Print

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

[LastFootnote]

And by version 3.0, I mean this is at least the third card called "Redistrict" that I've posted on these forums. It's probably the fifth or so card I've tried under that name. My quest for good one-shot trash-for-benefit is never-ending.

While I was trying to come up with a good top half for a cheap Reaction, I thought of half-a-Remake. "Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it." Seemed like a better fit for a cheap one-shot than a cheap Reaction, and the feedback the other thread is convincing me that a Conscripts-gaining Reaction should be more expensive.

So here's Redistrict:

Redistrict
Types: Action
Cost: $2
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it. You may trash this. If you do, gain a card costing exactly $1 more than the first gained card.

I'd like a $2 terminal in my set and this is potentially a great fit because it can't cost $3 or $4. Originally I had it at $3, but at that price you can turn $2 cards (Estates) into Redistricts and then trash the played Redistrict for a $4 card. You break even on Redistricts and get a card costing $4. So it could be used as a Remodel until the Redistricts run out. Bad news.

Costing $4 isn't quite as bad, but it does allow a player to needlessly run out the pile when trashing $2 cards by trashing the played Redistrict to gain another Redistrict.

So $2 it is! And $2 seems like an OK price for the card, assuming it's not too weak even at that price.

Any crazy broken combos I'm missing? It can still be used to gain itself when $1 cards are available, but I'm fine with that.

[soulnet]

I think this is nice. In a hand of Redistrict+4 starting cards (without 3 Estates), is basically Remake in most cases (trash two cards, Estates get you Silvers, buy "nothing" because you need the buy to re-buy the Redistrict) so it is even a fine early trasher if it is the only one available. The problem is that with 2 players using it as an early trasher, the pile will basically run out before the game is even started. With 3 or 4, the trashing luck would be worst than with Chapel, because some players will get more trashing turns than others (depending on how fast you draw your Redistrict). I would possibly open Redistrict/Redistrict in multiplayer games because of that problem. I guess it will be in the neighborhood of Ambassador's luck-issues.

About the wording: I think something like this is clearer.

Trash a card from your hand. Gain one or two cards, each costing exactly $1 more than it. If you gained two cards, trash this.

[LastFootnote]

I think you've slightly misread the card. If you choose to trash the Redistrict, you gain a card costing $1 more than the card you just gained, not the one you trashed. So if you trash an Estate and gain a Silver, you can trash the Redistrict and gain a $4 card.

Thanks for the feedback, though. It's possible that the card just won't work out if everybody just rushes them every game. If that happens, at least I can try the first part on a Reaction.

[Eistee]

I like this! Clean, simple, easy, yet clever.

Might playtest it when I get to see my Dominion-Friend. I love good fan-made 2s.

[LastFootnote]

I like this! Clean, simple, easy, yet clever.

Might playtest it when I get to see my Dominion-Friend. I love good fan-made 2s.

Thanks! I hope it works well. If you have time, let me know how it goes.

[soulnet]

Thanks for the feedback, though. It's possible that the card just won't work out if everybody just rushes them every game. If that happens, at least I can try the first part on a Reaction.

Ups, you are right, sorry.

[LastFootnote]

Thanks for the feedback, though. It's possible that the card just won't work out if everybody just rushes them every game. If that happens, at least I can try the first part on a Reaction.

Ups, you are right, sorry.

But then you struck out the part of your earlier post that was valid and left the part that doesn't apply to the card?

[Polk5440]

I think it's worth testing, as is.

[simval]

I quite like it !

I understand the costing logic, for not gaining free Redistrics, but I think 2$ for a good trash-for-benefit like that is not a lot.

However, it could balance itself... Make this clearer for me please :

Let's say I have a hand of Copper-Copper-Silver-Redistric-Village, or something like that, and use the redistric to trash a copper. The way fhe card is worded, I'd get a 1$ card... but there are none on the board so I get nothing. After that I trash redistric so I get a card costing 1$ more than the one I gained... which doesn't exist.

So basically Redistrict just doesn't work with coppers and curses, right ? That's a really interesting mechanic. I quite like it. It's woth testing, definitely !

[LastFootnote]

I quite like it !

I understand the costing logic, for not gaining free Redistrics, but I think 2$ for a good trash-for-benefit like that is not a lot.

However, it could balance itself... Make this clearer for me please :

Let's say I have a hand of Copper-Copper-Silver-Redistric-Village, or something like that, and use the redistric to trash a copper. The way fhe card is worded, I'd get a 1$ card... but there are none on the board so I get nothing. After that I trash redistric so I get a card costing 1$ more than the one I gained... which doesn't exist.

So basically Redistrict just doesn't work with coppers and curses, right ? That's a really interesting mechanic. I quite like it. It's woth testing, definitely !

Yes, you've got it! That is exactly the intended behavior! It's not that it doesn't work with Coppers and Curses. You can use Redistrict to trash those cards and gain nothing (assuming there are no $1 cards in the Supply). But if you gain nothing, you will also fail to gain anything if you choose to trash the Redistrict. So you wouldn't choose to do so unless you just wanted the Redistrict out of your deck.

[simval]

Great design, it not always easy to create good 2$ cards.

[soulnet]

Thanks for the feedback, though. It's possible that the card just won't work out if everybody just rushes them every game. If that happens, at least I can try the first part on a Reaction.

Ups, you are right, sorry.

But then you struck out the part of your earlier post that was valid and left the part that doesn't apply to the card?

The first part was not valid, because it assumed you may trash two cards from hands a la remake, which you cannot. I should have struck everything.

[GendoIkari]

Not that I'm arguing that $2 isn't a good price, but I want to point out that I don't think your reasoning against $3 is sound. It sounds like you're saying that it can't be $3 because it's basically Remodel as long as there's still some in the supply. However, it's only Remodel for $2 cost cards (basically, for your Estates). Remodel could still do lots of things that a $3 Redistrict couldn't do, such as turning Silver into $5s, and especially turning Gold into Provinces.

[manthos88]

Interesting concept. I kinda like it.

I 'd love to see this card with $7's on the board.

This is where this card really shines...

Trash Gold, gain a $7, trash Redistrict, gain Province. And you got two very important cards in your deck. Just like that. I like it.

[LastFootnote]

Not that I'm arguing that $2 isn't a good price, but I want to point out that I don't think your reasoning against $3 is sound. It sounds like you're saying that it can't be $3 because it's basically Remodel as long as there's still some in the supply. However, it's only Remodel for $2 cost cards (basically, for your Estates). Remodel could still do lots of things that a $3 Redistrict couldn't do, such as turning Silver into $5s, and especially turning Gold into Provinces.

You are 100% correct. Still, the fact that you could use it as a Remodel for Estates by draining the pile is a turn-off for me. If everybody does that at the start of the game, there'll be no Redistricts left for more interesting maneuvers later in the game, like trashing a $4 for a $5 and a $6.

[soulnet]

You are 100% correct. Still, the fact that you could use it as a Remodel for Estates by draining the pile is a turn-off for me. If everybody does that at the start of the game, there'll be no Redistricts left for more interesting maneuvers later in the game, like trashing a $4 for a $5 and a $6.

Remodeling Estates into $4s is not usually a strong opening move anyway.

[manthos88]

Another thing that just came into mind is that this card could possibly make a Mint opening viable (Mint/Redistrict on 5/2 opening).

I 've been trying to find whether a Mint opening would ever be viable. I haven't found of any case where this could happen, but i think this card might just be that case.

After getting rid of 5 Coppers, you can easily Redistrict Estates into Silvers, then (perhaps) Mint the Silvers and you could even Redistrict the Mint into a Gold (or another $6) if you don't need it.

[markusin]

I 've been trying to find whether a Mint opening would ever be viable. I haven't found of any case where this could happen, but i think this card might just be that case.

I think the free Baker token adds a lot of plausible options for Mint openings. Off the top of my head, I'm thinking Hermit.

Without Baker, there is probably only one Mint opening you need to know about: Mint/Fool's Gold.

[manthos88]

I 've been trying to find whether a Mint opening would ever be viable. I haven't found of any case where this could happen, but i think this card might just be that case.

I think the free Baker token adds a lot of plausible options for Mint openings. Off the top of my head, I'm thinking Hermit.

Without Baker, there is probably only one Mint opening you need to know about: Mint/Fool's Gold.

Nice! Never thought about it! I literally thought that Mint would never be viable at 5/2 opening...

[Jimmmmm]

Another thing that just came into mind is that this card could possibly make a Mint opening viable (Mint/Redistrict on 5/2 opening).

In answer to your actual question, Mint/Redistrict could be amazing. Imagine a deck of KC/Goons/Copper/Copper/Estate/Estate/Estate after turn 3. Buy another Redistrict and you'll have those Estates gone by turn 5.

[markusin]

Another thing that just came into mind is that this card could possibly make a Mint opening viable (Mint/Redistrict on 5/2 opening).

In answer to your actual question, Mint/Redistrict could be amazing. Imagine a deck of KC/Goons/Copper/Copper/Estate/Estate/Estate after turn 3. Buy another Redistrict and you'll have those Estates gone by turn 5.

Woah, I mixed up Redistrict with Davio's VP token card that's being discussed right now. Yeah, the situation you describe would be pretty awesome. You can even KC the Redistrict.

[soulnet]

I 've been trying to find whether a Mint opening would ever be viable. I haven't found of any case where this could happen, but i think this card might just be that case.

I think the free Baker token adds a lot of plausible options for Mint openings. Off the top of my head, I'm thinking Hermit.

Without Baker, there is probably only one Mint opening you need to know about: Mint/Fool's Gold.

Nice! Never thought about it! I literally thought that Mint would never be viable at 5/2 opening...

Mint/Lighthouse can be good if there are cheap Attacks. Mint/Lighthouse opening with Ambassador on the board can be REALLY good, as you get to play Amb every turn while being Lighthouse protected almost immediately. With Swindler is not as amazing, but also pretty nice. And even with $5 strong Attacks like a $5 junker is good, because you will be playing the junker almost every turn while protected, even though they might get the junker before you.

[florrat]

Remodeling Estates into $4s is not usually a strong opening move anyway.

Can you elaborate? Remodeling Estates into $4s (or $3s) sound like an excellent way to turn dead cards in your deck into useful cards.

[Warfreak2]

Sometimes opening Remodel is good, but usually even Silver is better - most of the time, the key cards are at $5, not $4.

[LastFootnote]

When there are good $4 cantrips on the board (e.g. Caravan, Tournament, Ironmonger), Remodel can be a strong opening. Lacking that, I'd rather have Remake. When you don't trash it, Redistrict should be weaker than Remake or Develop for trashing Estates (as befits its $2 price tag), but at least when you have a hand of [Copper, Copper, Copper, Estate, Redistrict], you can Redistrict the Estate and still buy a $3 card that turn. So it doesn't kill your current turn as badly as Remake tends to do.

To elaborate, there are lots of better ways than Remodel to remove Estates from your deck. Lacking any of them, Remodel can be a nice choice since early removal of Estates tends to be a strong play.