I would cost Familiar at $P.
Tournament: Make all the prizes the same, like 5 Trusty Steeds or something, it will still be a good card because of its early Peddler ability.
InnI agree it would be fun, but probably way too powerful. The ability to get lots of actions in a draw-your-deck engine... 1 or 2 of these, and you don't need any other Villages. Also, simply +2 cards, +1 action, Discard a card is probably pretty good sifting.
Action - $5
+2 Cards
Discard any number of cards, +1 action for each card you discard this way
---
When you gain this, you may look through your discard pile (including this), reveal any number of Action cards from it, and shuffle them into your deck.
More variety, and more thematic on top (the more "time" you spend at the inn, the more you can do), and the bottom cuts down on unnecessary shuffling.
Farming Village
Action - $2
+2 Actions
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Action or Treasure card. Put all the revealed cards in your hand.
It's simpler, more interesting and slightly more thematic.
New Farming Village is waaay too powerful. Is strictly superior to regular Village, strictly superior to Scout and it costs $2? I think even at $4 it would be overpowered, although it would be bad at $5.
Why people do not like FV? I like it as it is.
New Farming Village is waaay too powerful. Is strictly superior to regular Village, strictly superior to Scout and it costs $2? I think even at $4 it would be overpowered, although it would be bad at $5.
Why people do not like FV? I like it as it is.
Looks like the $2 was a typo. I still agree it's too god for $4. It might work as a $5. It's not strictly better than Scout though... if it finds an action on top, it was just a regular Village. You might still have 3 green cards below it that are stuck there for your next draws; Scout would have picked those up (plus just the rearranging ability for when you don't find green).
Transmute is too powerful at 4$. It's more balanced at 2-3$.
Transmute is too powerful at 4$. It's more balanced at 2-3$.
Wait, what? Making it cheaper so you can open with double Transmute makes it more balanced?!?!?! I'm not sure I understand your logic.
Wharf | +1 Buy Now and at the start of your next turn: +2 Cards | $5 ACTION - DURATION |
Cultist | +2 Cards You may play a Cultist from your hand. Otherwise, each other player gains a Ruins. When you trash this, +3 Cards | $5 ACTION - ATTACK - LOOTER |
Fishing Village | +2 Actions +$1 At the start of your next turn: +1 Action. | $3 ACTION - DURATION |
Scout | +2 Actions Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Curses and Victory cards into your hand and the rest back in any order. | $4 ACTION |
Adventurer | Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal 3 Treasures. Put 2 into your hand and discard the rest. | $6 ACTION |
Throne Room | You may choose an Action card in your hand and play it twice. Otherwise, +$1. | $4 ACTION |
LighthouseI see the reasoning, but I would say that Lighthouse is too good because it gives you a coin in your next hand in addition to not worrying about collision. Providing an Action and Coin the first turn and a Buy the second would balance it out more effectively, I think.
$3 Action - Duration
Now and at the start of your next turn:
+1 Buy
+$1
___
While this is in play, when another player plays an attack card, it doesn't affect you.
The problem I have with Lighthouse is that it isn't terminal. You can piledrive them if you want and they'll never collide. The thing that I like about Moat and Watchtower is that they increase player interaction, but I feel like Lighthouse actually decreases player interaction, because you can't interact with someone who always has a Lighthouse in play. Also, Lighthouse isn't very good in games without attack cards. Therefore, I replaced the +1 Action with something that sometimes makes you want to buy Lighthouse even when there are no attacks: +1 Buy. This version is almost better than Woodcutter, so I felt like I had to increase the price.
GoonsI disagree with this method. In any game where getting multiple Goons cards into play is possible, this ability to trash Treasures would make them even more important than they already were since they provide the Treasure thinning that you need. My suggestion to fix them would be to weaken the coin they provide (thusly making it harder to use its extra buys), or make its Attack anti-stack (discouraging stacking them whenever it is possible).
$6 Action
+1 Buy
+$2
You may trash up to two treasure cards from your hand.
___
While this is in play, when you buy a card, +1VP
The attack part of Goons feels slightly out of place and it really hurts when you get your first $6 hand hit by your opponent's Goons. Trashing possibly makes getting an early Goons even more important, but at least it doesn't make your opponents' early Goons buys less likely to happen. Also, it makes buying Coppers for the +VP more attractive (though still often a trap), because it has a built-in way to get rid of them.
Familiar - Action, $PI think it would be simpler to drop Familiar down to $2P instead: Possible to miss, but extremely unlikely.
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each other player gains a curse.
---------
You may not buy this after another card, and you may not buy another card after buying this one.
TransmuteSerious agreement here. It's a brilliant, simple fix to the card.
Action - $P
(Same effect as before)
---
When you gain this, +1 buy
It significantly lowers the opportunity cost of getting one, and gives a little perk to the treasure trashing option should you choose to take it. Also it's probably the only chance the game has at putting this when gain effect on a card (putting on a card without a potion cost means you can make a run on the pile with enough Highways etc.).
MarauderSure. No problem here.
Action/Attack - $4
Gain a Spoils from the Spoils pile
Each other player gains a Ruins, putting it in his hand
I like the tradeoff between short term and long term.
InnI've thought of this too (the discarding cards), but I think it makes Inn too good. The sifting it provides is moderately hard to use, but strong when you can. I mostly don't like Inn's on-gain effect because I rarely feel as though I'm using it effectively.
Action - $5
+2 Cards
Discard any number of cards, +1 action for each card you discard this way
---
When you gain this, you may look through your discard pile (including this), reveal any number of Action cards from it, and shuffle them into your deck.
More variety, and more thematic on top (the more "time" you spend at the inn, the more you can do), and the bottom cuts down on unnecessary shuffling.
Farming VillageThis makes Farming Village a bit stronger, but only with Trash for benefit. I wouldn't say this pushes it out of being reasonable at $4.
Action - $4
+2 Actions
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Action or Treasure card. Put all the revealed cards in your hand.
It's simpler, more interesting and slightly more thematic.
On a completely unrelated note, I think a good change to Fortress would be to put 20 in the supply, and then have the effect be "When you trash this, gain a Fortress, putting it into your hand."This would be a perfect fix to all of Fortress's problems.
Adventurer Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal 3 Treasures.
Put 2 into your hand and discard the rest.$6 ACTION
Yeah, it seems a lot more useful this way while the change is subtle.
Adventurer Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal 3 Treasures.
Put 2 into your hand and discard the rest.$6 ACTION
I tend to dislike most suggested changes to cards, but this seems really solid. I think Adventurer, as the only $6 Kingdom Card in the Base Game, deserves to be better than it is. I'm actually considering playing with this variant from now on.
Farming VillageThis makes Farming Village a bit stronger, but only with Trash for benefit. I wouldn't say this pushes it out of being reasonable at $4.
Action - $4
+2 Actions
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Action or Treasure card. Put all the revealed cards in your hand.
It's simpler, more interesting and slightly more thematic.
Farming VillageThis makes Farming Village a bit stronger, but only with Trash for benefit. I wouldn't say this pushes it out of being reasonable at $4.
Action - $4
+2 Actions
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Action or Treasure card. Put all the revealed cards in your hand.
It's simpler, more interesting and slightly more thematic.
Not only trash for benefit... it's stronger if you have any trashing in general; anytime you would reshuffle after playing Farming Village (bad cards miss the shuffle). Also the following cards: Warehouse; Hamlet; Vault; Secret Chamber; Storeroom; Cellar; Masquerade; Tournament; Baron; Ambassador; Madman. Worse for Hermit though!
I'm not so sure about what I said before about $5... it would be quote a weak $5... but it's still way better than current Farming Village in a fair number of situations.
Farming VillageThis makes Farming Village a bit stronger, but only with Trash for benefit. I wouldn't say this pushes it out of being reasonable at $4.
Action - $4
+2 Actions
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Action or Treasure card. Put all the revealed cards in your hand.
It's simpler, more interesting and slightly more thematic.
Not only trash for benefit... it's stronger if you have any trashing in general; anytime you would reshuffle after playing Farming Village (bad cards miss the shuffle). Also the following cards: Warehouse; Hamlet; Vault; Secret Chamber; Storeroom; Cellar; Masquerade; Tournament; Baron; Ambassador; Madman. Worse for Hermit though!
I'm not so sure about what I said before about $5... it would be quote a weak $5... but it's still way better than current Farming Village in a fair number of situations.
Why is it worse for Hermit? Hermit can trash from hand.
you can use that to buy two non-black market cards. (e.i., in the supply). This makes it strictly better than woodcutter.
I believe the "at most one" is reffering to cards in the black market deck. it would need to be at most one for both, which is easily remedied.
What does need fixing is, in my view, Scrying Pool.I agree with this, but it's not a fix, more of a convenience. The Spy effect is weak, a only slows the game down. No one buys it for the attack, and would essentially never change a game with it taken out without weakening the card.
+1 Action
Reveal the top card of your deck and either discard it or put it back.
Then reveal cards from the top of your deck until revealing one that isn't an Action.
Put all of your revealed cards into your hand.
you can use that to buy two non-black market cards. (e.i., in the supply). This makes it strictly better than woodcutter.
I think it would get confusing if multiple BMs were played. Let's say that you play TR-BM. You reveal three cards, then you reveal another three cards. What happens in the Buy phase? Are you still restricted to buying just 1/6? If you can buy 2/6, are you restricted to only buying one from each set of 3? When you return cards to the bottom, do you have to do it in the correct order (that is, one set and then the next)?
It would make tracking difficult, and IRL it could end up requiring too much table space depending on how many BMs you manage to play in a single turn.
I'm still curious as to whether a $0 Scout is balanced, though.
I'm still curious as to whether a $0 Scout is balanced, though.
I think having $0 cost piles makes three piling on megaturns too easy, especially with KC and a power +Buy card like Goons or Wharf or Bridge. I would rather just not use the card.
Well, with Bridge as your power + Buy, you were probably going to end up with some $0 piles anyways. :D
I think Transmute for $4 would be an awesome card.How about leaving it at the $0/P cost and adding the line "In games using this, when you gain a Potion, you may gain a Transmute."?
I'm still curious as to whether a $0 Scout is balanced, though.
I think having $0 cost piles makes three piling on megaturns too easy, especially with KC and a power +Buy card like Goons or Wharf or Bridge. I would rather just not use the card.
I know other people have suggested it already, but I think my favorite fix to Scout is to make it a Victory card worth 1VP.
I know other people have suggested it already, but I think my favorite fix to Scout is to make it a Victory card worth 1VP.
Well, it's strictly worse than Estate, but at least it's an improvement.
I know other people have suggested it already, but I think my favorite fix to Scout is to make it a Victory card worth 1VP.
Well, it's strictly worse than Estate, but at least it's an improvement.
Is that a joke? It would very much not be strictly worse...
I know other people have suggested it already, but I think my favorite fix to Scout is to make it a Victory card worth 1VP.
Well, it's strictly worse than Estate, but at least it's an improvement.
Is that a joke? It would very much not be strictly worse...
Someone on F.DS is talking about Scout... and you have to ask if it's a joke? ;)
I know other people have suggested it already, but I think my favorite fix to Scout is to make it a Victory card worth 1VP.
Well, it's strictly worse than Estate, but at least it's an improvement.
Is that a joke? It would very much not be strictly worse...
Someone on F.DS is talking about Scout... and you have to ask if it's a joke? ;)
But it's talking about modified Scout! Modified Scout is not Scout. ::)
(Also, "strictly inferior/superior" are abused terms on f.ds.)
I know other people have suggested it already, but I think my favorite fix to Scout is to make it a Victory card worth 1VP.
Well, it's strictly worse than Estate, but at least it's an improvement.
Is that a joke? It would very much not be strictly worse...
I know other people have suggested it already, but I think my favorite fix to Scout is to make it a Victory card worth 1VP.
Well, it's strictly worse than Estate, but at least it's an improvement.
Is that a joke? It would very much not be strictly worse...
He didn't say "Action/Victory"
Here's my "fix" for Scout:
Scout
Action 4$
+1 Action
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand.
If none of the revealed cards were victory cards, put one of them into your hand.
Put the rest back in any order
So it's always at least a cantrip.
Minion
$4 Action - Attack
+1 Action
+$1
Each player discards his hand and draws 4 cards.
I hate getting stuck with a 4-card hand that I don't like against Minion players while they're still playing their Minions. This should fix the "problem": at least now I can hope for a better 4-card hand, though it's now significantly weaker (it resembles Peddler) so I made it a $4. Another possible solution:
Minion
$4 Action - Attack
+1 Action
Choose one: +$2; or each player with 5 or more cards in his hand discards it and draws 4 cards and each other player may do the same.
Both cards are also interesting because they're Attacks even though they do the Attack part thing to all players.
That first one doesn't work. Sometimes you get a crappy 4 card hand and hope for a second Minion to give you a better one... but sometimes you will have a perfectly good 4 card hand and a second Minion wipes it out. Not to mention, a chain of Minions would slow the game down immensely because everyone will be reshuffling over and over again.It works just fine, wiping out good cards too is intentional. Slowing the game down is a problem IRL though, but not online.
In my opinion, Chancellor would be more powerful if he/she/it would be non-terminal, so:Making Chancellor non-terminal has a logistics problem. It makes you shuffle A LOT more.
Chancellor: 3$
+1 Action
+1 Buy
You may immediately put your drawpile into your discard pile.
Maybe this one would be better, though:
Chancellor: 4$
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
You may...
So you do not waste a card in your hand to get to 5$, and Chancellor does not conflict with the other terminals you want to play more often because Chancellor is no longer a terminal.
I don't think that should be a reason to not change a card. I don't really think it needs changing. Sure it's weak, but there are still times I buy it.In my opinion, Chancellor would be more powerful if he/she/it would be non-terminal, so:Making Chancellor non-terminal has a logistics problem. It makes you shuffle A LOT more.
Chancellor: 3$
+1 Action
+1 Buy
You may immediately put your drawpile into your discard pile.
Maybe this one would be better, though:
Chancellor: 4$
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
You may...
So you do not waste a card in your hand to get to 5$, and Chancellor does not conflict with the other terminals you want to play more often because Chancellor is no longer a terminal.
Making Chancellor non-terminal has a logistics problem. It makes you shuffle A LOT more.I don't think that should be a reason to not change a card.
I don't really think it needs changing. Sure it's weak, but there are still times I buy it.
Making Chancellor non-terminal has a logistics problem. It makes you shuffle A LOT more.I don't think that should be a reason to not change a card.
That's because you've never played an IRL game against someone who plays a string of cantrip-Chancellors and shuffles his deck 7 times in a row. Dominion is primarily a physical card game and these things matter.I don't really think it needs changing. Sure it's weak, but there are still times I buy it.
Chancellor and Woodcutter are two very similar Base Set cards that are renowned for being underpowered. I wonder if they could be combined into one good card.
Chancellor
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Buy. +$2. You may immediately put your deck into your discard pile.
I'm guessing that's still fairly priced at $3, though I could be way off base.
chancellor with +buy makes it combo with counting house better, which is cool.
The two parts don't synergise in an obvious way (although I could see it being possible), and honestly what you pay for is a terminal silver + small benefit, this just has two small benefits.
Yes, one of the reasons why I decided to make Chancellor non-terminal was to strengthen Counting House, therefore it also got +1 Buy. But you often do not buy Chancellor because it is terminal and likely collides with your Witches, for example, so why not make it non-terminal. I understand your fear that you need to shuffle your deck a lot, but in many cases you can do that in your opponent's turns and it does not take five minutes to shuffle your deck. Additionally, with a chapel trimmed deck, you shuffle your deck every turn as well, and nobody complained.
That would solve the problem of mid-turn shuffles, would enable that you can play your good terminals more often, but it would no longer combo with Counting House :(It would, with 5x Scheme.
That would solve the problem of mid-turn shuffles, would enable that you can play your good terminals more often, but it would no longer combo with Counting House :(It would, with 5x Scheme.
What does need fixing is, in my view, Scrying Pool.Fixed that for you.
+1 ActionRevealLook at the top card of your deck and either discard it or put it back.
Then reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal one that is not an Action.
Put all of your revealed cards into your hand