Promenade (Action, $6).
You may play an Action card from your hand twice.
You may return one of your Villagers. If you did, play it a third time.
---
When you gain this, +1 Villager.
A Throne Room variant that lets you upgrade to King's Court if you have a Villager to hand.
...
That said, my main issue with Promenade isn't its power level, but that it's too Kingdom dependent. If the Kingdom has no other sources of Villagers, it's too weak IMO, but if the Kingdom has a way of getting large amounts of Villagers, such as Recruiter or Academy, then Promenade becomes practically just a cheap King's Court. It's always going to be broken in one direction or the other, IMO.
Couldn't say it better.
seeked (sook?)
"Sought."
What about if it, rather than going from hand for its target card, was like Rebuild, where it [sought] out the next Victory card in your deck and set it aside? It'd still be terminal. Maybe get rid of the penalty with that since it's going to be more randomized. Feel like that'd be less centralizing than Rebuild. Could be maybe a little swingy in slogs (player A sets aside an Overgrown Estate, player B sets aside a Colony - bad news bears for A) but it wouldn't slow the game down nearly as hard as trying to line up a collision which causes a price increase.
Revising it to
Vista • $5 • Action - Duration - Victory
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Victory card. Set the revealed Victory card aside, face up, under this. If this sets aside a Province or Colony, all other players get +1 Card.
(This stays in play).
-
This is worth % equal to its set-aside card(s).
The hunting
Island is definitely more interesting conceptually, but, as you cover, it would render many games far too luck-based, not even in the worst-case. Consider Estate versus Province for a 5VP swing that makes the player lose a $5-cost one-shot while, in a way, reducing the overall VP that is available in the game. That's pretty miserable compared to
Distant Lands. I think it needs to be worked into something where hitting an Estate is actually a good thing.
Cavern - Treasure Shelter, $1
When you play this, discard 2 Shelters and a Victory card, revealing them. If you d, +1 Buy and double your $ if you haven't yet this turn.
Something more rewarding to build around. Fortune spread across 4 cards I'm hoping is safe on a Shelter? The Victory need is there to stop a $5/$2 opening becoming $5/$4. I could make it need an Action in play if 4 cards is too many.
Thanks for your feedback.
Assuming we are doubling $10 (not too unreasonable for a deck junked up with 3 Shelters and a Province), that turns the 4 cards into $2.5 each, so it's probably still on the weak side. The +Buy will likely be the deciding factor on whether or not Cavern is worth pursuing, which is fine if that is your intent.
$8 Project
When you buy this, set aside an action card from your hand. Whenever you play a copy of that card from your hand, play it again.
I like the concept. I also but don't imagine that there are many Kingdoms for which it is not irreparably broken. $14 would possibly still be too low.
Knight Errant
$5 - Action
+$3. Each player (including you) reveals and discards the top 2 cards of their deck and gains a copy of a card they revealed costing from $3 to $6 that you choose.
This is gonna decimate piles in 4+ player games
Gaining an Action typically
decimates its pile.
Jester gives out one card per player who revealed a non-Victory card. Knight Errant has just as high a cap as Jester.
The cap is higher as the player of Knight Errant is affected too: It is not N-1 cards gained, it is straight N cards. Really though, this will be far more like an Attack that not. Gaining a
Smithy is good. Gaining 4
Smithies is not so good. And I can think of plenty worse targets that will be commonly swung into since the player of Knight Errant chooses. I think it will be pretty strong. I will confirm though that this will speed up 4-player games to an unhealthy degree whenever relevant, which would make me loathe to use the card.