Print

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

[eHalcyon]

when I saw this thread, I expected it to be something else. I thought it would be about the chancellor sort of bonus - going through your deck faster to get new cards sooner. I think that's a pretty minor bonus, hence why chancellor isn't very good, but what do other people think about this?

chancellor isnt a usless card at all, it's just that most of the terminal silver 3-4$ cards have effects that are better.

Well, lio didn't say it's useless -- just that it's not very good, which is true.

One of the most powerful "strategies" is the Lucky Chancellor, which is just Chancellor-BM with optimal luck.  Open Chancellor/Silver, then T3 you draw Silver-Chancellor-Coppers and buy Gold, and every turn after that you draw Chancellor-Gold-Silver-Copper and buy Province, buying the 8th province on turn 11 (or earlier if the opponent manages to get any).

So yes, Chancellor can be good.  The problem that it usually isn't.  Chancellor's power varies considerably depending on when you draw it.  If you draw it after you've played your best cards and purchased some good cards and before you have to draw through all your worst cards, then that is amazing.  Cycle back to your power cards, skip all the junk.  But if you draw it before reaching your best cards, then Chancellor is nothing more than a terminal +$2 -- worse than Silver in most cases.

And yeah, the opportunity cost is a big deal.  There will almost always be a better terminal to buy/play instead of Chancellor... not to mention Silver itself.

[liopoil]

wasn't so much talking about chancellor but more the effect itself... as in, how would it compare to other bonuses if you replaced current bonuses with it. Or what if it wasn't your whole deck, just "discard the top 5 cards of your deck" or something

[Awaclus]

I would say you want to put your deck in your discard every time.

But that's not true. If you draw a hand of Chancellor and 4 Curses and your deck is KC, KC, Bridge, Bridge and Bridge, you don't want to put your deck in your discard with the Chancellor when you play it. This is an extreme example, but much less extreme situations in which you don't want to put your deck in your discard for similar reasons actually occur in games.

[sudgy]

I would say you want to put your deck in your discard every time.

But that's not true. If you draw a hand of Chancellor and 4 Curses and your deck is KC, KC, Bridge, Bridge and Bridge, you don't want to put your deck in your discard with the Chancellor when you play it. This is an extreme example, but much less extreme situations in which you don't want to put your deck in your discard for similar reasons actually occur in games.

Ok, I more meant "almost every time".  You don't want to do it in the late game, and if you know the contents of your deck perfectly then you might want to not do it.  But, probably 95% of the time in the early and mid game, I think it's the best play to use it.

[Awaclus]

I would say you want to put your deck in your discard every time.

But that's not true. If you draw a hand of Chancellor and 4 Curses and your deck is KC, KC, Bridge, Bridge and Bridge, you don't want to put your deck in your discard with the Chancellor when you play it. This is an extreme example, but much less extreme situations in which you don't want to put your deck in your discard for similar reasons actually occur in games.

Ok, I more meant "almost every time".  You don't want to do it in the late game, and if you know the contents of your deck perfectly then you might want to not do it.  But, probably 95% of the time in the early and mid game, I think it's the best play to use it.

I definitely think that you should know the contents of your deck well enough to know whether or not you want to use Chancellor (no need to track every Copper, but you should track key cards and you should take note if your turns before the Chancellor have been worse than you would expect on average), and I also think that 95% is too much; something like 70-80% sounds like it's closer to truth IMO.

[silverspawn]

wasn't so much talking about chancellor but more the effect itself... as in, how would it compare to other bonuses if you replaced current bonuses with it. Or what if it wasn't your whole deck, just "discard the top 5 cards of your deck" or something

we did compare it to other bonuses. let me list a few cards:
chancellor, scavenger, navigator, monument, fortune teller, cutpurse, woodcutter, swindler, nomad camp, bridge

all of them cost $3-4 and all of them are "+2$ *some bonus*" (except bridge, but you could rephrase it to so it had it too). you can directly compare all of them, by just ignoring the +2$ effect. you could also put moneylender on there... but people are going to start complaining when i do.

now, if i had to rank them spontaneously, i'd say...
swindler > cutpurse > monument > bridge > nomad camp > scavenger > fortune teller > navigator > woodcutter > chancellor

this list wont look identical if other people made it, but probably similar. this shows you how good chancellor effect is; scavenger does chancellor effect and more and it's still only about average. if you made "put the top 5 cards from your deck into your discard pile" it would be even worse. still, it's not useless, other cards are just better. it also shows how small the difference between $3 and $4 cards is.

maybe the "put deck into discard pile" effect would've been better put on a cantrip, maybe for $2. or you could combine woodcutter with chancellor (and make it $4). or you could just remove chancellor, cause scavanger makes it unnecessary anyway. either way, it's already done twice, it won't be done more, it's probably not done much in fan expansions either.

oh and there's a difference between "discard" and "put into your discard pile", because the first one triggers tunnel. if chancellor said discard, you would get 1 gold for every tunnel in your deck every time you played it.

[shark_bait]

swindler > cutpurse > monument > bridge > nomad camp > scavanger > fortune teller > navigator > woodcutter > chancellor

It's pretty good.  Nomad Camp is too high (I'd put it by Navigator and maybe move Fortune Teller lower).  Swindler is just good and the reliability of Cutpurse as an early game attack is just good.  Scavenger is under-rated in general (not just by you).  It's actually a pretty strong card that is useful for BM and engines.

[markusin]

swindler > cutpurse > monument > bridge > nomad camp > scavanger > fortune teller > navigator > woodcutter > chancellor

It's pretty good.  Nomad Camp is too high (I'd put it by Navigator and maybe move Fortune Teller lower).  Swindler is just good and the reliability of Cutpurse as an early game attack is just good.  Scavenger is under-rated in general (not just by you).  It's actually a pretty strong card that is useful for BM and engines.

I worry that I overrate Scavenger a bit. But hey, it's all around useful, and Counting House combos much better with Scavenger+village than with Chancellor+village.

[Davio]

If Chancellor was good, they wouldn't have made Scavenger.

The main problem with Chancellor is the Counting House effect where it doesn't offer any extra utility if your draw it on the turn before a reshuffle.
And if you play it one turn before that, you "only" gained one turn of momentum.

So it can be a bit swingy from grabbing 3 Golds in 3 turns to just playing regular BM if you draw it badly.

[liopoil]

Could discarding 5 cards from the top of your deck be used for tweaking fan cards? (or maybe existing cards too). As in, a card is a little too weak for its cost, so add discarding the top 5 cards of your deck. pretty random I guess.

[Davio]

Navigator does that and Cartographer and Harvest can discard 4 so I guess it's not a particularly novel idea.

[Awaclus]

Navigator does that and Cartographer and Harvest can discard 4 so I guess it's not a particularly novel idea.

They can do that, but what about a mandatory effect where you always discard the top 5, or decide before looking at them?

[LastFootnote]

Navigator does that and Cartographer and Harvest can discard 4 so I guess it's not a particularly novel idea.

They can do that, but what about a mandatory effect where you always discard the top 5, or decide before looking at them?

That seems like a worse version of "put your deck into your discard pile". Worse both in terms of power and in terms of fun because you see the good cards as they go by.

[Awaclus]

Navigator does that and Cartographer and Harvest can discard 4 so I guess it's not a particularly novel idea.

They can do that, but what about a mandatory effect where you always discard the top 5, or decide before looking at them?

That seems like a worse version of "put your deck into your discard pile". Worse both in terms of power and in terms of fun because you see the good cards as they go by.

I guess the being worse in terms of power part is the intention.

[LastFootnote]

Navigator does that and Cartographer and Harvest can discard 4 so I guess it's not a particularly novel idea.

They can do that, but what about a mandatory effect where you always discard the top 5, or decide before looking at them?

That seems like a worse version of "put your deck into your discard pile". Worse both in terms of power and in terms of fun because you see the good cards as they go by.

I guess the being worse in terms of power part is the intention.

But it's just going to upset players in the same way that opponents' Tributes and Possessions do. Often enough, it will pass over good cards and leave you with a terrible next hand. It's just really not a compelling mechanic, is all I'm saying.

[c4master]

I guess, one bad point about chancellor is, that it's terminal. Being a nonterminal, it would be far more powerful. First, it couldn't collide with other terminals, and second it wouldn't collide with itself.

-----

Perhaps some staff member should change the thread subject to more properly fit the intend. It really seems to be more about sifting.

[DG]

To digress on chancellor a bit more, the chancellor has slightly more opportunity in multiplayer games than two player games. This can often be the way with defensive cards. If the opponents are buying many militias, for example, the impact of chancellor cycling could be more than the impact of your own militia.

[LastFootnote]

I guess, one bad point about chancellor is, that it's terminal. Being a nonterminal, it would be far more powerful. First, it couldn't collide with other terminals, and second it wouldn't collide with itself.

A non-terminal Chancellor has some logistical issues in real-life games. Specifically, it prompts a lot of mid-turn shuffling. Play Chancellor, discard deck, play Witch, shuffle, draw 2. And then the whole point of Chancellor is gone because your new purchases this turn aren't being shuffled in immediately.

Mid-turn shuffling is sometimes an unfortunate reality of Dominion. But a card that causes it to happen this often for such little effect is probably a bad idea.

[silverspawn]

To digress on chancellor a bit more, the chancellor has slightly more opportunity in multiplayer games than two player games. This can often be the way with defensive cards. If the opponents are buying many militias, for example, the impact of chancellor cycling could be more than the impact of your own militia.

not sure i undestand what you mean. militia is worse in 3+ player games, because your average attack is weaker, since your opponent may have already been forced to discard. but that doesn't make the effect of chancellor better, it only makes certain attacks worse and chancellor better in comparison.

[DG]

Exactly. Chancellor isn't in itself a bad card, so if other options become weaker the chancellor shouldn't be ignored.

[sudgy]

Here is my thoughts on when I should get chancellor:

1. Is there no other $3 action I want?
2. Will I be able to handle it's terminalness?

If yes, buy the chancellor.  It's still pretty rare though.

[Davio]

Ha, well, that applies to any card though.

But some boards are either so dry that you will rarely have terminal collision and then a Chancellor never hurts or you want actions at all costs for example with KC, Golem, Vineyards etc on board.

I don't think I ever buy Chancellor just for the cycling, maybe with Familiar, but that falls into the first category most likely.