Print

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

[GeneralRamos]

This post has been updated to reflect the current state of the cards. The following are more or less stable right now:
Here is the current state of all the cards in the set:

Clergy Traveller line:

Note: Cardinal clearly needs a buff. It's been played extensively. It doesn't give you any reward for trashing junk, though, and it doesn't hang around in your deck long enough to be used to liquidate your deck for points, since it's just a flash in the pan on the way to Pope. Maybe a static base VP gain like bishop, maybe some amount of draw first so it at least gives you a better chance to trash junk.

Sinner Traveller line:

Note 1: The card amounts for this line: Sinner (8x in 2p, 12x in 3-4p); the rest 4x
Note 2: Heretic feels a little weak, and might warrant a buff. Nun is very strong by comparison, but doesn't have the longevity (your deck quickly runs out of junk to trash for points) and stays a double-lab

$6+

$5

Notes:
Corvee has been modified. It now only draws you cards when an opponent buys rather than gains a card. In testing, we ran into some weird interactions from a case I cannot recall at present.
Holy See could probably be reduced to $4 with no ill effect. But it's purchase is fairly niche anyway, so I don't think it would make much difference.

$4

Notes:
Wedding: Everyone, myself included, seems to keep forgetting the on-buy effect. I might make it optional. Or I just need to drill it into my and other peoples' heads further.
Collection Plate: The on-buy effect has been changed to a copper, and Charity has been repurposed. The on-buy effect too keeps getting forgotten in playtesting. Probably because my wife and I don't own Hinterlands.
Labyrinth: I think this could be reduced in price to $3, or the Labyrinth restriction to the points removed. The VP token benefit has been fairly fringe so far. It might just be that the card is pretty niche.
Another alternative would be for it to react to your own gain rather than another player's, while keeping the restriction on revealing from gaining Labyrinth. Then you could at least coordinate your buying of VP to accord with Labyrinth in hand.

$3

$2

$1

Non-supply

Note: Excommunication was renamed to Damnation, and its effect changed from an untrashable curse to a -1 VP that, when trashed, gives a curse and copper.

Events

Note: These are untested, and the prices not certain.

[Roadrunner7671]

What is confession?

[GeneralRamos]

Sorry, this was posted in the other thread.

[LastFootnote]

This really doesn't grab me. A Laboratory where the first one is also a Lab for your opponents. And you get a Silver. I mean it seems strong, but independent of its strength, it doesn't seem interesting.



This is potentially very confusing. I don't see the rules questions being worth it. Also it's incredibly strong and very stackable. Let's say another player plays Smithy. You can discard this for what is effectively +3 Cards and +1 Action. Then you can discard another Pardon—even one you just drew!—for another +3 Cards, and so on. And also the game has to slooooooow waaaaaaay dooooooown as you wait to see if other players are going to use Pardons after every Action you play that draws any cards (even just +1 Card). I don't think this card is worth salvaging.



So it's a combination of Familiar and Young Witch. Except it's super slow. You play two of these, so each player has to shuffle a Curse into his deck, draw a card, then shuffle another one in, etc.



This is potentially interesting. Or at least different enough from existing cards to be worth doing. It's sort of like Wandering Minstrel, but different enough. I'm guessing it's too strong for $5. I would, at minimum, reduce it to +2 Actions.



Uh, probably I would cost this at $5 or less. It's an Inn for Treasures, which I have panned before. I think it's nice on a Victory card, though. I would test it to see if it's a dud or what, but it seems like it has potential.



Looks promising. I would take out the on-gain part. The top is interesting enough without it and it just adds complexity.



Well I don't think we need another card with Mint's on-gain ability. We have Mint for that! The top part is really swingy and probably you never activate it, especially if you trashed a bunch of Coppers when you buy it. So mostly it's a one-shot Silver with Mint's on-gain ability. Not so interesting.



Here we have the same on-gain effect as on Iconographer. This card clearly doesn't have space for it, already being written in tiny text. The top half seems potentially interesting, albeit swingy. I mean you want to keep a Copper so that you can choose that, but maybe sometimes you just have a Tithe. But if you just have a Tithe, probably you don't play it. I wonder if it would be better as "When you play this, each other player may gain a Silver."



This one scares me. Mostly I worry about seating order issues, etc. I can choose to screw you over by not buying cards, which isn't fun for either of us, and lets the other players (if there are any) get a leg up. I don't think getting passed to the right makes up for it.

[tristan]

Wedding is too strong. If you open with 4$ Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.

Pardon is a nice idea but far too strong for 1$. If another player does play a Smithy and you discard Pardon it is equivalent to a double Lab (you do not have to spend an action to discard it)!

Inquisition is interesting. Cantrip cursers are problematic but as there are some downsides to it (discarding a card, Confession as defense, the attacked player drawing a card) it is probably roughly balanced.

I agree with LFN that Synod should probably just provide 2 actions.

I do not see why Corvée should be a card that is passed around. Most often it is just a double Lab between turns which is fine ... but it does nothing on the turn it is played.

[BadAssMutha]

Wedding is too strong. If you open with 4 Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.

Not true, with a CCCCE open and a Wedding buy, my next hand may well be SCCEE for $4, not $5.

Pardon seems way strong in any game that has +cards, especially when it's +3 or +4 cards.

Inquisition seems a bit expensive for a blockable curser that isn't even a cantrip.

[tristan]

Wedding is too strong. If you open with 4 Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.

Not true, with a CCCCE open and a Wedding buy, my next hand may well be SCCEE for $4, not $5.

It may indeed well be 4$ and indeed well be 5$. Which is precisely what I said. ^^
It depends on whether the top-decked Silver substitutes an Estate or a Copper (you open with Wedding, topdeck a Silver and thus have 6 cards in your deck). In the former case you get 5$ and in the latter case 4$. Chances for the latter are slightly higher, 60%.

[Roadrunner7671]

Wedding is too strong. If you open with 4 Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.

Not true, with a CCCCE open and a Wedding buy, my next hand may well be SCCEE for $4, not $5.

It may indeed well be 4$ and indeed well be 5$. Which is precisely what I said. ^^
It depends on whether the top-decked Silver substitutes an Estate or a Copper (you open with Wedding, topdeck a Silver and thus have 6 cards in your deck). In the former case you get 5$ and in the latter case 4$. Chances for the latter are slightly higher, 60%.

Doesn't opening double Silver give you about a 60% chance of hitting $5 as well? So it double Silver too strong?

[tristan]

Wedding is too strong. If you open with 4 Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.

Not true, with a CCCCE open and a Wedding buy, my next hand may well be SCCEE for $4, not $5.

It may indeed well be 4$ and indeed well be 5$. Which is precisely what I said. ^^
It depends on whether the top-decked Silver substitutes an Estate or a Copper (you open with Wedding, topdeck a Silver and thus have 6 cards in your deck). In the former case you get 5$ and in the latter case 4$. Chances for the latter are slightly higher, 60%.

Doesn't opening double Silver give you about a 60% chance of hitting $5 as well? So it double Silver too strong?

What does the third move have to do with this? Wedding changes the SECOND move if you open with 4. With Wedding a 4-3 changes into a 4-4 or 4-5 opening.
I do not think that this is game breaking or anything but changing the symmetry of the opening (normally it doesn't matter whether you open with 3-4 or 4-3 with Doctor being the only exception that comes to mind right now) opening it is a significant change and probably makes Wedding an autobuy if you open with 4 in a lot of decks.

[Roadrunner7671]

Wedding is too strong. If you open with 4 Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.

Not true, with a CCCCE open and a Wedding buy, my next hand may well be SCCEE for $4, not $5.

It may indeed well be 4$ and indeed well be 5$. Which is precisely what I said. ^^
It depends on whether the top-decked Silver substitutes an Estate or a Copper (you open with Wedding, topdeck a Silver and thus have 6 cards in your deck). In the former case you get 5$ and in the latter case 4$. Chances for the latter are slightly higher, 60%.

Doesn't opening double Silver give you about a 60% chance of hitting $5 as well? So it double Silver too strong?

What does the third move have to do with this? Wedding changes the SECOND move if you open with 4. With Wedding a 4-3 changes into a 4-4 or 4-5 opening.
I do not think that this is game breaking or anything but changing the symmetry of the opening (normally it doesn't matter whether you open with 3-4 or 4-3 with Doctor being the only exception that comes to mind right now) opening it is a significant change and probably makes Wedding an autobuy if you open with 4 in a lot of decks.

Except now you have a Wedding and a Silver in your deck. A Silver is nice, sure, but Wedding looks a little weak. On a Baker board, you could've just opened Silver/Five cost and skipped the weak Wedding. And no one thinks Baker openings are too overpowered.

[GeneralRamos]

Wedding is too strong. If you open with 4$ Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.

*ahem* Nomad Camp.
If consensus is that topdecking silver is too strong, I can always just put it in the discard. But i don't think it's a problem, really. Same gamble on your second buy as Nomad Camp.

Here's an alternate version of Corvee:

This doesn't react to a particular player, but all players. It also doesn't pass. It draws only up to a certain number of cards, so as to accommodate multi-player in this new framework. Offers resiliency against handsize attacks.

A whole new Pardon. Bears no resemblance to 1.0, just the name and image:

A sort of Shanty Town variant. If you end up with a bad hand, or have played out your other actions, you can reveal a hand with no Actions, discard it, and draw 3. Of course, if you have a hand full of treasure, you might not want to reveal.

And the original concept of Pardon transformed significantly into Missal:

Reacts only to your own resolved action, instead of others, which takes care of the slow-down critique. You may trash it as a one-shot buffer to another Action card, netting you +1 Card to your hand. This is, I imagine, more the bonus. The over-buying is why you'd bother with it in the first place (cf. Stonemason). I'm willing to entertain the notion it should be priced at $2.

[tristan]

Wedding is too strong. If you open with 4$ Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.

*ahem* Nomad Camp.

The on-gain effect of Nomad Camp is priced into the card, it is a more expensive Woodcutter. So let's compare buying a Nomad Camp and a Wedding on turn 1 if you have 4 coins:

With Nomad Camp you pay 4$ for a 3$ card on turn 1 and in return you get 4$ or 5$ on turn two. 4$ just counteracts that you overpaid 1$ for Nomad Camp so the opening is only really changed if, with 40% probability, you get 5$ on turn 2. So you get on average +0.4$ on move 2.
This is different from Wedding which gets on average +1.4$ on move 2.

Furthermore note that Nomad Camp, a terminal silver with an extra buy, is in and of itself rarely (Peddler, Fool's Gold or other 2$ cards you want several copies of are the exception) a good initial purchase. Wedding on the other hands is a Lab variant and like Lab it is useful in nearly all circumstances.

[Gubump]

I just thought of a simple reason that Holy Order cannot gain Silvers at all when you gain one, let alone on top of your deck: If it gained silvers on-gain, it would be a strictly better buy than Silver at $4, which is a Dominion no-no. Now, it could cost $5 and keep the topdecking silver, but it probably is too weak for $5. Although it may be balanced at $5.

[GendoIkari]

Um, Corvee seems extremely weak. The best it can possibly be is +3 cards on your next turn. Looks at Haunted Woods. That gives you the same thing plus it attacks your opponents. And this will rarely actually be +3 cards, normally it will be +2 cards, or worse. Wharf gives you that plus a buy, and 2 cards and a buy when you play it. This is just an extremely weaker version of Wharf/Haunted Woods. And one that is a one-shot before your opponent gets it?

[Co0kieL0rd]

Yeah I don't get Corvée either. I mean, making it non-scaling in multiplayer by letting you draw up to X is a step in the right direction but this makes it significantly weaker. This version could maybe cost $3.
The new Pardon and Missal are pretty creative ideas and Pardon looks solid! Missal could easily cost $2 or even less, I think. Also I don't see the need for the top part to be a reaction. It could just say "+1 Action. Trash this. If you do, +2 Cards."

[GeneralRamos]

I just thought of a simple reason that Holy Order cannot gain Silvers at all when you gain one, let alone on top of your deck: If it gained silvers on-gain, it would be a strictly better buy than Silver at $4, which is a Dominion no-no.

Okay, yeah, that's a great point. I'm gonna have to reconsider the nature of the on-gain bonus for buying it. Considering a margrave-like function, either put one or put two Treasures from in play on top of your deck.

The best it can possibly be is +3 cards on your next turn. Looks at Haunted Woods. That gives you the same thing plus it attacks your opponents. And this will rarely actually be +3 cards, normally it will be +2 cards, or worse. Wharf gives you that plus a buy, and 2 cards and a buy when you play it.

Also good points, referring to version 1.0, but mostly accurate for the update as well. I knew I over-nerfed it, and it'll need something useful in the turn you play it: thinking either a draw-up-to-6 (thematic with the Duration effect) or a handsize attack on opponents (ensuring there's always a handsize attack in kingdoms with this, and making the Duration effect more valuable).

The new Pardon and Missal are pretty creative ideas and Pardon looks solid! Missal could easily cost $2 or even less, I think. Also I don't see the need for the top part to be a reaction. It could just say "+1 Action. Trash this. If you do, +2 Cards."

True, and I almost wrote anticipating this when I posted it. Missal as printed differs from that in two ways. (1) Downside: it's dead without another action in hand; (2) upside: if you draw it from resolving an actions (say, Smithy) you can still trash this to buff it without another action. I leave it up to debate whether these are interesting enough differences, though I think the latter could be.
And I agree on the cost reduction. $2 is probably right.

[Gubump]

The best it can possibly be is +3 cards on your next turn. Looks at Haunted Woods. That gives you the same thing plus it attacks your opponents. And this will rarely actually be +3 cards, normally it will be +2 cards, or worse. Wharf gives you that plus a buy, and 2 cards and a buy when you play it.

Also good points, referring to version 1.0, but mostly accurate for the update as well. I knew I over-nerfed it, and it'll need something useful in the turn you play it: thinking either a draw-up-to-6 (thematic with the Duration effect) or a handsize attack on opponents (ensuring there's always a handsize attack in kingdoms with this, and making the Duration effect more valuable).

The handsize attack option antisynergizes with the duration effect though, because it makes it harder for your opponents to buy higher-cost cards, which means less cards drawn for you.

[GeneralRamos]

Here are the next 5:

Funeral:At base, it's half a Fishing Village. Trash it first and it's a one-shot Bazaar. As they power up, of course, there's less availability of them. If there are cards that steal from the trash, you might even power down your opponents'. Resurrection.


Blackmail:Another Excommunication dealer (see Arch-Heretic from the other thread). Less thematic by name but descriptive of function. Every other time Blackmail is played, it either puts Silvers and Golds into the trash or deals Excommunications (an untrashable Curse in smaller numbers). Every other time Blackmail is played, you may gain a Treasure from the trash. Of course, the first time you play it will most likely be a dud, giving players enough time to at least get a few Silvers for "bribing."


Indulgence (2.0): Same name, totally different card. I reworked the curses=points mechanic from the original Arch-Heretic card. This card still allows Curses to be converted to points, but not all Curses in your deck. In fact, you can pump up the value of Curses to more than just 1 VP. But it maxes out at 5 points a curse for 5 points, though depending on how many curses you have in hand, it might be worth putting a few more on the Indulgence mat. If you have no Indulgences in you deck at the end of the game, you essentially just trashed the Curses on your mat (they equal 0VP). At the cost of $2, it should be ungainable from the trash by any official card.


Reliquary:
An expensive Silver on it's own. But in games with Cursers, it can mitigate their damage. In games with useful Hexes, all the better. It might even be worth buying a Curse with this in hand to gain the Gold.


Black Mass: The last of the Curse-interaction cards. It may be too similar to Reliquary to keep both of them. It stays in play until you start a turn with a Curse in hand. But maybe it shouldn't stay out so long. I honestly have no idea how to price it, and welcome thoughts on it. My inkling is Reliquary will be the one to prevail.

[Gubump]

If you're going to make a card that works with Hexes, you should make more Kingdom Hexes than just Sinner.

[faust]

Thoughts:

Funeral: It looks interesting, but I'm not sure it works. It is Village type, so you usually want lots of them, but then, you don't want to trash. Also, you are helping your opponent big time by trashing this unless you won the Funreal split already. I think this may lead to the following problematic scenarios:
1) You are in need of Villages and there is no other one, in which case you will simply use this as a bad Squire.
2) The card is so strong that you cannot allow your opponent to win the split significantly to trash them. The Funerals will split and both players have added bad cards to their deck that they are unwilling to trash because they don't want to help their opponent.
I think you could fix 1 by not putting the effect on a Village and 2 by making it so that only the Funerals you trashed give you a bonus (probably requires mats or tokens). Either 1 or 2 should be fixed I think, not necessarily both.

Indulgence: The Curse interaction (and the fact that it's doing nothing but that) is problematic: Either this is strong enough to make you want to buy Curses, in which case it completely nullifies any cursing attacks, or it is not, in which case it will be a complete dud in games without cursers. Both these things are not desirable.

Relinquary: Looks rather weak. Compare to Hoard, which does not need to be discarded for the same effect. I suggest making it something like Caravan Guard: You can react, gain a Gold, and still get the +$2 on your turn.

Black Mass: Similar problems as indulgence, though I think it is very clear at least that this does not make buying Curses worth it. Buying a single Curse maybe for TfB shenenigans, but that will still make cursing hurt. Some shaky math: I think a card with just "gain a Gold" would be okay-ish priced at $4 (compare Explorer and Feast). This delays that effect (-$1; compare Caravan/Lab) and makes it conditional (-$1). SO $2 is probably a good price.

[faust]

Somewhat whacky idea for Black Mass: Instead of discarding the Curse, pass it to the player to the left.

[GeneralRamos]

I think you could fix 1 by not putting the effect on a Village and 2 by making it so that only the Funerals you trashed give you a bonus (probably requires mats or tokens). Either 1 or 2 should be fixed I think, not necessarily both.

I'll consider changing part 1. I'll have to think about what it would be instead.

Indulgence: The Curse interaction (and the fact that it's doing nothing but that) is problematic: Either this is strong enough to make you want to buy Curses, in which case it completely nullifies any cursing attacks, or it is not, in which case it will be a complete dud in games without cursers. Both these things are not desirable.

I doubt it would ever be strong enough to render Cursers moot. But whether it would be worthwhile to go after an intentional Indulgence-Curse strategy to a large extent I won't know til I can sit and test this one out a few times. But it might make sense to extend it to Hexes as well. (And Re: Gubump: Note also Excommunication is a Hex. There are still more Hexes, I just haven't posted all the cards as of yet).

[quote author=faust link=topic=14416.msg553591#msg553591 Relinquary: Looks rather weak. Compare to Hoard, which does not need to be discarded for the same effect. I suggest making it something like Caravan Guard: You can react, gain a Gold, and still get the +$2 on your turn.[/quote]
Good idea. That or gain the Gold in hand? Or might that discourage cursers too much?

Somewhat whacky idea for Black Mass: Instead of discarding the Curse, pass it to the player to the left.

Some sort of passing mechanic incorporated into this might be interesting. I need to ruminate on it and what that might entail.

[beri]

This is potentially interesting. Or at least different enough from existing cards to be worth doing. It's sort of like Wandering Minstrel, but different enough. I'm guessing it's too strong for $5. I would, at minimum, reduce it to +2 Actions.

2 actions would make it worse and more expensive than Farming village.
Plus you're not sure to draw a card with Synod. So 3 actions seems fine and we might want to add "discard the rest or put them back on top of your deck in any order"

[Awaclus]

2 actions would make it worse and more expensive than Farming village.

No. Farming Village is literally just Village. Synod discards all junk cards, including Treasures (which is what the majority of your junk cards are anyway), and can easily draw more than one card.

[beri]

Problem: who's gonna want to trash one first? Not me, because it's too expensive for a one-shot Bazaar.


I'm not sure you need to create untrashable curses to make this worth it.


Problem: useless card in games without any cursers. I'm not sure it makes buying curses worth it. Would cost 3 buys for 1 VP token.


Useless card in games without any cursers and hexers. Even when there are, it costs 5 for POTENTIALLY gaining a Gold, which you don't even put into your hand. Doesn't work.


I would add "When you buy this, gain a Curse" or some way to gain or give curses.