With VP tokens, it's a concern whether the card can lead to degenerate situations where no decks advance and players just sit there accumulating VP tokens for the rest of their lives.
Goons almost guaranteed it (edit: and by "it", I mean "the game ending eventually") by requiring you to buy cards, eventually leading to a 3-pile even if it took a long time (exceptions: Trader, Ambassador shenanigans).
Bishop encouraged it by offering more VP for trashing, which then requires you to buy stuff and, again, head towards a 3-pile ending (exceptions: Fortress, Graverobber, Rogue).
Monument encouraged it by giving you $2 that you want to spend, which once more pushes towards a 3-pile ending if nothing else. Those unending scenarios could still come up (Bishop-Fortress is probably the easiest) but they are rare.
Do these cards do anything to move towards a game end?
Groundskeeper requires you to gain cards, so it's like Goons.
Temple encourages players to buy more Temples (to gain the VP that's placed there) so at least that pile will empty eventually, but otherwise... eh. It trashes though, which should help players to build a better deck that can end the game.
Chariot Race is a Peddler whenever it grants VP, so it's kind of like Monument in giving you money you want to spend. It's also unreliable, so it's tougher to get into a stable back-and-forth where all the players have to keep gaining more VP and doing nothing else or else be forced into a loss.
Sounds good, I guess?
In raw power, I think Groundskeeper has a lower ceiling than Goons. It only works for Victory cards, it doesn't have +Buy, it doesn't even give coins to help you buy stuff. But it's cantrip so you can chain them more easily, and it works with gainers. Where Goons games start slow and get bigger until a game-ending VP explosion (or a sudden 3-pile), I think Groundskeeper will provide a steady drip. I can see it encouraging alt greening as well, because you'll be much more inclined to buy Estates or Duchies with a few Groundskeepers in play. Groundskeeper is at a price point with lots of competition and doesn't help you build your deck, so it probably won't be bought early... unless rushing Estates/Duchies is especially powerful. Hm.
I think Groundskeeper will love Distant Lands.
Temple is strange. The trashing is mediocre, and the VP seems especially slow. But the Gathering mechanism here seems like something that will push players into group think. One player buys Temple while the others ignore it. That player slowly gains more VP tokens, which may make others wary. But VP tokens may also accumulate on the Temple pile, until another player gives in and buys it. Now tokens build up on the Temple pile even more quickly, making it even more attractive to buy more... and so goes the snowball. It may also create an all-in mentality, if the first Temple player is also the one who buys the second Temple and its gathered tokens. Actually, this may happen more than the multiplayer snowball, because I sure don't want you to get all those VP tokens without suffering the same opportunity cost of having a terminal Temple in your deck for a few shuffles.
If the Temple pile is empty, you still continue adding VP tokens to it, right? But there's no way to get those tokens without Ambassador shenanigans (or something unrevealed)?
Chariot Race seems swingy, depending on what you uncover from the other player's deck. Copper, the rest of your Chariot Races will be good times. Province, your day at the track is ruined. It'll be better with some deck inspection attacks, and if you trash down vs. an opponent who still has all their starting Copper. But even though it's great when it hits, it's also kind of bad when it doesn't. I think that unreliability will make this a weak and ignorable card on most boards, but it will still be bought often and overrated because people love to gamble and the highs are pretty high here.