Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Eistee]

Just go this idea and wanted to see what you guys think about it.

Village of Outcasts
Action - (5)
+2 Cards
Discard a non-victory card from your hand. +1 Action per Coin it costs.


Can be worse than a lab, better than a lab, and in a engin-y, really thin deck, a lot better than lab.

What is your opinion? Is there a really serious flaw with that card that I have missed?

[Jack Rudd]

Looks really nice in a well-trimmed deck. "Oh, I discard my Chapel for +2 Actions. That hurt me so much."

[Warfreak2]

It's never a lot better than lab - lab increases handsize, whereas this can never draw your deck. It probably plays more like inn - discarding one non-victory worth $2+ is probably similar to discarding two anythings.

[LastFootnote]

It needs to either say "you may" or "(or reveal a hand of all Victory cards)".

I expect the card to be really weak, even if it cost $2. If you discard a Copper or Curse to minimize damage to your hand, it's basically Ruined Library with some sifting. Otherwise you're discarding something useful, which tends to really hurt until you have a ridiculous engine built up. But you're not going to get anywhere trying to build such an engine with this card. And once you have it built, do you really still want it?

[Eistee]

In a really trimmed teck, I thought it would look something like this:

Please VoO, discard Gold, get 6 Actions. Play more Actions, draw your deck, what do I know.

At first it drew +3 Cards, but I thought it was to powerfull.

[Awaclus]

It needs to either say "you may" or "(or reveal a hand of all Victory cards)".

You may is better. In that case, you could discard a Gold, get +6 actions, and play 6 more Villages of Outcasts before you need to discard again; it would be almost as good as a Lab and arguably better in some situations.

[LastFootnote]

In a really trimmed teck, I thought it would look something like this:

Please VoO, discard Gold, get 6 Actions. Play more Actions, draw your deck, what do I know.

At first it drew +3 Cards, but I thought it was to powerfull.

Yeah, in a really trimmed deck that sounds right. But how are you getting from your original deck to a trimmed deck with VoO? You can't use at as your village while you're building because you may have to discard your draw card in order to get any Actions. So you probably need some other village while you build up. But once you've built up, do you still want VoO?

This is all just theory, of course. Maybe it won't work out that way.

[Warfreak2]

It's a bit of a waste to use the rest of them as expensive moats though. I think the only time it really shines is double-tactician, discarding gold (or platinum) which you can't play anyway.

[LastFootnote]

At first it drew +3 Cards, but I thought it was to powerfull.

Did you actually test it with +3 Cards, or did it just look too powerful? If you haven't already, I'd test it that way. It's either Smithy or a Lab that gives you more +Actions in exchange for discarding a good card. You could keep it at +2 Cards and cost it at $2, but I think you're better off with +3 Cards at $5.

EDIT: Oh, and it should also say "you may", like Awaclus said.

[blueblimp]

I dunno why people are saying this is weak. Discarding a gold for +6 actions is great in a lot of engines. Or for that matter, discard a $5 you don't need yet to get enough actions to draw it back.

I like how this card requires some care and cleverness to build a deck where it's not weak, but in that situation it's super strong. Kinda like Outpost.

[Aidan Millow]

I do think that this is too weak for 5. Compared to Inn's on play you're throwing away a card that you most likely want as opposed to those you don't want and only getting bonus actions based on how much you wanted the card you discarded. It's not 2 weak though, you're getting either a small hand size increase or multiple extra actions with no cost in hand size. I'd think this would be a pretty reasonable card at 3 or 4.

I really don't like the card drawing three, it might be balanced (I'm sceptical though) but it's not interesting . You play the card, draw 3 and discard a silver or something if you have more actions you want to play. You're getting all the actions and all the draw you need from one variety of card.

All of this was assuming a "may" in the text, using the other option would make the 5 cost 3 cards version more reasonable and the 3 or 4 cost version weaker. I still feel like the 3 or 4 cost with a may is the most interesting version though.

[LastFootnote]

I dunno why people are saying this is weak. Discarding a gold for +6 actions is great in a lot of engines. Or for that matter, discard a $5 you don't need yet to get enough actions to draw it back.

I like how this card requires some care and cleverness to build a deck where it's not weak, but in that situation it's super strong. Kinda like Outpost.

It's good when a card is better on some boards than others, but if it's unusable on most boards and super crazy on a few, that's a major strike against it. Back when it was a Kingdom card, Diadem got cut for this reason. WanderingWinder coined a term for this type of card: Terribroken.

Outpost is much less terribroken in games with a bunch of other Seaside cards. When you have a bunch of duration effects going off and maybe some topdecked Treasuries, your Outpost turns are a lot less likely to be awful.

[popsofctown]

I kind of like really weak villages.  I think the original card would have some places to shine, but only when it's the only village.  It's one of those things that makes me wonder about the kingdom design process more than the card design process.

But I agree that if you just throw it into Dominion on full random it's not going to get used very often.