Print

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

[Karrow]

Your point is to make sure the card is worded such that, even if the curses are out, you still must discard a silver if you have at least one in your hand? Do I understand that right?

Not at all.  Just pointing out the additional factors that could sway the wording to be one way or the other.  Neither is wrong.  It just gives an additional thing to think about.  I'm probably just over-complicating it, and not being helpful.  And that's why I said I was just rambling.  Your last version seems pretty balanced to me.  After the curses are out, it's just +1 card +$2, but with the silver option the curse pile will empty slower and last longer.  It's probably best the way it is now, as the other versions could be deemed too much like a witch, or too much like a cutpurse.


For Church Bell, one thing I always think about with 5's is the 5-2 start.  If someone opens 5-2 against 4-3, can the 4-3 win?

A 5-2 opening is church bell/nothing.  That's 91% to hit on turn 3 or 4.  Turn 3 would hit 100% copper/estate.  Turn 4 would have a 1 in 3 chance to hit the card bought on turn 3, but if it hits it, it's likely a silver that would go into your hand.

I don't see any 4-3 standing a chance against a 5-2 church bell opening short of a workshop/gardens.

BUT... I also find that a 5-2 opening with witches/mountebank against a 4-3 already breaks the game.  Practically nothing short of workshop/gardens stands a chance there either.  So in that aspect, it's no worse than what already exists.

Pushing it out to a $6 or more pushes it out to mid-late game where it's going to loose all of it's power and not be anywhere near worth the price.

So again, I'm not so helpful.  Balancing out a deck thinning cards is tough.  And if it's not thinning what's in your hand it's even tougher.  For most of the other ones loosing the card in hand is an additional cost to play it.  With this one the only cost is the purchase price, and the action to play.  Overpowered early, weak late.  Not sure what would work.

[ChaosRed]

You are quite helpful. I am going to bite the bullet on Church Bell and move it to testing, even though it is very strong and can really warp the opening of a game on a 5/2 draw against a 4/3 draw. I suspect this is easily solved by costing it at 6, but then, I am not sure its worth it at 6. I'll move it to testing and see how it goes.

Lycanthrope needs work. Nobody really likes it, it is under-powered and although its meant to complement and have synergy with the theme of the expansion, I am not sure it does that. Here is my new radical change to the card:


This is a significantly stronger attack on both fronts. Since some of the expansion's theme is the collection of Silver (for both Victory and to activate some of the abilities on cards), I think the trashing penalty is strong. Traders has no defense for it now, (unless you have no Silver in your hand, which is unlikely if you are playing Traders).

It's really strong now, so I'd like to discuss if its under-costed, but it certainly no longer has the problem of being too similar to Witch. I don't think its as strong as Mountebank but it is close, so I probably need to tweak it some more.

Since I like to have two cards up for review at any one time here's another 5 to review, also quite strong, and as you can see also complements the overall theme of the expansion:


I could use some help with the verbiage of the gain ability, is that worded right? The idea is if you buy or gain a Sprite, you immediately get +1VP. I had started to add "gain" abilities to some of my 5s a few weeks ago, knowing Hinterlands was featuring this. So its a rip-off of that feature in Hinterlands, but one I expect we'll see continued in other expansions so I don't feel guilty "borrowing" a unique feature.

[Tydude]

For Sprite, I think it would just be, "When you gain this, +1 VP".

[Elyv]

I think your old Lycanthrope was actually completely fine. This one probably is too, although both are pretty good I think.

[Jimmmmm]

Unless you end up trashing the Sprite, how is it different to making it Action - Victory and worth 1 VP? Seems a bit odd to have a source of VP tokens that is only likely to get you two or three for the whole game.

[biopower]

Unless you end up trashing the Sprite, how is it different to making it Action - Victory and worth 1 VP? Seems a bit odd to have a source of VP tokens that is only likely to get you two or three for the whole game.

Many cards interact with only Victory cards or differently with Victory cards, like the new Crossroads, Scout, and Jester to name a few. That's the difference.

[Jimmmmm]

Unless you end up trashing the Sprite, how is it different to making it Action - Victory and worth 1 VP? Seems a bit odd to have a source of VP tokens that is only likely to get you two or three for the whole game.

Many cards interact with only Victory cards or differently with Victory cards, like the new Crossroads, Scout, and Jester to name a few. That's the difference.

True. So the card has fewer interactions and is therefore less interesting. Apart from this, I just don't think the +1VP on gain is different enough to a Victory card to be interesting.

I don't mean to sound like I'm having a go at the OP. It seems like you're putting a lot of effort into this and coming up with some interesting ideas which are obviously generating heaps of discussion.

[ChaosRed]

I don't mean to sound like I'm having a go at the OP. It seems like you're putting a lot of effort into this and coming up with some interesting ideas which are obviously generating heaps of discussion.

No, no, not at all, your comments are appreciated.

My thought was, this doesn't make it a Victory card and that you have to gain it to get it (getting it passed to you on a Masquerade for example doesn't get you the point). It's a pretty cheap victory point, but it is just slightly different than 1VP outright. Also as you can say, you can trash the card later without losing the VP.

It's not that compelling I agree, but do you think the card is still worth 5? Or does it need more to make it a compelling and competitive buy on the board? One thought I had was to give it the ability of gaining another +1VP if you trashed the card. I like the idea of a Sprite helping you when it arrives and when you get rid of it.

Thank you all for the feedback and don't be shy in your criticism, while I don't take every critical review to heart, I most certainly appreciate all of it.

[Tydude]

(*This is actually not quite true:  on a board with no terminals and no Tournament, Market is strictly superior to Bazaar, because Bazaar's extra actions are never useful without terminals or Diadem.  Obviously this is an extraordinarily rare situation.  I think I thought of one other equally rare situation, but I've forgotten it now.  The point is, there aren't any two official cards that always or even somewhat frequently have this problem.)

Moat and Courtyard with no attacks?

[def]

Close. Courtyard could trigger a reshuffle which you don't want.

[WanderingWinder]

(*This is actually not quite true:  on a board with no terminals and no Tournament, Market is strictly superior to Bazaar, because Bazaar's extra actions are never useful without terminals or Diadem.  Obviously this is an extraordinarily rare situation.  I think I thought of one other equally rare situation, but I've forgotten it now.  The point is, there aren't any two official cards that always or even somewhat frequently have this problem.)

Quarry is strictly worse than silver when there are no actions out, and you don't have cards that care about cost or how many different cards you have in play. So basically no actions and no Horn of Plenty and no Fairgrounds. How frequent is that? Not very.

[Jimmmmm]

It's not that compelling I agree, but do you think the card is still worth 5? Or does it need more to make it a compelling and competitive buy on the board? One thought I had was to give it the ability of gaining another +1VP if you trashed the card. I like the idea of a Sprite helping you when it arrives and when you get rid of it.

I'd say it's probably not worth 5. At worst, it's a Native Village without the mat, which is pretty terrible. At best it's comparable to a Village in that you end up with the same number of cards but with an extra action. Whether or not this card is worth having depends on if your average card is better for you than a Silver, and I'd say at least as often as not, it's not. You also need lots of Silver to regularly activate it, and if most of your cards are better, you probably don't want this.

So, the 1 VP aside, I think at worst this is a terrible Village, at best it's still not very good. If the "discard" were a "reveal instead", I'd say it's more worthy of $5, although then it's probably too powerful.

[Glooble]

What if it gained you 2 VP when you bought it? That would make it more inline with the bonus VP effect of Island or Nobles.

[ChaosRed]

Okay, without taking your direct advice Glooble, I see now the card needs more juice. So I thought I'd throttle it up gradually. I wanted to make it a Duration card anyway (so it matches Gypsy and later, the Druid) in style and presentation...


So a gradual increase in power, is it enough? I could use help with the syntax. The card is supposed to work that you must discard the Silver to get the immediate cards and the duration effect of +1 Card. It's still card neutral on this turn, but provides a card on your next hand.

Alternatively, I wanted to give it the ability to trash itself for an additional Sprite, it would read:

Discard a Silver, if you do +2 Cards.
On your next turn, you may trash Sprite, if you do, gain a Sprite.

The idea would be the Duration puts the card on the side , and on the next turn you can trash it for another Sprite (and gain +1VP in the process). The thematic idea is that a Sprite doesn't last long, but are lucky. Gimmicky to be sure, but a fun card perhaps?

[ChaosRed]

Moved Lycanthrope to the beta thread and I'll start testing the last iteration based on the last feedback.

Sprite needs work, so the two up for review right now are a revised Sprite and a new card called Druid, which is similar in style and theme as the Sprite:


I need help with the syntax on both Druid and Sprite.

Sprite is meant to work this way, on the turn you can play it, you can reveal a Victory card in your hand, discard it and gain 2 cards. Regardless of whether you did that or not, on your next turn the Sprite is trashed and you gain +1 Card and another Sprite.

The idea with the card is its a light, temporary thing that keeps coming back. It's meant to be a bit annoying (Sprites are) but overall, its beneficial. I like the idea that one Sprite, chains into another, until the pile is empty. It can be useful if a 3-pile victory is your strategy, so it kind helps a Gardens deck a little. I could make it more useful for Gardens, and rather have it draw cards, have it give +1$, +1 Buy, both for the discard and for "next turn" effect when you trash it. I want the "gimmick" that it trashes itself and you gain another one to stick though, that's the key gimmick of the Sprite now.

Druids were traditionally care takers of forests and the wild, so I thought it being able to move Victory cards to the side was cool (you can even put Coppers or Curses aside if you want).  So it is strong. Is the power right for the cost? Regardless of whether you put a card aside or not, you gain the +1 Card and +1 Action on your next turn.

Help with verbiage and an assessment of the ability-for-cost for both cards would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

[Jimmmmm]

I think Druid is definitely not underpowered for a $5, not sure if it should cost more though.

The obvious comparison is with Island. The only disadvantage is that it doesn't give you the 2 VP. You can't put Druid down too, but you probably don't want to. Overall, I think it's way better than Island since it's non-terminal and reusable, and the duration effect is also very good. I think this will make you want to buy green cards ASAP so you have something to tuck away in order to get the duration effect (an empty hand works too).

I think Druid deserves a mat. Using the Island mat works fine if you have Seaside as well, even if you have both Island and Druid in the same game, but at least thematically it deserves its own.

Anyway. It may tread on the design space of at least three Seaside cards, but that might be okay. My gut says it might be a tad powerful for a $5, but I'm not sure.

[Newcomer]

How's this text edit for Sprite?

+2 Actions
You may discard a Victory card. If you do, +2 Cards.
At the start of your next turn, trash this. [If you do,] Gain a Sprite and +1 Card.

I wasn't sure if you wanted the "if you do" there. It would come into play if you had Throne Roomed the Sprite on your previous turn. Then you would trash the card once and gain a Sprite and a card. Then you wouldn't be able to trash it again, but you could still gain another Sprite and a card without an "if you do." I suppose that fits the theme of being inundated with Sprites. It could really go either way. It's up to you, what do you want the card to do?

Now for Druid:
"Set aside a card from your hand." Everything else looks good to me. Okay, I'd probably switch +1 Action and +1 Card, but looking at the Duration cards, the ordering doesn't seem as strict--e.g. Tactician puts Buy before Action.

[ChaosRed]

Thanks New, those syntax adjustments are perfect. And yes, in the even you Throne Room the Sprite, you should still get the duration effect on the second, (virtual) sprite, so I'll leave off the [If you do], part of the verbiage. I'll make the +1 Card, +1 Action adjustment to Druid's duration effect as well, thanks for catching that!

[ChaosRed]

Modified the text according to New's suggestions, I'll leave this up until tomorrow for peer review, then unveil the last of the 5s...

[Newcomer]

.. You put the "if you do" in, but said you didn't want to. :-P

[ChaosRed]

.. You put the "if you do" in, but said you didn't want to. :-P

Bummer! You are so right. I'll fix it tonight, thanks for catching that.

[ChaosRed]

Okay moved the Druid and Sprite to beta-testing (after the final minor-modification pointed out by New).

Here are two 4-pointers. These replace 4-pointers that were rejected or needed modification after play testing:


Shyster...well do I have the costing right? Seems like a weak Curse attack to me, but its advantage is when the curses run out it can spam copper. Costs you a Silver every time, so it won't hold up to the 4-cost Witches. But given it goes with the theme of the expansion, what are your thoughts? I had debated make it a +2$, since this essentially helps defer the cost of losing a Silver.

Rummage...lots of cards in the set need Silver to fire or defend, so this is a simple way to get them. It's essentially a +4$ terminal play for 4 bucks, so its pretty strong (assuming the cards in the discard pile). The expansion needed some card draw and rather than create a Smithy hybrid, I went with this card instead.

[DStu]

Okay moved the Druid and Sprite to beta-testing (after the final minor-modification pointed out by New).

Here are two 4-pointers. These replace 4-pointers that were rejected or needed modification after play testing:

Shyster...well do I have the costing right? Seems like a weak Curse attack to me, but its advantage is when the curses run out it can spam copper. Costs you a Silver every time, so it won't hold up to the 4-cost Witches. But given it goes with the theme of the expansion, what are your thoughts? I had debated make it a +2$, since this essentially helps defer the cost of losing a Silver.

Rummage...lots of cards in the set need Silver to fire or defend, so this is a simple way to get them. It's essentially a +4$ terminal play for 4 bucks, so its pretty strong (assuming the cards in the discard pile). The expansion needed some card draw and rather than create a Smithy hybrid, I went with this card instead.

Shyster is much weaker than Sea Hag. The cursing is conditioned on having Silver in hand. You trash a Silver, which usually is a good card in a cursing game. And because of the trashing, it's -1coin in total in contrast to 0 of the Sea Hag.
It can hand out Copper, so it's not strictly weaker, but I doubt I will buy it for $4. I even doubt I will buy it for free, except there really is a card that can give me lots of Silvers and get rid of curses I might get, like TradeRoute or Trader.

Rummage... +4coins for a discard basically, when it works. Compared to Counting House, that is not the strongest $5, might work...

[ChaosRed]

Shyster is much weaker than Sea Hag. The cursing is conditioned on having Silver in hand. You trash a Silver, which usually is a good card in a cursing game. And because of the trashing, it's -1coin in total in contrast to 0 of the Sea Hag. It can hand out Copper, so it's not strictly weaker, but I doubt I will buy it for $4. I even doubt I will buy it for free, except there really is a card that can give me lots of Silvers and get rid of curses I might get, like TradeRoute or Trader.

Yeah I really struggle to design Curse attacks and I wanted two in the set. It needs more, but I am unsure how to do it. If any of you have suggestions, please let me know.

Thanks for your comments.

[ChaosRed]

Three variants of Shyster, please comment if you have time:

SHYSTER 1 - 4$
ACTION - ATTACK
+1 VP
Trash a Silver or a Victory card.
If you do, each other opponent gains a Curse or a Copper (you choose).

Some justification:
There's a Victory card coming later, that specifically activates when it is trashed, not to mention of course, trashing Estates is useful. I took away the +1$ but rewarded you with +1VP, which I thought it a little more unique, as the Curse attack essentially becomes +2VP swing (while also clogging your opponent). Of course, activating the Curse is harder and narrower, so a lot of times you are just stuck with the +1VP (which isn't the worst thing in the world, but pricey at 4$).

Again, I don't think it holds a candle to Sea Hag, which is a simpler, straighter Curse attack. But it does have some additional utility. It can trim Estates early in the game, it can also be non-terminal if you choose to give up the Silver. If you can spam it, you can just accrue VP without activating the curse mechanism.

-----------------------------------------
SHYSTER 2 - 4$
ACTION - ATTACK

You may discard a Silver, if you do, all other players gain a Curse.
You may discard a Silver, if you do, +1 Action

Some justification:
This is a Hamlet-type card, that works off Silver. The first discard spreads Curses and the second discard keeps your turn going. It has danger of creating a nasty chain if your deck is narrow enough and full of Silver. But this is what makes it compelling.

--------------------------------------
SHYSTER 3 - 4$
ACTION - ATTACK

Choose one:
You may trash a Victory card, if you do, all other players gain a Curse.
or
You may trash a Treasure card, if you do, all other players gain a Copper
-----------
When you gain this card, gain a Curse.

Some justification:
I think without the self-curse mechanism the card is far too strong, but with it, I think 4$ is about right. Although IGG (which the gain mechanism copies) is priced at 5$ and Donald said this is how it wound being valued after testing, so maybe this should be worth 5$ too?

For some reason, designing a well-balanced Curse attack at 4$ is really hard for me.