Print

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

[silverspawn]

:) ahem. Showdown did all of these, I just provided the ideas. So, here are our "fixes" for some official cards. I tried to leave the inherent function of each card intact, and only tweak it a little bit. They are hd images, so they should be easily printable and handily replace the original card.

Talisman, Harvest, and P3$ cards to come. And, if someone has suggestions, we could do those too.

Adventurer - Action - 6$
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 3 Treasure cards. Put those Treasure cards into your hand and discard the other revealed cards.

Rebuild - Action - 5$
+1 Action
Name a card. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal a Victory card that is not the named card. Discard the other cards. Return the Victory card to the Supply and gain a Victory card costing up to 3$ more than it.

Scout - Action - 4$
+1 Action
+1$
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand. Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

Transmute - Action - P$
+1 Action
Trash a card from your hand.
If it is an...
Action card, gain a Duchy.
Treasure card, gain a Transmute.
Victory card, gain a Gold.

Transmute - Action - P$
Trash a card from your hand.
If it is an...
Action card, gain a Duchy.
Treasure card, gain a Transmute.
Victory card, gain a Gold.
---
When you buy this, +1 Buy.

Talisman - Treasure - 4$
Worth 1$
---
While this is in play, when you buy a card costing 4$ or less, gain a copy of it.

Scrying Pool - Action - 2P$
+1 Action
Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal one that is not an Action. Put all revealed cards into your hand.

Harvest - Action - 5$
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck, put one back and discard the rest. +1$ per differently named card revealed.

Minion - Action - 5$
Choose one: 2$; or discard your hand and +4 cards.

Alchemist - Action - 2$P
 - Ability unchanged -

Familiar - Action - 2$P
 - Ability unchanged -

Philosopher's Stone - Treasure - 2$P
 - Ability unchanged -

or click here to view them all

[liopoil]

rebuild and scrying pools still really good, scout transmute and adventurer still really weak. But much better . They can't all be perfectly average strength

[LastFootnote]

Haha. You could have just posted this stuff in the other thread.

Obviously the Transmute change makes it stronger, but absolutely will not make it good enough to buy if it's the only Potion-cost card. Again, the problem is that you usually only need to buy one, so the Potion you had to buy to get it becomes a liability. +1 Action does zilch to address that issue.

[silverspawn]

Haha. You could have just posted this stuff in the other thread.

Obviously the Transmute change makes it stronger, but absolutely will not make it good enough to buy if it's the only Potion-cost card. Again, the problem is that you usually only need to buy one, so the Potion you had to buy to get it becomes a liability. +1 Action does zilch to address that issue.

bah

well, you already buy it sometimes if it's the only potion card. with the buff, you will buy it more often. of course, it's still just a minority of games. but it's an improvement

[silverspawn]

Talisman and Harvest:

[dondon151]

Transmute is missing a line.

If it is a Scout: Gain a Province.

[Fragasnap]

Transmute's problem is the opportunity costs accrued by both the turn you bought a Potion as well as the turn you bought Transmute. All +1 Action does is make Transmute Duchy-rushing maybe a thing whenever that would actually work out (i.e. probably never). +1 Buy on-buy would at least alleviate part of its opportunity cost, but I don't think that would make it better in many more Kingdoms.
Would applying a list of vanilla benefits make Transmute more compelling?

Transmute
Cost: $P
Types: Action
Trash a card from your hand. If it is an...
Action card: +3 Cards and gain a Duchy
Treasure card: +2 Actions and gain a Transmute
Victory card: +$1 and gain a Gold

[heron]

Maybe transmute could use "When you buy this, +1 buy."

Edit: Actually, that leads to weird interactions with trader and goons and merchant guild. How about, "When you buy this, if this is the first Transmute you bought this turn, +1 buy."

[Awaclus]

Maybe transmute could use "When you buy this, +1 buy."

Edit: Actually, that leads to weird interactions with trader and goons and merchant guild. How about, "When you buy this, if this is the first Transmute you bought this turn, +1 buy."

Well, Trader, Goons and new version of Transmute is still a 3-card combo, not very likely to come up unless you deliberately choose your kingdom to have those cards in it. If you absolutely have to avoid infinite combos, then it's out of the question, but otherwise it's probably not a problem.

[GeoLib]

Maybe transmute could use "When you buy this, +1 buy."

Edit: Actually, that leads to weird interactions with trader and goons and merchant guild. How about, "When you buy this, if this is the first Transmute you bought this turn, +1 buy."

Well, Trader, Goons and new version of Transmute is still a 3-card combo, not very likely to come up unless you deliberately choose your kingdom to have those cards in it. If you absolutely have to avoid infinite combos, then it's out of the question, but otherwise it's probably not a problem.

How is this an infinite combo? I buy transmute, get a vp, get a buy, reveal trader, gain a silver instead. I can buy transmute again, in which case I get a vp, but not a buy since I already bought a transmute this turn. Where does it explode?

[Deadlock39]

Ninja'd, but I am posting anyway... I agree with GeoLib.

I don't think that is true.  Trader's effect happens on "would gain" and gaining the Transmute occurs after you buy it.  If you use Trader to gain a Silver instead, you still bought a Transmute, and you would not get the free buy again. 

Edit, it also still isn't really an infinite combo even if you give it the straight up "When you buy this, +1 buy." because you've got to have $0P to buy it.  By the time you Trader it away, or whatever you are doing... well, you already spent your Potion, so you would need to have played a second Potion this turn to keep buying them.  I think that version of the card is just fine.  If you want to put 16 potions in your deck so you can buy 16 Transmutes and Trader them with Goons in play, I would say good for you man, that is going to require one hell of an engine to go along with the 3 card combo (plus probably a 4th combo card in Watchtower to trash all those Silvers).

[Awaclus]

well, you already spent your Potion

Good point.

[silverspawn]

well, I already said in my card list that I think transmute is in fact underrated, so I don't want to buff it too much.  Like,

Transmute
Cost: $P
Types: Action
Trash a card from your hand. If it is an...
Action card: +3 Cards and gain a Duchy
Treasure card: +2 Actions and gain a Transmute
Victory card: +$1 and gain a Gold

This is too much I think. especially the +3 cards. Making it a village feels kind of awkward. it's also more complex than I would like

"when you buy this, +1 buy" is not bad. you also can't emtpy the pile with 2 highways or something, because it's on a potion card, and there is no way to get the P out of the cost. I think I'll request a second version with that.

[LastFootnote]

I think "When you buy this, +1 Buy" is by far the most interesting option for Transmute. It removes the combo that Transmute usually has with other sources of +1 Buy, but maybe it plays better this way. Again, it doesn't change the fact that your Potion now sucks, but at least you will less often waste a whole turn buying the Transmute itself.

[soulnet]

I think a good "fix" for Transmute would be to have a better bonus for trashing your Potion. Like +$3 or +3 Cards or maybe even better.

[LastFootnote]

I think a good "fix" for Transmute would be to have a better bonus for trashing your Potion. Like +$3 or +3 Cards or maybe even better.

Myeh, that makes the card more complex, though, in a way that seems inelegant to me. You get a Transmute and a vanilla bonus?

I guess you could just replace what happens when you trash a Treasure altogether. "If it's a Treasure, +3 Cards."

[enfynet]

I thought there was a card (other than Tribute) that worked that way?

[theblankman]

What if Transmute had more of a TfB feel where both the cost and type of the trashed card matter?  Say if it is an...
Action card: gain a Victory card costing up to $3 more than the trashed card.
Treasure card: gain an action costing up to $3 more than the trashed card, or a Transmute.
Victory gard: gain a Gold.

Other suggestions of my own:
Minion: Same effects for you, but opponents choose and discard down to 4. (no more randomly turning the opponent's good hands dead, or their dead hands good)
Cultist: Same except the attack is "If this is the first time you played a Cultist this turn, each other player gains a Ruins." (I think this version is still strong but doesn't flat-out dominate nearly as many random boards)

[Awaclus]

What if Transmute trashed itself on play?

[liopoil]

What if Transmute trashed itself on play?

No way, that's (almost) strictly better than bomb.

[silverspawn]

What if Transmute had more of a TfB feel where both the cost and type of the trashed card matter?  Say if it is an...
Action card: gain a Victory card costing up to $3 more than the trashed card.
Treasure card: gain an action costing up to $3 more than the trashed card, or a Transmute.
Victory gard: gain a Gold.

I don't want to change the card (or any card) too much. This is too much for my taste.

Minion: Same effects for you, but opponents choose and discard down to 4. (no more randomly turning the opponent's good hands dead, or their dead hands good)

I understand the intention, but "discard down to 4" is such a weak attack, and it's even weaker in Minion games, that I don't think it has any business even being there. So, if anything I'd cut the attack. Which would make the card significantly weaker, but that might not be a bad thing. Hm...

Cultist: Same except the attack is "If this is the first time you played a Cultist this turn, each other player gains a Ruins." (I think this version is still strong but doesn't flat-out dominate nearly as many random boards)

I'm not sure. This might be a good idea. Gotta think about it.

[Fragasnap]

Cultist: Same except the attack is "If this is the first time you played a Cultist this turn, each other player gains a Ruins." (I think this version is still strong but doesn't flat-out dominate nearly as many random boards)

I always preferred the simpler:

Cultist
Cost: $5
Types: Action, Attack, Looter
+2 Cards. You may play a Cultist from your hand. If you don't, each other player gains a Ruins.When you trash this, +3 Cards.

[soulnet]

Cultist: Same except the attack is "If this is the first time you played a Cultist this turn, each other player gains a Ruins." (I think this version is still strong but doesn't flat-out dominate nearly as many random boards)

I always preferred the simpler:

Cultist
Cost: $5
Types: Action, Attack, Looter
+2 Cards. You may play a Cultist from your hand. If you don't, each other player gains a Ruins.When you trash this, +3 Cards.

It is also better that you can deliver several ruins a turn if you have the actions.

[popsofctown]

I like how Harvest's buff also rewards variety.

Transmute can probably tolerate both the buy rebate and the +action.


Rebuild+overgrown estate into silk road is hilarious but fine. I'd like it if Rebuild trashed the card before returning it to the supply, for the intended in-set interaction with Feodum's sake.

[silverspawn]

I did not think about interactions with on-trash effects or non-supply cards. Mhpf.

"Trash it and then return it to the supply" is awkward. Maybe LF was right and the card just can't be fixed.

[Deadlock39]

How about, "Return it to the Supply. If you did, gain..."

That neuters it even more with Shelters, and prevents gaining all the Estates and Silk Roads with OE.  I don't really think killing the Feodum interaction is a big deal when trying to weaken a card that dominates too many boards, but I know you are trying to limit the scope of the changes here.

[enfynet]

Is there a text version? My iPod wont load any of the images in the OP.

[silverspawn]

Is there a text version? My iPod wont load any of the images in the OP.

There wasn't, but sure, I'll make one

Adventurer - Action - 6$
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal 3 Treasure cards. Put those Treasure cards into your hand and discard the other revealed cards.

Rebuild - Action - 5$
+1 Action
Name a card. Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal a Victory card that is not the named card. Discard the other cards. Return the Victory card to the Supply and gain a Victory card costing up to 3$ more than it.

Scout - Action - 4$
+1 Action
+1$
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand. Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

Scrying Pool - Action - 2P$
+1 Action
Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal one that is not an Action. Put all revealed cards into your hand.

Transmute - Action - P$
+1 Action
Trash a card from your hand.
If it is an...
Action card, gain a Duchy.
Treasure card, gain a Transmute.
Victory card, gain a Gold.

Transmute - Action - P$
Trash a card from your hand.
If it is an...
Action card, gain a Duchy.
Treasure card, gain a Transmute.
Victory card, gain a Gold.
---
When you buy this, +1 Buy.

Talisman - Treasure - 4$
Worth 1$
---
While this is in play, when you buy a card costing 4$ or less, gain a copy of it.

Harvest - Action - 5$
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck, put one back and discard the rest. +1$ per differently named card discarded.

also added to the OP

[enfynet]

Thanks spawn!

[NoMoreFun]

Why is the revised Harvest "+$1 per differently named card discarded", and not "+$1 per differently named card revealed"? The reward for revealing 4 uniques should be higher than revealing 3 uniques and a copy. It is, somewhat, with the "discard" wording (since you can put your best card back instead of the duplicate and still get the maximum $3), but flavour-wise it'd be better to give +$1 per unique.

[silverspawn]

that's a transcription fail. Of course it's revealed not discarded.

[LibraryAdventurer]

Re: Adventurer: why not just make it cost $5?  That's what I did for when I play.

[silverspawn]

Re: Adventurer: why not just make it cost $5?  That's what I did for when I play.

Because I think it'd be a horrible card at 5$, maybe the weakest 5$ in the game.

also, why "not just". it's not like changing "2" into "3" is a big change in terms of what it does.

[theblankman]

Cultist: Same except the attack is "If this is the first time you played a Cultist this turn, each other player gains a Ruins." (I think this version is still strong but doesn't flat-out dominate nearly as many random boards)

I always preferred the simpler:

Cultist
Cost: $5
Types: Action, Attack, Looter
+2 Cards. You may play a Cultist from your hand. If you don't, each other player gains a Ruins.When you trash this, +3 Cards.

It is also better that you can deliver several ruins a turn if you have the actions.

Yeah I do like that version.  The attack is a little stronger than my version, but still toned down enough imo (obviously I think the original is too much). 

Minion: Same effects for you, but opponents choose and discard down to 4. (no more randomly turning the opponent's good hands dead, or their dead hands good)

I understand the intention, but "discard down to 4" is such a weak attack, and it's even weaker in Minion games, that I don't think it has any business even being there. So, if anything I'd cut the attack. Which would make the card significantly weaker, but that might not be a bad thing. Hm...

The current Minion attack can be weaker than "discard down to 4," because it reduces your hand to 4 cards but also cycles you, and often cycling is good.  But really it's just very swingy and better or worse than "discard down to 4" on a case-by-case basis.  If you wanted a stronger attack, I'd even prefer "discard down to 3" over the original. 

Removing the attack entirely would be fine too imo... I honestly can't think of a time when I bought Minion for the attack.  I see Minion a lot like Scrying Pool, it's a money/draw card that happens to have an attack on it.  Only Minion's attack is a lot more annoying than Scrying Pool's. 

[Awaclus]

The current Minion attack can be weaker than "discard down to 4," because it reduces your hand to 4 cards but also cycles you, and often cycling is good.  But really it's just very swingy and better or worse than "discard down to 4" on a case-by-case basis.  If you wanted a stronger attack, I'd even prefer "discard down to 3" over the original. 

Removing the attack entirely would be fine too imo... I honestly can't think of a time when I bought Minion for the attack.  I see Minion a lot like Scrying Pool, it's a money/draw card that happens to have an attack on it.  Only Minion's attack is a lot more annoying than Scrying Pool's.

It can be weaker, but on average, it is a lot stronger; the best 4 out of 5 cards are usually almost as good as just 5 cards because the odds of having a village and a +cards in the remaining 4 is as big as having them in the original 5. 4 random cards is a lot worse than 5 random cards, though.

Also, you will never buy Minion for the attack, but oftentimes you will ignore stuff such as Scheme because of it.

[soulnet]

I think the Attack on Minion is quite significant.

[theblankman]

It can be weaker, but on average, it is a lot stronger; the best 4 out of 5 cards are usually almost as good as just 5 cards because the odds of having a village and a +cards in the remaining 4 is as big as having them in the original 5. 4 random cards is a lot worse than 5 random cards, though.

Also, you will never buy Minion for the attack, but oftentimes you will ignore stuff such as Scheme because of it.

I think if Minion didn't have the attack, I would still buy it in the same situations I do now, and the cards you ignore because of the attack are few enough to call that an edge case imo (Scheme, Alchemist, Treasury, can't think of many more).  It would still be good in the same engines without the attack, but if it must have an attack then I think even discard-to-3 would be a good change. 

[Awaclus]

It can be weaker, but on average, it is a lot stronger; the best 4 out of 5 cards are usually almost as good as just 5 cards because the odds of having a village and a +cards in the remaining 4 is as big as having them in the original 5. 4 random cards is a lot worse than 5 random cards, though.

Also, you will never buy Minion for the attack, but oftentimes you will ignore stuff such as Scheme because of it.

I think if Minion didn't have the attack, I would still buy it in the same situations I do now, and the cards you ignore because of the attack are few enough to call that an edge case imo (Scheme, Alchemist, Treasury, can't think of many more).  It would still be good in the same engines without the attack, but if it must have an attack then I think even discard-to-3 would be a good change.

In the same decks, but not against the same decks. Engines, slogs and rushes don't usually care about a Militia too much, but a Minion hurts them significantly, while Militia is stronger against BM than Minion.

[soulnet]

In the same decks, but not against the same decks. Engines, slogs and rushes don't usually care about a Militia too much, but a Minion hurts them significantly, while Militia is stronger against BM than Minion.

I think "engines" is a too wide category here. Engines without cards, or engines without +3 cards (and no KC) can suffer from any discard, and will likely suffer from Militia more than from Minion (usually the only way to make an engine work without decent +cards is with good trashing or good sifting and it both cases, having a good starting handsize is important). For instance, you can have an engine solely on Hamlet/Steward/Bridge that just tries to play lots of bridges, and Militia hurts it way more than Minion (both before and after trashing your junk).

[Awaclus]

Engines without cards

Like, the kind of deck you end up with after being on the receiving end of a Masquerade pin?


But yeah, you're right. The point was mostly that the attacks are different, and good against different things.

[enfynet]

Minions attack is annoying in the same way Possession is annoying, which could also extend to Tribute in some cases. But it's only annoying once, unless someone manages a Minion/Council Room thing.

Edit: or Governor. Okay so further thought, Governor/Minion would piss me off.

[silverspawn]

Minions attack is annoying in the same way Possession is annoying, which could also extend to Tribute in some cases. But it's only annoying once, unless someone manages a Minion/Council Room thing.

I wouldn't go that far. Possession has that aspect, but it's also annoying in countless other ways.

I don't think Minion should have another attack. Discarding down to X is awkward. It doesn't feel right. I think it's either leaving it as is or cutting the attack entirely. Soulnet got a point about strategic importance of the attack, but it might not be worth the frustration/swinginess.

[soulnet]

Minions attack is annoying in the same way Possession is annoying, which could also extend to Tribute in some cases. But it's only annoying once, unless someone manages a Minion/Council Room thing.

I wouldn't go that far. Possession has that aspect, but it's also annoying in countless other ways.

I don't think Minion should have another attack. Discarding down to X is awkward. It doesn't feel right. I think it's either leaving it as is or cutting the attack entirely. Soulnet got a point about strategic importance of the attack, but it might not be worth the frustration/swinginess.

I think CR/Governor into Minion is actually worth having, because it adds strategic and tactical depth. You need to discard your own drawn cards in order for the opponents to discard their drawn cards, so you need to add disappearing cards to your deck for it to make sense, and also watch shuffles.

[silverspawn]

Minion without the attack:



Doesn't he look super simple now?

[LastFootnote]

Minion without the attack:



Doesn't he look super simple now?

It should say, "…discard your hand and +4 Cards." The comma is a holdover from when there were three effects. Now there are only two.

[LibraryAdventurer]

middle ground Minion:

Minion - Action - 5$
Choose one: 2$; or discard your hand, +4 cards, and each other player with at least five cards in hand discards three cards and draws two.

And there'd still be an interesting interaction playing Council Room - Minion.

[liopoil]

I like the minion attack. I never get too frustrated when I discard a good hand for a bad one. It's a good type of thing to have in the game and can lead to some interesting strategic scenarios. If encourages tracking your opponent's deck, for one.

[silverspawn]

middle ground Minion:

Minion - Action - 5$
Choose one: 2$; or discard your hand, +4 cards, and each other player with at least five cards in hand discards three cards and draws two.

And there'd still be an interesting interaction playing Council Room - Minion.

a LF upvote? do you think this is a good idea? becuase it doesn't to me (no offense  ). discard 3 cards and draw 2, that's like, transform one of their bad cards into a cellar, play it for them, let them choose their worst 2 cards. I'd guess that it helps them at least 4 out of 5 times. And it's an attack, it should probably not help them on average.

plus, this version is so simple. why even add an attack? the interaction with governor is cute and all, but it doesn't happen that often.

I like the minion attack. I never get too frustrated when I discard a good hand for a bad one. It's a good type of thing to have in the game and can lead to some interesting strategic scenarios. If encourages tracking your opponent's deck, for one.

I can absolutely see why people would like this attack. it's far less clear cut than scrying pool or adventurer. but some people dislike it, and replacing it is optional, so, doesn't hurt.

[LastFootnote]

middle ground Minion:

Minion - Action - 5$
Choose one: 2$; or discard your hand, +4 cards, and each other player with at least five cards in hand discards three cards and draws two.

And there'd still be an interesting interaction playing Council Room - Minion.

a LF upvote? do you think this is a good idea? becuase it doesn't to me (no offense  ). discard 3 cards and draw 2, that's like, transform one of their bad cards into a cellar, play it for them, let them choose their worst 2 cards. I'd guess that it helps them at least 4 out of 5 times. And it's an attack, it should probably not help them on average.

plus, this version is so simple. why even add an attack? the interaction with governor is cute and all, but it doesn't happen that often.

I like the minion attack. I never get too frustrated when I discard a good hand for a bad one. It's a good type of thing to have in the game and can lead to some interesting strategic scenarios. If encourages tracking your opponent's deck, for one.

I can absolutely see why people would like this attack. it's far less clear cut than scrying pool or adventurer. but some people dislike it, and replacing it is optional, so, doesn't hurt.

Uh, yes. In retrospect, LirbraryAdventurer's suggestion would probably not work out. But I like the idea and his thought process, so my +1 stands. But your (silverspawn's) version also deserves a +1, which I have now given it.

If Minion needed to still be an Attack, I'd probably suggest discarding a random card from each target's hand. Probably the attacker would pull them Robber-from-Settlers-style. It's still swingy, but probably not nearly as swingy as losing your whole hand. Of course, both this version and LibraryAdventurer's version lose that symmetry that Minion-as-printed has. For that reason, I think non-Attack Minion is probably best. It's so sleek. Probably I would add back the third option, though (trash this and gain 2 Estates).