Adventurer's VillageLooks OK. It is on average a Worker Village with 1/2 less Action and 1/2 more Coin.
$4
Action
+1 Action
+1 Buy
Flip over your Journey token (it starts face up). If its face up, +2 Cards, +1 Action, +$1.
Its a cheap level 3 City with its bonuses split.
Looks weakish. A rough heuristic is to pick Pioneer as target for the +1 Card token but then it is weaker than Peddler. And if you pick another card, e.g. a village, you still needs several Pioneers/Coppers to activate the +1 Card thingy.QuotePioneer
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action, +$1. Move your +1 Card token to an Action Supply pile. (When you play a card from that pile, you first get +1 Card.) At the start of Clean-Up, remove it from the Supply.
It completely shuts down the other players.If they are dumb enough to not play money.
Swindler wants to junk Cursers, Silvers, Duchies and Estates, not Actions. So nothing broken here unless you consider trashing a $4 Action instead of exchanging it for a worse $4 Action a horrible increase in the power level of Swindler.Well, you can make that ruling, but it renders certain cards (Swindler, for example) extremely broken.Not really. Suppose you play Exorcist, trash an Silver and then don't gain an Imp. Normally X would happen, now it does not.It's not, though. Deluded prevents you from buying Actions, which is fine. The OP's card prevents you from gaining Actions, which interacts oddly with a few cards that force you to gain Actions.I'm not letting #3 into my game at any cost. It creates a lot of rules snarls.it's literally just the same as Deluded; I priced it similar to when I was designing a druid-style hex-er.
This is incredibly simple. Unless you direly want to read rule issue into it, then you can of course construct an obstacle.
Not really. Suppose you play Exorcist, trash an Silver and then don't gain an Imp. Normally X would happen, now it does not.It's not, though. Deluded prevents you from buying Actions, which is fine. The OP's card prevents you from gaining Actions, which interacts oddly with a few cards that force you to gain Actions.I'm not letting #3 into my game at any cost. It creates a lot of rules snarls.it's literally just the same as Deluded; I priced it similar to when I was designing a druid-style hex-er.
Silver is often semi-junk so this is likely too strong. I'd take a minimum price of $4, and if you wanna be on the safe side you can add an extra Kingdom card costing $4 whenever Magic Workshop is present.
This is part of a Victorian era themed set I am working on. You can see the cards here. https://imgur.com/a/mJNyx3cCost reduction is a larger issue than Poor House. With 2 Highways in play, you can empty the entire Ragamuffin pile, net gain 10 Buys and 10 Coins and then empty the Estate pile.
None have been playtested as I dont sleeve cards so I will have to look into stickers and whether they will work.
But here's the card I am particularly worried might break games.
It is a card whose only benefit is when you buy it but my worry is that you can empty the whole of this pile and a pile of 1 cost cards (like Poorhouse) with no money. You wont win just by doing this but if you were ahead it could end the game. Is this a problem balanced by the fun possibilities of the card?
net draw isn't The Point for you though, it's being able to pick the best card from between the top of your deck and whenever the next victory card [after card #3] is. It's sifting on roughly the same tier as a Embassy (no handsize gain like embassy, but is nonterminal). Like, net draw doesn't mean anything if you pick up three estates.This is a better Border Guard for you. Let's say a $3.
And the "normal" Buy. You gain one card and can buy 2 cards.Santa's Workshop
$3
Action
+1 Buy
Gain a card costing up to $4. Each other player gains a Gift.
Gift
$0*
Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
+$1
Setup instructions for Gift: Use as many of them as you would Curses (haha). 50 provided.
The name is as thematic as I could get, hopefully it works.
So basically, it's a Workshop+ that gives a little present to the other players. How nice. I think the +Buy will be useful in Gardens games, and if you're making an engine, this could help you gain 3 cheap components in a single turn. Just be careful how many Gifts you give.
Just to be clear - Gifts aren't in the supply, right? Like, the impression i'm getting is they're in a similar boat to Spoils or Will-O-Wisps but uh it doesn't have the "not in the supply" disclaimer and also they're immediately compared to Curses so ... in the supply? free peddlers?
Also: gain 3 cheap components? help me w the math on that - i'm seeing the gained card, the +Buy card, and?
and each other player draws a card.).
At first this looks crazy: 3 out of X? Wow!QuoteBicycleI think it might be too strong without the "non-Bicycle" clause, although I would like to remove it if possible. Essentially, it is a smithy+ that gets worse the more you have.
$5 Action
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Bicycle. Put 3 of the revealed non-Bicycle cards into your hand, and discard the rest.
MillstoneThis looks like a classic. At the first glance it looks like a strong opener as it makes spiking to $5 (or $6 on some boards) likely but on the second glance it is not better than Feast for that job and Feast was never crazy.
$4 - Treasure
$1
Choose one: return this to the Supply for +$2, or gain a Millstone.
As a note, in order to win the contest, a card needs to be designed such that players could actually use it when playing the game. As it is right now, the fan submission "storeroom" by [TP] Inferno conflicts with the Dark Ages storeroom, so it should have a name change. To allow people to play with all previous and winners, I'd rather you not use names of previous winners or runner-ups. To that end, I'd like to remind @Grep know that "Rabbits" was the name of a previous runner up in contest 45 (plural is hardly a difference), so I hope you feel comforting using a new name.Sorry, I did not want to derail the thread. I hope that [TP] Inferno can nonetheless use something from this discussion about the pros and cons of his card.
The back and forth between pops and segura is feeling slightly little more combative than helpful. Of course this has absolutely no bearing on my judging, I just wanted to give a moment of reflection of whether each of you think the conversation is worth continuing in this thread. Of course, totally your choice!
You answered incorrectlyNope. I did not answer your question at all because it is so particular that it is irrelevant (and your "2 Storerooms = 1 Warehouse" compairson is like saying that 2 Pearl Divers in hand > 1 Laboratory in hand so hurrah, Pearl Diver is brilliant; you cannot make such nonsensical comparisons in which the very liability of a card, sifting at the cost of handsize reduction is not only ignored but inverted) .
Doesn't matter. Two Storerooms are simply not the same as one Warehouse. That's a fact, not an opinion.You surprise me here.QuoteIf you draw two copies of them together the quality is exactly the same as Warehouse.No, not at all. Warehouse has less sifting depth. 2 Storerooms have more sifting depth but reduce the handsize by one. Being a Lab or being an anti-Lab kinda matters. A lot. For example if Rats did not have the on-trash Lab effect it would suck.
You're shuffling your deck a hand of cards for the Fleet turn of a game of Dominion. I offer to gain either two Warehouses on top of the deck before you draw your five, or one Dungeon. You pick the Dungeon?
It's not self junkingTell that to the player who has 10 or 20 Storerooms in his deck because he opened with it.
the kind of card you'd willingly buy when six provinces are remaining in a Dominion game.I agree, the card is only a good purchase around the time everybody starts to green.
If you draw two copies of them together the quality is exactly the same as Warehouse.No, not at all. Warehouse has less sifting depth. 2 Storerooms have more sifting depth but reduce the handsize by one. Being a Lab or being an anti-Lab kinda matters. A lot. For example if Rats did not have the on-trash Lab effect it would suck.
Sometimes Warehouse gets skipped and therefore often this would get skippedAgain, Warehouse is flexible and good during all phases of the game whereas Storeroom can only be gained late in the game to keep the self-junking at bay.
just like Port doesn't have a huge impact on whether you decide it's an engine game or not.Huh? Port is one of the strongest villages so its presence or absence does very much determine whether a Kingdom enables an engine or not.
But I think the card is strong in an exciting way. Hitting 10$ and buying a "Storeroom" and a Province seems really strong.This is simply not the case; the card is weak if it can be only used in the endgame. Warehouse and Dungeon are often good openers as cycling accelerates your build-up and during the middlegame you increase the matching chances of your engine pieces.
I'm skeptical this is actually brokenly bad rather than brokenly good.Storeroom, without the Rat-style propagation is very similar to Dungeon. We can debate all day long about whether the start of the turn consistency that Dungeon provides is weaker or stronger than the non-Duration, do-it-all-now aspect of Storeroom. But it is obvious that they are similar in strength.
StoreroomI don't like this. The play effect looks like a slightly stronger version of Warehouse/Dungeon (although Dungeon's second sifting happening at the srat of the turn is neat for consistency so it is arguable which is better) but the self-spamming is simply nasty. You can easily end up with all Storerooms if the other players forsake it and all that the sifting will achieve is reduce your handsize.
$2
Action
+1 Action
Gain a Storeroom. Do this twice: +2 Cards, then discard 2 cards.
Tried to make it simple. Basically, it offers some nice sifting search space, but do you really want more copies of it? Worse comes to worst though, it can sift through other copies of itself.
Why? Sure, in a 2P games you have less options and the other player can simply play money to make Emissary pointless. But as it stands the card looks extremely strong: even a petty Pearl Diver makes Emissary better than DoubleLab.
Based on my card Delegate (submitted for the Command-type contest). Based on the playtesting results from Delegate, I think it would be safe to say that Emissary works great with 3 or 4 players, but is unbalanced at other player numbers.
