My Submission:
| | | Notes
Goods is a non-Supply card that comes in a pile of 30 copies.
Goods interacts with cards that have the Vendor type, like Fruiterer. This connection allows designing different Vendor cards and justifies the large number of Goods (if that would ever be printed).
A player’s Fruiterer can gain Goods for free as long as they haven’t any Goods in play yet.
If a player has more than 4 Goods in play, their Fruiterer can only receive each of the 4 options once per play. The sole purpose of excess Goods is to have more of them in play than the other players, which gives them a Horse, if that is the case.
“Patience is bitter, but its fruit is sweet.” - Aristotle
| |
Goods – Action – Duration When you play a Vendor, choose a different option for each Goods you have in play: +1 Card; +1 Action; +1 Coffers; +1 Buy.
(This stays in play. This is not in the Supply.)
| Fruiterer – Action - Vendor +1 Action You may gain a Goods. If you did and you have Goods in play, take .
If you have more Goods in play than any other player, gain a Horse.
|
Since seeing this post 2 days ago, I have wavered back and forth a few times as to whether this uses existing mechanics or fan mechanics. It parallels Looters (which I would call a specific new mechanic because it has a separate Type with new, specific rules that were added), but also parallels cards which use Horses (a 30-card non-supply pile, and these cards would not be a new mechanic because no extra rules are needed - if a card says it can gain a Horse, then Horses are put on the table, just like other non-supply piles like Spirits in Nocturne, or Hermit/Madman interaction).
Even typing this out, I have flipped back and forth a few times. I started writing this thinking I would disqualify the entry since it parallels Looters too closely (having the new Type). But then I realized you could just drop the "Vendor" Type, and have Goods work just like "Horses". But then the Goods card specifically requires the new Type... I'm so confused about where I land on this!
Let's put it this way... as currently designed, I will say the submission is not valid. But for the purposes of this contest, if you consider that Goods is not a generic non-supply pile that can interact with many other (not yet designed) Vendor cards, but instead consider it is specifically tied with Fruiterer, you would make the following changes - remove the Vendor type from Fruiterer, and change Goods to say "when you play a Fruiterer" (instead of "play a Vendor"), then it can be acceptable. Fair enough?