AgentAgents don't like you taking on other agents, but if you can get them to work for you then they'll do great things.
$7
Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
+$3
--------
You can't buy this if you have an Agent in play.
This week, your task is to design a card(-shaped object) with a buying or gaining restriction.
The inspiration for this contest is Grand Market. However, once-per-turn or once-per-game Events like Alms or Seize the Day would also be valid.
- your submission should be in the supply; a gaining restriction due to not being in the supply will not be valid. You may still involve non-supply cards.
Yeah you're right; I clarified.This week, your task is to design a card(-shaped object) with a buying or gaining restriction.
The inspiration for this contest is Grand Market. However, once-per-turn or once-per-game Events like Alms or Seize the Day would also be valid.- your submission should be in the supply; a gaining restriction due to not being in the supply will not be valid. You may still involve non-supply cards.
I hate to nitpick, but for the purposes of these rules I presume we should understand Events (and Projects) to be "in the supply" (or for that precise rule not to apply to them).
- your submission should have some additional requirement to being bought/gained other than cost.
(https://i.ibb.co/wMcbFLy/Pyramid-2.png)
Note that with 15VP, this is the logical thing after Colony (1->3->6->10->15), so it's like Dominate (also 15VP) but wit a different cost.
Elitist Village • $4 • Action
+1 Card
+3 Actions
You can't buy this if you have any Action cards in play.
My Submission:
(https://i.imgur.com/SEwbUOrh.png)Quote from: Elitist VillageElitist Village • $4 • Action
+1 Card
+3 Actions
You can't buy this if you have any Action cards in play.
This feels like it is on par with Port but with a buy clause. Probably a lot worse than it considering it is so much harder to get
A double-village for $4, these snobs don't like mixing with others. Getting the first one won't be a problem, but if you want to continuing buying them as your engine grows, that could get tricky. Synergy with gainers and Command cards.
Abutment • $4 • Action
+2 Buys
Cards cost $1 less this turn.
-
When you gain this, if you don't have a card costing exactly $3 in play, trash this.
Pyramid’s “you can’t gain this in any other way” clause seems likely to cause rules issues and confusion. For example, suppose that someone hits your Province with Swindler. Are they allowed to choose to have you gain a Pyramid, and if they do, do you gain nothing?
Instead, I’d suggest costing Pyramid at $12 so that it can’t be gained in a typical game except by buying, and limit the clause to buying.
The additional condition should be on top of the cost. Animal Fair/Duchess would not qualify.- your submission should have some additional requirement to being bought/gained other than cost.
An "additional optional requirement"? Or an "additional mandatory requirement"? If the first, then would Animal Fair qualify? And regardless of your answer there, would Duchess qualify?
That's a question that's likely to be board dependent. Sometimes this giving +Coin instead of +Card is going to be better due to a draw-to-X engine. Sometimes this is the only village on the board. I'm more trying to make a card with interesting gameplay decisions than a consistent power level.(https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/827692005160648744/944078216132436039/Machine3.png)(https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/827692005160648744/944075589629935646/Broken_Gear.png)Sure, the first copy is a Peddler but would you ever want two?
A village? You can get a bunch of these but you're gonna give up the card for doing so. Might be worth it on some boards. Below-the-line effect to avoid you just running away with a million Actions.Because I'm legally required to get some card with a bad Artifact to work.
This looks borderline unplayable in a non-mirror, i.e. when you are stuck forever with the artifact. On the other hand, if there is engine potential, the dominant strategy might be for everybody to get some of those Peddlers/Bazaars/Squires.
(https://i.imgur.com/JXMFW3e.png) | Quote from: Financier Financier ($6 Action - Duration) |
Quote
| Quote Master Tradesman | Quote
|
Late Witch - $4
Action - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action
Exile an Estate from the Supply.
Each other player gains a Curse.
----
When you would play, gain, trash, or Exile this from the Supply, if there is no empty Supply pile, gain a Silver instead.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51894263630_b42cde6923_b.jpg)QuoteLate Witch - $4
Action - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action
Exile an Estate from the Supply.
Each other player gains a Curse.
----
When you would play, gain, trash, or Exile this from the Supply, if there is no empty Supply pile, gain a Silver instead.
A late game attack card that will accelerate a 3 pile ending. I know the replacement wording of "would/instead" was changed on at least one card that used to use it, but for the card to function as desired it was needed. Not sure how centralizing and game warping this being in the Kingdom will be, but I wanted to try and make something functional that could not be obtained until a Supply pile was empty. Feedback is appreciated.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51894263630_b42cde6923_b.jpg)QuoteLate Witch - $4
Action - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action
Exile an Estate from the Supply.
Each other player gains a Curse.
----
When you would play, gain, trash, or Exile this from the Supply, if there is no empty Supply pile, gain a Silver instead.
A late game attack card that will accelerate a 3 pile ending. I know the replacement wording of "would/instead" was changed on at least one card that used to use it, but for the card to function as desired it was needed. Not sure how centralizing and game warping this being in the Kingdom will be, but I wanted to try and make something functional that could not be obtained until a Supply pile was empty. Feedback is appreciated.
That's an interesting concept. But I'd suggest to remove "trash, or Exile" from the below-the-line wording - it's enough to disallow gaining and playing Late Witch:
Most kingdoms wouldn't allow you to exile or trash it from the supply anyway, and those that do still can't get it into your deck afterwards as long as no pile is empty, let alone play it.
Maybe you could even get away with not disallowing playing it either, though it would make an occasional combo like Band of Misfits +Late Witch very strong...
Project: Magna Carta
Cost: $8
Text:
When another player plays an attack card, it does not affect you.
-
You must have at least 5 differently named Action cards in play to buy this.
(https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1cpgxyRw2kOSSnDPWC0jsyC1ycRS1fGTh)
I agree this project feels way off as it is hard to hit $8 if a strong attack card are on board which completely defeats the purpose of such a project, notice most moats cost $2 or $3, that is to help players gain them even through heavy attacks. Also the odds you get a mega action hand of 5 card is doubly hard when you are forced to discard down to 3 cards or have a lot of junk cards in your deck.Project: Magna Carta
Cost: $8
Text:
When another player plays an attack card, it does not affect you.
-
You must have at least 5 differently named Action cards in play to buy this.
(https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1cpgxyRw2kOSSnDPWC0jsyC1ycRS1fGTh)
I know some people (especially those I play with!) often want more ways to "defend" against attacks. Moat, Champion, Lighthouse... are there other "full" protections? A project may be a good place for such a design. But it's not an easy thing to design.
As it currently stands, there are *so* many barriers here. Some kingdoms don't have any villages, and then you'd need at least 4 different cantrips, which is rare too. On top of that, you have to land such a hand with 5+ unique action cards played with at least $8 coins, likely before greening starts for it to be worthwhile (though not necessarily before). And, even if you land all that, this project can end up in kingdoms with no attacks!
Does it need something else added instead of just moat-effect? Does it need a lower barrier (not 5+ unique actions in play)? Does it need a lower cost? I don't know. But it feels to unreachable for this first version.
I agree this project feels way off as it is hard to hit $8 if a strong attack card are on board which completely defeats the purpose of such a project, notice most moats cost $2 or $3, that is to help players gain them even through heavy attacks. Also the odds you get a mega action hand of 5 card is doubly hard when you are forced to discard down to 3 cards or have a lot of junk cards in your deck.Project: Magna Carta
Cost: $8
Text:
When another player plays an attack card, it does not affect you.
-
You must have at least 5 differently named Action cards in play to buy this.
(https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1cpgxyRw2kOSSnDPWC0jsyC1ycRS1fGTh)
I know some people (especially those I play with!) often want more ways to "defend" against attacks. Moat, Champion, Lighthouse... are there other "full" protections? A project may be a good place for such a design. But it's not an easy thing to design.
As it currently stands, there are *so* many barriers here. Some kingdoms don't have any villages, and then you'd need at least 4 different cantrips, which is rare too. On top of that, you have to land such a hand with 5+ unique action cards played with at least $8 coins, likely before greening starts for it to be worthwhile (though not necessarily before). And, even if you land all that, this project can end up in kingdoms with no attacks!
Does it need something else added instead of just moat-effect? Does it need a lower barrier (not 5+ unique actions in play)? Does it need a lower cost? I don't know. But it feels to unreachable for this first version.
$7 isn't much cheaper than $8; add on the in-play restriction and i think the only time i'd ever buy this is if i was able to get there first in a mountebank game.I agree this project feels way off as it is hard to hit $8 if a strong attack card are on board which completely defeats the purpose of such a project, notice most moats cost $2 or $3, that is to help players gain them even through heavy attacks. Also the odds you get a mega action hand of 5 card is doubly hard when you are forced to discard down to 3 cards or have a lot of junk cards in your deck.Project: Magna Carta
Cost: $8
Text:
When another player plays an attack card, it does not affect you.
-
You must have at least 5 differently named Action cards in play to buy this.
(https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1cpgxyRw2kOSSnDPWC0jsyC1ycRS1fGTh)
I know some people (especially those I play with!) often want more ways to "defend" against attacks. Moat, Champion, Lighthouse... are there other "full" protections? A project may be a good place for such a design. But it's not an easy thing to design.
As it currently stands, there are *so* many barriers here. Some kingdoms don't have any villages, and then you'd need at least 4 different cantrips, which is rare too. On top of that, you have to land such a hand with 5+ unique action cards played with at least $8 coins, likely before greening starts for it to be worthwhile (though not necessarily before). And, even if you land all that, this project can end up in kingdoms with no attacks!
Does it need something else added instead of just moat-effect? Does it need a lower barrier (not 5+ unique actions in play)? Does it need a lower cost? I don't know. But it feels to unreachable for this first version.
Thank you for the feedback mathdude & arowdok. I wanted the cost to be similar to Moat or Lighthouse @ $2 x 4 to reflect that it lasts throughout the rest of the game, and for it to be similar to a cost of a Province: when making it to $8 for the first time, would you decide to buy this vs by a Province? But I get the point about the barrier when there is attacks going on, so I've reduced it to $7 and changed the on-buy restriction to be just 5 differently named cards which seems much more plausible: 2 actions + 3 treasures.
$7 isn't much cheaper than $8; add on the in-play restriction and i think the only time i'd ever buy this is if i was able to get there first in a mountebank game.I agree this project feels way off as it is hard to hit $8 if a strong attack card are on board which completely defeats the purpose of such a project, notice most moats cost $2 or $3, that is to help players gain them even through heavy attacks. Also the odds you get a mega action hand of 5 card is doubly hard when you are forced to discard down to 3 cards or have a lot of junk cards in your deck.Project: Magna Carta
Cost: $8
Text:
When another player plays an attack card, it does not affect you.
-
You must have at least 5 differently named Action cards in play to buy this.
(https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1cpgxyRw2kOSSnDPWC0jsyC1ycRS1fGTh)
I know some people (especially those I play with!) often want more ways to "defend" against attacks. Moat, Champion, Lighthouse... are there other "full" protections? A project may be a good place for such a design. But it's not an easy thing to design.
As it currently stands, there are *so* many barriers here. Some kingdoms don't have any villages, and then you'd need at least 4 different cantrips, which is rare too. On top of that, you have to land such a hand with 5+ unique action cards played with at least $8 coins, likely before greening starts for it to be worthwhile (though not necessarily before). And, even if you land all that, this project can end up in kingdoms with no attacks!
Does it need something else added instead of just moat-effect? Does it need a lower barrier (not 5+ unique actions in play)? Does it need a lower cost? I don't know. But it feels to unreachable for this first version.
Thank you for the feedback mathdude & arowdok. I wanted the cost to be similar to Moat or Lighthouse @ $2 x 4 to reflect that it lasts throughout the rest of the game, and for it to be similar to a cost of a Province: when making it to $8 for the first time, would you decide to buy this vs by a Province? But I get the point about the barrier when there is attacks going on, so I've reduced it to $7 and changed the on-buy restriction to be just 5 differently named cards which seems much more plausible: 2 actions + 3 treasures.
$4 with the restriction is the upper limit of what i'd ever pay - no attack hurts enough that it's worth doing this, not a province
Beckoner
$5
Night - Duration
Gain an Action or Treasure card costing up to $5. Set it aside. If you did, then at the start of your next turn, play it.
-
When you gain this, return it to the supply unless you discard an Action, a Treasure, and a Victory card, revealed.
This is no longer my entry as emtzalex pointed out a huge flaw with the combo it creates.
I wanted a nice strong Project that feels worth going for. The limit of not using Copper adds a nice angle as players need to find way to fund this Project without removing all the Coppers, or at least find a way to get them back via +Buys or Return from Exile as treasures that produce $3 are as good as Gold, at least that what I have been told. Is is a bit funny as the OP's original refenced card, Grand Market, used the exact same limit, but this card leads players down a odd path of wanting to keep Coppers for later use vs most decks (especially Grand Market decks) just want all of the Copper trashed.
(https://i.imgur.com/xqqaIq8.png)QuoteBronze
$4
Project
Copper produces an extra $2 on your turns.
-
You can’t buy this if you have any Coppers in play.
After making quite a few of cards for the contest this week and reading through other entries I am just going to muse on the design space for a minute.
These "cannot be bought unless X." cards and really any synergy focused card seem to fall into 2 Camps.
Either the card can be bought by doing something that can happen every game even if it is not often to happen alot/easily. This includes having something or having the lack of something. Examples: Grand Market, Fisherman, , have no discard pile, discard a card from your hand when purchasing.
The other major division is the cards with limits that are board dependent, even if the missing thing is a common effect, the Landmark Tomb with no Trash effects or the Landmark Labyrinth with no gainers or +buys and Tomb with no Trash effects. Also to a lesser extent bonus effects from card like Leprechaun's extra trigger for wishes needs some number of +Action cards to gain the Wish or Priest's bonus $2 for extra trashed card later in the turn can only happen with +Actions or trash effect that trigger via treasures and Night cards. (Not that having money in the Night phase does much)
This can be circumvented by the Split piles, Travelers or most commonly Heirloom mechanic. Each granting additional effects beyond the default supply piles grant (the Copper, Estate, Curse and such) to assist players in doing the objective the pile sets up. Example Magic Lamp needing some number a common effects like +Cards, a Duration, or something else to allow for having enough cards in play to meet the have 6 or the Necromancer has its default Zombies to help set up a useful trash pile.
Now this all pretty surface level stuff to see and talk about, what get interesting is how each individual card gets implement such as the Event Quest. Technically this Event is NOT board dependent since a player can spend multiple buys on Curse cards (blehhh), also if the board has a common terminal +2 cards effect it can turn a heavy green hand into a Gold. Though the Event's main focus to counter Attack strategies which give you Curses, or turn your own attack effects into personal value, or after getting a junked up hand of 6 cards into an okay turn. But that does demonstrate that even if the effect is technically NOT board dependent it really is, just more subtly requires either +cards to get to 6 or attack effects to be on board. This also can translate to the Split piles. The Parasitic design behind them is a delicate balance for a linked supply piles (Split piles, Travelers or Heirloom) one side is if they have nothing to do with each other like Fool/Lucky Coin there is almost no reason these effect are attached. Or a more odd case of Catapult/Rocks, as the self synergy is clear fling some Rocks for value but who ever buy more then 1(maybe 2) Catapults. So in a 2 player experience good luck getting to Rocks and unlocking that value. The other side of this Balance is maybe a greater danger too much self synergy. Examples are Encampment/Plunder and Sauna/Avanto. Both use mostly themselves to make a strong decks with a splash of the default supply of Gold/Silver to accomplish what there game plan is. These are not the strongest Dominion deck but they have issue similar to the all Minion decks which just want more Minions, (maybe backed up by some Peddlers). Or an early Rebuild which just avoids Dominion's main systems of gained VP all together and has few interesting way for other supply pile to spice up its play.
Now for a new player, these are not the greatest issues as the repeated play patterns from some Singular supply piles will not be a huge turn off for the 1st few times, unless they have limited access to the expansion content. I might suppose, they might more easily see the repeated play patterns appear and be turned off by them, though the common complaints of this comes from a lose synergy from 2 cards (Witch+Village) more so then coming from 1 pile. But for the enfranchised player these patterns of a two card combo less of a problem given with access to more card official expansions or fan made cards spices up repetition. Like which Witch they are being Cursed by or what flavor of village is supporting it. But with Singular linked piles this will not be the case, so a great danger comes from a strong monolithic Pile. Example if a Supply requires a card being trashed during the same turn as this card can be purchased and the card comes with an Heirloom to unlock that trash trigger, if that Heirloom was as strong as Goat or greater you might see this Linked pile almost never caring what else is in the kingdom and only focusing on it own self synergy. Now if the same supposed Pile required trashing and the Heirloom was a much weaker at Trashing then players might used another kingdom card over the heirloom to unlock this Supply pile. Lastly if the card Supply is not worth the effort it is unlikely to completely ruin a game, since if players ignore 1 or 2 kingdom piles they can still find interesting game player in the other 8 card interacting with each other.
I do get quite annoyed though when comment mention that a card is unplayable on some boards due to "needing" a +1 buy or something else.
Now it is nice when Designers can seamlessly create interesting self synergies but maybe it is better to have cards that can only work when the board has the explicate requisite effect and be dead otherwise instead of the guarantee the card will always be able to function at full strength no matter the surrounding board which lends itself to mandatory to purchase for all players.
These are not my entries. I thought others might enjoy tinkering with these ideas down the line and since it is late in the contest I am hopefully not limiting other entries by making this extended post. Feedback and discussion is still welcome for those who have the time and motivation.
(https://i.imgur.com/DNH13nQ.png)
This one is my take on limited by lots of card in play and end up as a strange Alt strategy to reward a mega turn guided by the dark flavor of 3 different Sixes to make a 666 refence and 13 for an overall Evil theme.QuoteDark Pact
@5
Event
+6%
Gain a card onto your deck costing up to $6.
-
You can only buy this if you have exactly 13 cards in play.
(https://i.imgur.com/q5MkEP2.png)
This one is my take on limited be requiring a Gold to buy this, I went with Treasure to limit its brokenness with Workshops and I got cute with it being a "National Treasure" flavor of a mega bridge. A few design notes: the Debt cost was added to make it feel different from Gold and limit it from assisting in gain future copies, also it is a nice limiting factor how future plays of Golden Gate Bridge does not help pay off the Debt taken to acquire them.QuoteGolden Gate Bridge
@7
Treasure
This turn, cards (everywhere) cost $3 less.
-
You can’t buy this if you have no Gold in play.
(https://i.imgur.com/ah8GTdU.png)(https://i.imgur.com/bkbOaOG.png)
This one is my take on requiring a Horse being used that turn. Which in my opinion is not to hard to track. Got to say I am not super happy with this design overall, the Heirloom seems fun, the event just is too close to Experiment and I tried to add a diversity quest to guide players but feels kind of flat. Would love to see somebody else take this design up a notch.QuotePony Up
$3
Event
+2 Buys
Once per turn: Gain a Horse per differently named card you have in play.
-
You can’t buy this unless you played a Horse this turn.
Heirloom: SaddlebagsQuoteSaddlebags
$0
Treasure - Heirloom
$1
When you play this, gain a Horse.
(https://i.imgur.com/PVwIaRB.png)
This one is my take on requiring another to be gained in the same turn. I felt it needed to give the Heirloom so all boards can use it. Started by making a few cute Heirlooms to try out then just figured the Official Heirloom Lucky Coin might just be a good fit. So then I went down a few Strange gainer rabbit holes and thought a Junker would be cool since this trigger doesn't care who gained a card this turn, which opened up more way for this to be unlocked and easier to gain the 1st copy on more boards. As for the Action itself I copied Familiar (which gets under played due to Potions) but it needed to be different enough so I went with delayed action(Villager) and delayed +1 Card (Horse) and it still gives out Curses like normal. This odd take on (+1Card&+1Action) feels worth exploring later and I might try this out elsewhere but on this card feels just bad fit for the contest.QuotePalmist
$5
Action
+1 Villager
Gain a Horse. Each other player gains a Curse.
-
You can only buy this if any player (including you) has gained another card this turn.
Heirloom: Lucky Coin
(https://i.imgur.com/J5ojI97.png)
This one is my take on requiring a gained province. The main focus was what would get player to want to spike to a province and still be useful late game but not be direct VP, Megabridge seemed like an okay fit but would encourage other to find a better one. I also felt it needed to give the heirloom so all boards can use that to get the Province then this card, I could shift it to a $10@2 cost and add "When you buy this, gain a Province." but then would not have worked for the this contest. To help differentiate this from that other design I went with a megabridge so that both the province and this card will be cost reduced for even bigger future turns. I felt $2($10=$8+$2) was too cheap but $3($11=$8+$3) was too difficult an ask so I added the Debt. As a side bonus the Debt cost helps to prevent free piling this, also prevents the using remodel to cheese this early, lastly add more layers of complexity to the situation for when a player has $10 not the full $12, is it worth the debt hurting next turn?QuoteThoroughfare
$2@2
Action
+2 Buys
This turn, cards (everywhere) cost $2 less.
-
You can’t buy this if you haven't gained a Province this turn.
Heirloom: Pouch
(https://i.imgur.com/WsNiCMG.png)
This one is my take on needing to keep Estates in your deck and super rewarding player for it. Mega Baron, not exactly a can't buy this effect but pretty close and probably should qualify for this contest. The flavor could use a tune up, also at $7 might be to close too Inheritance in same vein caring about Estates but also I am scared of most strong +VP token cards so probably best to test this on the weaker side vs letting it dominate a game.QuoteMatchmaker
$7
Action
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
You may discard an Estate for +2%. If you don't, gain an Estate.
--
When you gain this, discard an Estate from your hand. If you don't trash this.
(https://i.imgur.com/YNZBsyd.png)(https://i.imgur.com/kyjErJO.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/nMRmc1A.png)
This one is very different but has the spirit of this contest so here. The idea of personal kingdom piles feels like cool place for custom card to play in, I have seen a few other deckbuilder try this idea out to some success. This idea is a Tug-of-War for the exclusive right use of the set aside pile. At least though if you can pay the price the +2 buys get you in and grab few card before anyone else can take this from you. I went with just random piles of normal cards similar to black market, and players can decide if they want to spent time on acquiring them. I started with only 1 pile set aside but went to 3 just to up the odds one of the pile is worth getting. Also the Potion cost is to limit players access tell after the 1st shuffle and prevent a with tons of money just jumping in and buy this late with little effort. But some people hate Potion so I added the $3 option too. Also with potion it limit how often this trades hands so even if you cant buy things right away then at least you opened the door for next turn and if other haven't purchased Potion they cant shut that door from you. Lastly Potion cost make this feel a bit more different from Travelling Fair. A path some future designer might explore is making a full set of custom Forbidden piles, like Necromance/Zombies or a Knight like pile. Also one might just add the 3 normal piles like I did but buff them with cost reduction or other token like effects.QuotePlaudits
$^ or $3
Event
Once per turn: +2 Buys. Take the Approval.
-
Setup: Add three extra Kingdom card piles. Cards from those piles are Forbidden cards and are not part of the supply.QuoteApproval
Artifact
During your turns, Forbidden cards are in the supply.
(https://i.imgur.com/FiKTZeR.png)
This card was me trying to reward gathering a Copper, a Silver, and a Gold on one turn. I have go back a forth on the cost with being $0 or ($1+$2+$3=$6). Given without a +Buy it makes not Difference (I guess Debt too) win not test the overpowered and $0 and scale back after seeing it do some stuff as skip out on a $6 right away feels like a hard sell on top of the mini quest. The project's top half is patterned after Mint, you can gain a big treasure with no downside or choose to have a Action card not get played that turn in exchange for another copy, similar to a better Way of the Rat. Overall, I love the gain limit but just not happy with the Top part matching together.QuotePlaudits
$0
Project
At the start of your Buy phase, you may reveal a non-Victory card from your hand. Gain a copy of it.
-
You can only buy this if you have a Copper, a Silver, and a Gold in play.
(https://i.imgur.com/rQR5VF3.png)
This card was me trying to find a reward for a player who grab a Duchy early. And again not happy with the top half maybe somebody else can figure this out. Tried a few supply piles the needed the Duchy to discarded to bought but still no Homeruns.QuoteHorticulture
$4
Project
During your turns, Victory cards are also Actions with "+1 Coffers and +1%".
-
You can only buy this if you discard a Duchy from your hand.
Weaver
$4
Action
+2 Cards
Gain a card costing up to $4.
-
You can only buy this card if you have at least three differently named cards in play.
I wanted a nice strong Project that feels worth going for. The limit of not using Copper adds a nice angle as players need to find way to fund this Project without removing all the Coppers, or at least find a way to get them back via +Buys or Return from Exile as treasures that produce $3 are as good as Gold, at least that what I have been told. Is is a bit funny as the OP's original refenced card, Grand Market, used the exact same limit, but this card leads players down a odd path of wanting to keep Coppers for later use vs most decks (especially Grand Market decks) just want all of the Copper trashed.
(https://i.imgur.com/xqqaIq8.png)QuoteBronze
$4
Project
Copper produces an extra $2 on your turns.
-
You can’t buy this if you have any Coppers in play.
Field
Type: Victory
Cost: 6
Worth 5VP
You can't buy this if you have any coppers or silvers in play.
I wanted a nice strong Project that feels worth going for. The limit of not using Copper adds a nice angle as players need to find way to fund this Project without removing all the Coppers, or at least find a way to get them back via +Buys or Return from Exile as treasures that produce $3 are as good as Gold, at least that what I have been told. Is is a bit funny as the OP's original refenced card, Grand Market, used the exact same limit, but this card leads players down a odd path of wanting to keep Coppers for later use vs most decks (especially Grand Market decks) just want all of the Copper trashed.
(https://i.imgur.com/xqqaIq8.png)QuoteBronze
$4
Project
Copper produces an extra $2 on your turns.
-
You can’t buy this if you have any Coppers in play.
This would be very easy to buy with Storeroom / Vault (turning Coppers in your hand into $ without the need to put them into play), and there would be no need to trash Coppers to make either work.
Storeroom in particular is strong. If a player opens Storeroom/Silver, when the Storeroom comes up after the shuffle, they need just one of the eight cards they can look through to be the Silver. There's about a 60% chance of that happening on Turn 3 or 4 (I believe). Once it does, they can use the spare Buy to gain another Copper, and now have 8 Golds* and 1-2 Silvers on turn 3 or 4. This could end the game extremely quickly and make opening $2/$5 catastrophically bad. Alternatively, in a game with Vault opening $2/$5 becomes extremely beneficial.
I wanted a nice strong Project that feels worth going for. The limit of not using Copper adds a nice angle as players need to find way to fund this Project without removing all the Coppers, or at least find a way to get them back via +Buys or Return from Exile as treasures that produce $3 are as good as Gold, at least that what I have been told. Is is a bit funny as the OP's original refenced card, Grand Market, used the exact same limit, but this card leads players down a odd path of wanting to keep Coppers for later use vs most decks (especially Grand Market decks) just want all of the Copper trashed.
(https://i.imgur.com/xqqaIq8.png)QuoteBronze
$4
Project
Copper produces an extra $2 on your turns.
-
You can’t buy this if you have any Coppers in play.
This would be very easy to buy with Storeroom / Vault (turning Coppers in your hand into $ without the need to put them into play), and there would be no need to trash Coppers to make either work.
Storeroom in particular is strong. If a player opens Storeroom/Silver, when the Storeroom comes up after the shuffle, they need just one of the eight cards they can look through to be the Silver. There's about a 60% chance of that happening on Turn 3 or 4 (I believe). Once it does, they can use the spare Buy to gain another Copper, and now have 8 Golds* and 1-2 Silvers on turn 3 or 4. This could end the game extremely quickly and make opening $2/$5 catastrophically bad. Alternatively, in a game with Vault opening $2/$5 becomes extremely beneficial.
Thank you for pointing that out to me. I did not see that interaction. So I am going submit something else as I can't see a clean way to fix this card given that combo.