Print

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

[LastFootnote]

I was thinking of adding a fourth Attack card to my set and it struck me that right now I have a mucker-trasher (Barrister), a trasher-discarder (Axeman), and a discarder-junker (Conscripts). What about a junker-mucker to round it out?

Sea Hag is a published example of such a card. Each other player gains a Curse on his deck. I don't necessarily need another curser, and anyway it's likely that any junker-mucker that gave Curses would look a lot like Sea Hag. So I came up with a Copper junker instead.

Now I know what you're thinking (or what you should be thinking). An Attack that gives out Coppers is a bad idea because the size of the Copper pile scales badly with the number of players. That is true. But we also know that cards that sometimes give out Coppers can be OK. Examples include Mountebank, Noble Brigand, Jester, and Ambassador. So I came up with this attack effect:

Each other player reveals the top card of his deck. If it's not Copper, he gains a Copper, putting it on top of his deck.

I don't think it's a strong attack, so the rest of the card should compensate for that. But I have no idea what the rest of the card should be. I don't want it to be just a simple vanilla bonus because two of the other Attacks in the set already just have a flat +$2 (their attack effects and under-line text are really wordy, so that's all there's room for). So what should it be? For reference, the attack effect above takes up three lines of normal-sized text on the card.

[yuma]

Maybe something that gives a benefit for trashing coppers?

You may trash up to two cards from your hand, if at least one of them is a copper +$2.

[LastFootnote]

Maybe something that gives a benefit for trashing coppers?

You may trash up to two cards from your hand, if at least one of them is a copper +$2.

Hmm, that could work. Right now I think I have enough deck thinners in the set, but that could change. I also tend to avoid Attacks that fight themselves, but that doesn't mean they aren't valid. Pirate Ship and Ambassador fight themselves, for instance. This might be a little too close to Ambassador, but maybe not. Thanks for the idea!

I just came up with "Gain a Gold, putting it on top of your deck." I'd cost that at $6. I kind of like it because it's analogous to the attack portion. Is it too crazy?

[Jorbles]

What if you gained a card costing up to $X on top of your deck? That's a little more interesting than just gaining a gold.

[cluckyb]

I like it being able to trash copper, to deal with the fact that this will be adding copper.

"You may trash up to two copper from your hand, +1$ per copper you trash this way" seems reasonable. It doesn't help you thin out the other cards in your deck, but stops you from being overwhelmed by copper.

[Jorbles]

What if you gained a card costing up to $X on top of your deck? That's a little more interesting than just gaining a gold.

I was thinking about this more. It thins your deck and adds cards you might want for an engine. (How strong depends on the price point you give it and the value of X)

[LastFootnote]

I like it being able to trash copper, to deal with the fact that this will be adding copper.

"You may trash up to two copper from your hand, +1$ per copper you trash this way" seems reasonable. It doesn't help you thin out the other cards in your deck, but stops you from being overwhelmed by copper.

Food for thought:

• Getting junked with Copper is way less harsh than getting junked with Curses.
• This attack can miss and doesn't stack (unless you play something else that makes them discard the Copper they gained on their deck).
• No published card that hands out Curses gives you a way to trash Curses (except Ambassador, but then you need to gain Curses in some other way).

This is probably less harsh than any published junker. So I don't feel a really pressing need to make it also trash Copper. That's what the other cards on the board are for. When there's a good way to get rid of Copper, this attack becomes worse. When there isn't, it becomes better. Making it a solution to itself seems unnecessary.

What if you gained a card costing up to $X on top of your deck? That's a little more interesting than just gaining a gold.

I was thinking about this more. It thins your deck and adds cards you might want for an engine. (How strong depends on the price point you give it and the value of X)

How does it thin your deck? Are you talking about combining Copper trashing with gaining a card on top of your deck and the attack? That's a bit much I think.

Concerning just gaining a card costing up to $X on your deck, it seems like it could work, but let's examine it. In general, gaining a $5 card of your choice is way, way better than gaining a Gold. On some boards you'd rather have the Gold, but on most you'll take $5 Actions early and Duchies later.

So if X=5, this card is nuts. Altar is already a good $6 card, and even assuming that this attack is roughly equivalent to trashing a card (who knows if it is, but bear with me), the fact that the $5 card goes on top of your deck is insane. I mean, it might work if it cost $7 or more, but I don't really want to have any cards costing higher than $6 in the set.

If X=4, we have Armory with a bonus. So probably it would cost $5. I don't know if I find that terribly compelling, but it's a legit card for sure.

X≤3 isn't usually going to be popular. Then you have a weak Attack combined with a weak gainer. Probably not a crowd-pleaser. Even at $2, I don't know that I'd buy it in most games. Well, maybe I'm underestimating it. I guess there are a fair number of really cheap cards you want a bunch of, and it does put them on your deck. Hmm… Maybe I should try it out.

The reason I suggested Gold is that I feel it fits the theme of the card; it's analogous to the Coppers you're making your opponents gain on their decks. I think it's nice to have some cards that gain Gold. On the other hand, Soothsayer is another card that junks and gains Gold.

I'll think about it more and I might test several versions. Do you guys like the version that gains cards costing up to $3 or up to $4?

[scott_pilgrim]

I'll think about it more and I might test several versions. Do you guys like the version that gains cards costing up to $3 or up to $4?

I like both, but the more I think about it the more I think it would be really cool to have this as a cheap attack, gaining up to $3.  If nothing else it can gain and top-deck a Silver which is reasonable for $2, but it can also do better with other good cheap cards on the board, and the attack makes it a little better.  I also like that the attack will miss pretty often early on, so that opening with it doesn't force your opponent to get off to a bad start, which means that it works as a cheap attack.  The thing I wonder about though is whether it will be crazy gaining itself to top-deck.  Armory can do that too, but nobody suffers when you get a bunch of Armories, except you if you over-terminal.  This can guarantee that you attack for ten consecutive turns, and then probably for most turns after that.  It's probably not a good idea to do that, but I don't know if you want to give people that opportunity.

The gain up to $4 version is interesting as well (for some reason I have always wanted an Armory+), but I think it's just too weak for $5; the copper-junking doesn't add a whole lot power-wise, and $4 to $5 is a big jump.  The attack on Rabble makes that jump from Smithy, but that's a lot stronger than possibly giving out Copper to top-deck; plus, at $5 it loses the ability to gain itself (which isn't a huge difference, but it makes it even weaker).

Anyway, I really like the idea of the attack, and I think gaining to top-deck is a good way to make the benefit resemble the attack which is nice.  I think gaining top-decked Gold is too strong (even at $6), and gaining Silver is probably too weak (compare to Bureaucrat), so I like the more flexible gain up to $3.

[LastFootnote]

I'll think about it more and I might test several versions. Do you guys like the version that gains cards costing up to $3 or up to $4?

I like both, but the more I think about it the more I think it would be really cool to have this as a cheap attack, gaining up to $3.  If nothing else it can gain and top-deck a Silver which is reasonable for $2, but it can also do better with other good cheap cards on the board, and the attack makes it a little better.  I also like that the attack will miss pretty often early on, so that opening with it doesn't force your opponent to get off to a bad start, which means that it works as a cheap attack.  The thing I wonder about though is whether it will be crazy gaining itself to top-deck.  Armory can do that too, but nobody suffers when you get a bunch of Armories, except you if you over-terminal.  This can guarantee that you attack for ten consecutive turns, and then probably for most turns after that.  It's probably not a good idea to do that, but I don't know if you want to give people that opportunity.

The gain up to $4 version is interesting as well (for some reason I have always wanted an Armory+), but I think it's just too weak for $5; the copper-junking doesn't add a whole lot power-wise, and $4 to $5 is a big jump.  The attack on Rabble makes that jump from Smithy, but that's a lot stronger than possibly giving out Copper to top-deck; plus, at $5 it loses the ability to gain itself (which isn't a huge difference, but it makes it even weaker).

Anyway, I really like the idea of the attack, and I think gaining to top-deck is a good way to make the benefit resemble the attack which is nice.  I think gaining top-decked Gold is too strong (even at $6), and gaining Silver is probably too weak (compare to Bureaucrat), so I like the more flexible gain up to $3.

Good points all. It would be interesting to have a $2 Attack, but I too am worried about such an Attack that can topdeck copies of itself. Not power-wise, but fun-wise. You almost have to cost it at $4 so that it can't gain itself without help. So perhaps costing it at $2 and using another bonus would be cooler.

As for the Gold, I think gaining a Gold is weaker than most people give it credit for, but you could be right that it's too strong at $6. One thing this thread has taught me is that I should just update the Enterprise thread and post these topics there. I feel bad because I keep saying, "Well, that sounds good, but it doesn't fit in my set right now" when you guys have no way of knowing that. How could I expect you to?

I mention this because the other cards in the set are pushing me toward a more powerful, expensive Attack card. See, there's a card in the set called Barracks which costs $5 and one of the two things it can do is dig for an Attack card to put into your hand. So it would be good if most of the Attacks in the set were on the pricey side so that you're not using a $5 cantrip to pull up a really cheap Attack card. Yeah, maybe I could create a version of Barracks that costs less, but I've been through many iterations of it already and it's very popular as it is now.

So I'll try the Gold version first and see how it goes, BUT if it doesn't work out, I'm going to try a super-cheap version and not put it in this set. I'll probably try the $2 version that can gain cards up to $3 first, and if the self-gaining is nuts, I'll try a different bonus. Thanks, guys!

P.S. Thread not necessarily over. I'm still interested in more ideas and criticisms.

[LibraryAdventurer]

Jinxed Knave
Types: Action - Attack - Reaction
Cost: $4
+$1. Each other player reveals the top card of his deck. If it's not Copper, he gains a Copper, putting it on top of his deck.When any other player plays an attack card, you may discard this.  If you do, gain a conscripts, putting it into your hand.

A little more seriously, how about this:

Putpocket
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $3
Reveal the top card of your deck. If it's a copper, you may put it into your hand or trash it.  Otherwise, you may discard the revealed card or put it back.
Each other player reveals the top card of his deck. If it's not Copper, he gains a Copper, putting it on top of his deck.

[Jorbles]

Putpocket seems really weak. Like too weak to ever buy. Maybe if it wasn't terminal, it might be bought situationally, but I don't think I'd ever buy that over a Silver as is (or any other $3s).

[manthos88]

How about this?

 ---


Workhouse Contribution

Cost: $4

Action - Attack

Gain a Silver, putting it into your hand.

Each other player reveals a Copper card from his hand and puts it on top his Deck. If he didn't, he reveals a hand of no Copper and gains a Copper card putting on top of his Deck.


---

It's not exactly what you had in mind, but i figured it could be more interesting if the attack also did something else except for giving them a Copper on top of their deck, because this way it can be useful in more cases. Either way, the attack causes the opponent to put a Copper on top of Deck.


Edit: Just figured this looks a lot like Cutpurse in the early game, so maybe you could apply these changes:

Cost: $4 $3

Gain a Silver, putting it into your hand on top of your Deck.

[scott_pilgrim]

The second one looks a lot like Bureaucrat, hitting Coppers instead of victory cards.

[Warfreak2]

The first one is stronger than Cutpurse because discarding a Copper is better than topdecking it, and the, well, Copper-junking, not to mention adding a Silver to your deck. The second one is stronger than Bureaucrat because it hurts their current hand rather than their next one (plus the Copper-junking).

[Polk5440]

Last Footnote, where is the most recent version of your fan expansion?

[LastFootnote]

Last Footnote, where is the most recent version of your fan expansion?

The most recent version…

I have this crazy dream that I'll actually get it published. So I've been avoiding posting the new changes it in case that might someday happen. But since you asked for it, I'll update the Enterprise thread with the current version, which includes 23 Kingdom cards (I have two more slots to fill).

EDIT: It's here.

[manthos88]

Now that i've seen your fan expansion, i'm not really sure if a Copper Junker attack would be a good fit. A Curser could be a better fit, instead, as you 're kinda lacking  Cursing Attacks.

[NoMoreFun]

What if it was a symmetrical attack (everyone gains a copper, but they get it worse).

For example

Philanthropist
Action/Attack - $4
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each player gains a Copper. Put yours in your hand.

(I've posted this in many threads with Silver and Gold options).

[NoMoreFun]

You could also do junker-trasher and mucker-discarder. Or 3 at once. Or all 4.
Or an attack that steals trade tokens (the coin token stealing attack from the Guilds competition was something new).

[LastFootnote]

Now that i've seen your fan expansion, i'm not really sure if a Copper Junker attack would be a good fit. A Curser could be a better fit, instead, as you 're kinda lacking  Cursing Attacks.

In a game with many players, I think Conscripts acts as a fairly effective Curser. That being said, here's a new take on a Curser with light mucking elements.

Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
Gain 2 Silvers. Each other player gains a Curse. Each player (including you) puts his deck into his discard pile.

You could also do junker-trasher and mucker-discarder. Or 3 at once. Or all 4.
Or an attack that steals trade tokens (the coin token stealing attack from the Guilds competition was something new).

If I made the gain from Axeman mandatory, it would be a discarder-mucker-junker-trasher.

Super Axeman
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
+$2. Each other player with 5 or more cards in hand trashes a card from his hand costing at least $3 (or reveals a hand with no such card). He gains a cheaper card, putting it on top of his deck.
------------------------------------------------------------
You can't buy this if you have no Action cards in play.

That being said, I am not planning on making that change.

[NoMoreFun]

I just realized saboteur is a Mucker because it's guaranteed to remove a good card from the shuffle. Maybe there's an attack to be made that emphasises that.

As for:

Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
Gain 2 Silvers. Each other player gains a Curse. Each player (including you) puts his deck into his discard pile.

I love it. Is the taboo on duration attacks only for next turn damage, because I'd love to combine this with a "duration that misses it's own reshuffle" idea for a $4 curser.

[RTT]

I just realized saboteur is a Mucker because it's guaranteed to remove a good card from the shuffle. Maybe there's an attack to be made that emphasises that.

its not , it can also hit province or duchy  and make your deck better that way.