I think I'm going to test Axeman without the below-line portion. I was afraid that it would make the game suck when your opponent opened with it, but it's worth testing that way. I think the card will look less intimidating without those extra lines of text.
I sympathize with Committee scaring off more casual players with its complex wall of text. Except for possibly General, it's the most complex card in the set. But Committee is popular and I can't really make it any simpler.
Sorry, I guess I could've been more clear about the point I was trying to make. Trade Tokens are a simple concept: some cards give you them, some cards come with one. When a card gives you the opportunity to spend one, you can choose to do so for the bonus. Domain is also simple: the guy setting up the game already put it into your deck, and it's just a copper until you buy a Remodel or someone else plays a Barrister. Conscripts less so, but anyone who's played Dark Ages will understand it instantly. My point was that they seem a lot more complicated when the majority of your bandwidth is taken up by the wordiest cards. I didn't mean to suggest you should toss really good cards just because they're wordy.
Barrister
Types: Action Attack
Cost: $3
+$2. Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck, trashes a revealed Domain, and discards the rest. Gain a Domain from the trash.
Setup: Replace one of each players starting Coppers with a Domain.
Domain
Types: Treasure Victory
Cost: $3
Worth $1.
Worth 2 VP for every Domain in your deck.
So Domains are worth twice as much VP, making you really care them even in 2-player games. Barrister's only function (other than giving +$2) is to steal Domains. It can only gain one Domain at a time from the trash.
OTOH, this I like a whole lot more. I actually had no intention of ever playing with the old Barrister, just because I have my starting decks separated from the Estates and Coppers, and I didn't feel like messing with that setup for a card that didn't really interest me. (Also, I've sleeved over Rebuild, Embargo, a couple of the harsher attacks, and all my blanks to get about half of Enterprise, and fourteen more cards is a lot to ask.) But with the mini-Rabble cut out, the concept works a lot better.
Conscripts
Types: Action Attack
Cost: $0
+1 Action. +$2. Return this to the Conscripts pile. Each other player gains a Curse. (This is not in the Supply.)
I think I've tried this before, but I'm going to try it again. If there are no Attack cards in the Supply, Barracks will eventually lose utility, but whatever. That happens with all Curse-givers. I'm considering toning down Recruiter's Action portion, but I don't think I can really change the Reaction bit without killing the card entirely.
Recruiter
Types: Action Reaction
Cost: $4
+$2. Gain a Conscripts from the Conscripts pile.
When another player plays an Attack card, you may discard this. If you do, gain a Conscripts from the Conscripts pile, putting it into your hand.
Considering how long it takes players to get used to Spoils, it might be wise to keep this guy as simple as possible. I would be okay with this version of Conscripts, but I liked the idea of making them weak on their own but more powerful in multiples. Discard a card to a minimum of
four seems about the right power level, and it would give you a decision to make when only one comes up in your hand. Do I want to play it now for +$ and an attack that might not hurt that much, or do I save it and hope I can play both Conscripts on a future turn? With straight curse-giving, I feel like you'll automatically play them as soon as they come into your hand, whether or not you need the $2 -- Spoils requires more strategic thinking than that. (Also, General + 1 Conscripts would give out 1 Curse this way rather than 3 in two turns. I don't know if you see that as a good or a bad thing.)
The change to Recruiter seems fine, but it might not be necessary if you nerf Conscripts more.
I'm thinking of buffing Terrace by putting the [+1 Card; +1 Action] after the mulligan bit. I'm a bit afraid that makes you want to always use it immediately. I'm not so sold on this change. Just considering it.
Like, Ruined Village, decide whether to mulligan, then rest of village? Not a fan. Besides making the decision too easy, you could really confuse people by putting unconditional effects after conditional ones.
I may change Exchange to say "exactly $2 more" and then have you take a token when you gain it, rather than when you buy it. It's an alternate way to prevent Fortress shenanigans and makes it line up with the other Trade token cards.
Farmland and Noble Brigand don't match up with the other Hinterlands cards. Anyway, it wasn't Exchange/Fortress you were trying to fix, it was Exchange -> Exchange to hand -> repeat. I was about to say you shouldn't kneecap the card while also prohibiting novel cost reduction OR would-trash effects . . . then I noticed 'Exchange/any $3 card' was a thing, and there are already a few official silver flooders. It's a very good card as it is, and the token needs to be on-Buy.