$3 +3 cards, super strong. This Kingdom shows that you could move your mutate multiple times in a game, which I Like. You can always mutate Wayfarer to for council-room like draw.
Kingdom 3: Artificer, Ranger, Contract, Market, Mystic, Encampment/Plunder, Farmer's Market, Embassy, Sack of Loot, Warehouse. Ranger could make the draw even bigger, Mystic could give $3, Embassy becomes a wonky + 6cards discard 4, warehouse sifts even more, although the big prize here is Encampment/Plunder. Obviously you need it on Encampment/Plunder (which also improves the Plunders to be golds). This makes winning and keeping the Encampment split even more important, and it also makes it a lot easier to keep your Encampments. It seems fun too. But strong.
Side note, I do not think you need the "Action" restriction. Putting it on VP cards doesn't do anything anyway (it only boosts the VP on "your turn"). It would be nice to work on Night cards. Changing Silvers to Golds is pretty nice, so you could make it cost $6 or $7 instead, which might be a better price anyway.
After looking at the Kingdoms, I like this card a lot. It is fairly strong. Of course, taking a whole buy and $5 is a steep cost, but it could benefit from being even steeper, like $6, probably.
Finalist
Raiders' Den by HorazVitae
Raiders' Den
+2 Actions
The next Horse or Spoils you play this turn isn't returned to its pile.
-
Overpay: Per $4 overpaid, move your Horse or Spoils token to a Kingdom Supply pile you have no tokens on. (When you play a card from that pile, gain a Horse/Spoils.)
$2+ Cost Action
Judgement:
I find the overpay inelegant because all the current overpays work with a 1:1 ratio of $ overpaid and benefit given. This one is a step-wise benefit, only rewarding pays of $6 or $10. I'd say just cost this a flat $6 [* see note below], and "when you gain this, move your Horse or Spoils token." It means it limits the possibility of how many of these you buy in your deck, but then you remember in a deck with lots of Horses and Spoils, the card text essentially reads "+2 Actions, gain a Horse and a Spoils" which is weaker than bandit camp, but still viable. Perhaps the best cost would be $4 with a text "when you gain this, you may discard two treasures to move your Horse or ..." Anyway, I'm spit-balling with cost but there's a lot of the design that's interesting. Also, these don't stack, so (barring return to action phase shenanigans, or playing action cards in your buy phase) only your first Spoils stays. I would recommend rephrasing it in a few ways either making it a duration and saying "The next time you play a Horse or Spoils, you may discard this from play to not return the card to its pile" or "The next time you would return a card to its pile, discard it instead" or even "One time this turn, when you play a Horse or Supplies you may keep them in play rather than return them to its pile" some of those are not elegant, but I think most people will be annoyed that multiple Raiders' Dens work on Horses with correct play-order, but they don't work on Spoils. Another option would be removing the Spoils token entirely from this.
Then again we have to look at the Horse token. Pathfinding costs $8. Horses are "roughly" equivalent to +1 Card. If you just buy a Raider's Den as pathfinding, at $6, that's kind of broken. Of course, it is slightly weaker than pathfinding, since the initial draw is delayed 1 turn, but $6 is such an achievable $ to get a pseudo-pathfinding that this feels not well priced.
I do think there are clever parts of this design, like "Kingdom Supply pile" meaning you can't just slap this on Coppers. And I like the overall concept. The execution needs some work, in my opinion.
[* note below]: when I was talking about changing the cost, I did so assuming that the original cost is about correct. However, I think the original cost is too low due to the pathfinding comparisons.
Old Teacher by J410
 | Old Teacher -  Action When you gain this, you may move a token from its pile to an Action Supply pile you have no tokens on.
Setup: Put your +1 Card, +1 Action, +  and +1 Buy tokens on Old Teacher.
|
Judgement:
Here's another one that fails the Pathfinding comparison. Pathfinding costs $8, this allows you to buy it for $6. So, this design doesn't work, although it's quite a simple design and I like that a lot.
I think there's a couple of ways to fix this. One of them could be to get rid of the +1 Card token on Old Teacher. After all, Lost Arts costs $6 already. Although this would still be stronger than Lost Arts in many situations -- let's say you buy Lost Arts once for $6 vs you buy Old Teacher once for $6. With Old teacher, you get the token, and you get a card that gives +1 Buy +1$. Since, in games with Lost Arts, you're likely to draw your deck (non-terminal smithy, cheap labs+, etc), you actually want that +Buy +$. So even if you remove the +1 Card token, it feels better than Lost Arts (with the exception of not being able to stack tokens on one pile, which is already pretty rare). Maybe on play this discards a card? You could theoretically cost it $7, but that makes Sea way and Training uses of this card sad. Probably the better way to fix this is to give some sort of drawback on-gain like Lost City's "When you gain this, you may move a token from its pile to an Action Supply pile you have no tokens on. If you do, each other player draws a card." Another idea would be to make the moving tokens more difficult for example "When you gain this, if you have no duplicate action cards in play..." and costing it lower. The last idea I have to fix this would be to delay the token, like Teacher delays the token a whole turn. However, I could not think of an elegant way to do this. You may have to combine several of these ideas or come up with new ones.
Overall, I like the idea behind this design, but it needs work to be balanced. I hope you iterate on it in the future because it's a cool design space!
Enlightenment by JW
Enlightenment
$12 - Event
Move your +1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Buy, and + tokens to four different Action Supply piles.
Judgement:
Here's a mammoth Event that sits in the company of huge events like Prosper, Populate, Invasion, and Alliance. Those cards give you one big boost, that feels very fun the moment you do it. Enlightenment instead waits until your next turn and then your engine is just done. Which I find not very fulfilling. Like with Populate, you're probably terminal overrun and have to deal with Action cards you didn't actually want in your deck, but it's such a good deal you have to go for it. Enlightenment, has no draw-back at all. You'll pretty much always have 4 cards to place your tokens on, and, like I said, your engine is done at that point.
I would prefer there to be more work for this to trigger rather than just the cost. If you're just using $, then cost for such an event would have to be so high (in this case $12), and the effect is so crazy strong, that if one player hits the cost and the next player just can't afford it, well, it's potentially over. And at a high price point that becomes a likely scenario, both players trying to spike it, one player gets close on one turn and then takes a few turns to get close again, and the other player gets lucky. I think you'd gotta either make it more difficult to trigger. Something like "If you have no Action cards in play" and price it lower forces people to go Big Money strategy and then have to pivot to Action cards only after they get the event. Kind of interesting. Or you could make it curse or attack the player who buys it. In either case, trying to do something to get it to a less swingy cost of $8-$10.
Discipline by Melon
Judgement:
Here's a great example of additional cost I've been incorporating into my feedback of other designs. What irony, once you Pathfind a card, you really want multiple copies of it, but in order to get this cheaper pathfinding, you have to trash one of your precious copies, and not play it that turn. This is simple and balanced, and most importantly, makes me consider whether to get this earlier, or save for pathfinding. Good work.
Finalist
Shares by NoMoreFun
Shares
Action - $2
+1 Action
Choose one: Place your Shares token on an Action supply pile, or take back your Shares token for +2 Cards and +2 Actions
____
In games using this, when any player gains a card, +1 Card if your Shares token is on it
Judgement:
A little awkward phrasing with the "in games using this" compared to the other tokens. Try this "Choose one: Place your Shares token on an Action supply pile (When another player gains a card from that pile, +1 Card), or take back your Shares token for +2 Cards and +2 Actions." You might even consider "When another player gains a card from that pile, you draw a Card" for complete clarity.
Let's look at this compared to some similar cards. First of all, Native Village. If you simply alternate Native Villages, you net +3 actions +0 cards. If you alternate shares, you net +3 actions, +0 cards. Of course Native Village probably fares better here, allowing you to delay the draw for when you need it, and it's always a village. Shares has the benefit of doing something when you aren't drawing with it though, being the Shares token. Compared to Invest -- this sticks in your deck, triggers less often, and gets 1 less card, and the initial token placement is delayed until you play rather than gain. It feels like a sadder Invest for sure -- appropriately it's priced lower, but at $2 vs $4 they are both non $5s, so. However, I do like that it's just +1 Card. Because at that point it becomes harder for your opponents to stop gaining it because like, well maybe it's worth it to get it still.
I think this is an interesting card and design. On paper, this is a card I would like a lot, incorporating themes from other cards and combining them in a novel way. I'm not sure why this is just failing to excite me. Maybe I'll re-read this judgement later and disagree with my own opinion? It's well-designed for sure.
Scrounger by segura
Judgement: I think there's a few wording issues. For the scrounger token, I'd suggest "When another player plays a card from that pile, choose one: +1 Coffers or +1 Villager." Right now it is not clear who chooses whether you get Coffers or Villagers.
I agree that this might be too strong, especially because it does not scale at all in multiplayer. I think Dominion designs should work for 2-4 Players, and the scaling for this is way off. Even without the flexibility of choice, this even can kind of ruin the game, either giving you tremendous amounts of Coffers or tremendous amounts of Villagers. It has to cost high to work, and since it costs high, by the time you afford it, your opponents have already bought cards so you know where to put the token. So there's less strategy in predicting where to place the token.
All that being said, I admire the elegance of using delayed $ and actions (Coffers/Villagers) to trigger on opponent turns.
Queen by spheremonk
Judgement: I like the simplicity of this; however, it gets strong really quickly. Too quickly. The second buy could turn them into 2 Lab+$, which I would take over 2 Grand Markets almost any day. And Grand Market is a good comparision, which costs $6 and has an additional cost (can't have coppers in play) to buy. So perhaps you need to do something like that to this card. Segura compared it to a lost city that activates too quickly -- I agree with a lot of that, with the caveat that $6 is a lot harder to get to than $5. I'm someone who piles out cities often. But this card is good so much earlier that it more than makes up for it's increased cost, in an unbalanced way. You could also consider giving it opponents a benefit when you gain it, ala Lost City.
I think you could also fix the design entirely by removing the +1 Action (not the token). On play it would just give +1 Card. That means your first purchase of a $6 would turn it into a cantrip. Then second purchase is a Lab, probably. Then finally, on the third purchase you get the super lab stuff, and it becomes worth the cost. I would still likely cost this at $6
Literati by StrangerSon712
Literati $3 Action
+$3
Take your -1 Card token.
-
When you gain this, put a card you would discard from play this turn onto your deck.
Judgement:
Cheap terminal gold!? Interesting! Horse Traders is a nice comparison. That gives you a +Buy to make use of your money, and discards now, when you have good cards to discard, and Literati gives you the much worse -1 card token, although the drawback does not stack and you can play multiple each turn. So overall it feels similar enough to Horse Traders that I prefer a $4 for this, but because of the similarities of $3 and $4, this is probably fine.
I'm confused about the "when you gain this." I guess one idea is, hey if you're drawing less next turn, you want to be dang certain that cards you want get drawn. Okay, I'm less confused now. But I don't love it because you gained the card, it went to your discard, and you have to remember at the end of your turn to do something. Compare that to scheme which literally sits around telling you to scheme a card.
By the way, you attempted to include a card image, I saw this in your post:
[img width=350]https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/449166977991180299/1234934619682508880/Literati.png?ex=663289fd&is=6631387d&hm=2dae0eadc17c14ad63035e12805cec9552f22e1c58c65b1266d664159628d612&[/img]but the image did not render. Even when I get rid of the query parameters it says "This content is no longer available."
Semifinalist
Surveil by Tiago
Judgement: Many of my comments on Scrounger apply to this. It's not balanced. Absent of militia attacks (which happens often. I just randomized 10 Kingdoms and only got 2 with "discard down to" attacks), it is strictly better than Pathfinding, since you get the draw before your turn starts, and because it scales tremendously in multiplayer. And you've costed this a lot less than Pathfinding
Infestation by valb_7k
Infestation
Move your Pest token to an Action Supply pile costing up to $4.
(When you play a card from that pile, you first gain a copy of it.)
Judgement:
This is interesting and requires me to look at some Kingdoms to understand the power of it. Also, why is this limited to Action Supply pile? I feel like having it gain Silvers as an option would be interesting, and some Kingdom treasures would be nice for this.
Kingdom 1: Odysseys, Library, Poacher, Throne Room, Squire, Develop, Trail, Witch's Hut, Pilgrim, Swashbuckler. Poacher is spammable but you don't want to overload or you'll kill your deck, unless you've built your draw engine with Library + Squire. So while normally Poachers wouldn't be a great pest, it works awesome in this Kingdom. Trail is also a decent pest candidate, with combos of Poacher and Develop. Then there's the Odyssey's whose randomizer says $3. Although it seems great to have a Distant Shore pest, based on wording you would only gain it if you played a Distant Shore, while Distant Shore was the top card. And because it's hard to gain cards with it, I imagine that Allies split piles are not great candidates for pest-ing, even the spammable Townsfolk. Lastly, throne room will always be a good candidate for being a Pest. Overall, I find infestation not over-powered, and interesting here. I like that you would probably buy it more than once in a game, once a pile runs out, it could be worth it for another pile. After paying $5 for two $4s is a great deal, even if the gains are delayed.
Kingdom 2: Coin of the Realm, Scrying Pool, Guildmaster, Merchant Camp, Bandit, Graverobber, Sage, Spice Merchant, Cyrpt, Walled Village. Merchant Camp, Sage, Spice Merchant, and Walled Village are the only targets here. But you probably don't want to overload on Spice Merchants, and the two Villages can already top-deck themselves lowering the amount you want. I actually could see you Walled Village just to make the Scrying Pool stronger.
Kingdom 3: Lost City, Relic, Royal Carriage, Swamp Hag, Tunnel, Hunting Lodge, Leprechaun, Tormentor, Crucible, Taskmaster. Taskmaster is the only candidate here -- is it worth $5? Well, once you get enough Taskmasters in play they stay in play forever -- assuming you have +Buys. No +Buys in this Kingdom means we won't go for it.
I thought that this would an event that seemed balanced and interesting. You likely go for it, but when and what card are interesting decisions.
Finalist
Happy Village by Zoyarox
Happy Village
$5 Action
+3 Actions
Move your +1 Card token to an Action supply pile other than the one it was on.
Judgement: I find this interesting. +1 Card +3 Actions is akin to two Villages in one hand. There's games where you would pay $5 for just a village anyway. But if you play this card correctly, you get a lot more than +1 Card out of it. Although it's interesting and strategic about what card to place and when.
Semifinalist
Let's look at the 5 Finalists
Fletcher, Future Greatness, Mutate, Discipline, Infestation
I feel that Future Greatness and Mutate, while very interesting and well-designed cards, are slightly less-balanced than the others in the top 5. Of course, it would require extensive play testing to be sure. But for now eliminating those.
Of the remaining 3-- Fletcher, Discipline, Infestation
I worry that Infestation could lead to quicker games, though I love it a lot.
Fletcher is a tad little weak, but so simple and clear.
Discipline is a great design, but seems like a sort of improving pathfinding, though it treads similar territory.
I had a lot of difficulty ordering these top 3, but at some point I'm going to have to choose a winner. I think all the Finalists (and semifinalists) should be deeply proud of their design
Third Place: Discipline by Melon
Second Place: Fletcher by Augie279
First Place: Infestation by valb_7k
Author
Topic: Weekly Design Contest #218: Tokens (Read 2058 times)