Replies/opinions!
1. I'm happy to see so much discussion around this.
2. I would say that "set aside permanently" fits within the category of "trash" (so would "return to the supply"). But I don't like it here. I agree with Accatitippi that it boosts the power too much. I don't think it was suggested that it would be combined with an "up to" wording, but if it were, then it becomes "gain a Province" when you can line it up with a Province. Or Colony! Using the Island Mat seems bad because outside of the card named "Island", what's an Island Mat? Same for Tavern. India-Panther Mat would be better, but who wants a new Mat? Just plain set-aside could work, but I think it would be confusing as to why it's getting set aside.
All that aside, eHalcyon said it "gains added functionality", which is true, but I think that's a bad thing. The card does enough without it. It's a big change to fix a specific problem.
Returning to the supply would fix Fortress without adding to the power level; the only real reason I wouldn't like that much is because it feels like people would say "why isn't this just being trashed instead?" Plus, it means you can't remodel any non-Supply cards.
3. For voting, none of the "I change my vote" posts seem like they would change this fact: "Exactly $2 more" and "Either $1 or $2 more" got more votes than the others by a good bit. My "vote" would be for just a runoff between those 2.
As for why "Either
or
$2 more" is an option, no, it's not to fix Fortress. It was suggested because it's something that hasn't been done yet. Something that's stronger than the "exactly" options, while still being weaker than "up to
"
4. As for fixing Fortress, as said somewhere else, my vote would be for not auto-playing if the gained action is India-Panther. This would make draining the pile require other conditions aside from colliding 2 cards. And that should be fine, under the right conditions you can instantly drain Rats as well. But we can take a separate vote for how to fix fortress, with those types of options. Unless "Exactly
more" wins the runoff, in which case it's not a problem unless we choose to cost it at
(which seems less likely if it's an exactly).