Print

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

[spiralstaircase]

Trying to fix my card above, you could do something like:

Usurer
Action - Attack - $4
+$2
Each other player reveals their hand.  If they reveal more treasure cards than they have debt tokens, they take ⟨1⟩.

[eHalcyon]

How would a debt attack work?  Maybe something like this:

Action - $5
Until your next turn, when anyone buys a card, they take 1 debt.  Now and at the beginning of your next turn, +1 Buy.
-------
While this is in play, cards cost $1 and 1 debt less, but not less than zero.

It could be the long-awaited cost increasing card.

Tollgate
$4 - Action-Attack-Duration
At the start of your next turn:
+$3
+1 Buy
While this is in play, cards in the Supply cost <1> more.

The two main problem with cost increasers is that they can lock people out of the game (can't even buy Copper!) and they're confusing with cost reducers.  Using debt solves both of those problems.

[trivialknot]

I feel like bidding with VP isn't great because the value of 1VP swings so wildly depending on the board.  Sometimes 1VP decides victory, sometimes the margin is in the triple digits.  I guess coin/debt value can swing too, but I think it's a much smaller range.

But the whole point of bidding is to determine the right price for something.  If we're playing a game where 1 VP is super valuable, then bids will be low.  If we're playing a game where 1 VP is nearly worthless, then bids will be high.

[eHalcyon]

I feel like bidding with VP isn't great because the value of 1VP swings so wildly depending on the board.  Sometimes 1VP decides victory, sometimes the margin is in the triple digits.  I guess coin/debt value can swing too, but I think it's a much smaller range.

But the whole point of bidding is to determine the right price for something.  If we're playing a game where 1 VP is super valuable, then bids will be low.  If we're playing a game where 1 VP is nearly worthless, then bids will be high.

I'm thinking of the physical limitations.  You still need a way to track that, and there probably aren't enough VP tokens to account for the highs.

[Elestan]

Trying to fix my card above, you could do something like:

Usurer
Action - Attack - $4
+$2
Each other player reveals their hand.  If they reveal more treasure cards than they have debt tokens, they take ⟨1⟩.

Not all treasure cards give coin.  Crown, for example.  Even if they have treasures, they might be at risk from trashing attacks.

[drsteelhammer]

Usurer
Action - Attack - $4
+$2
Each other player takes  ⟨1⟩

Except for the edge cases of Storyteller and Coppersmith, isn't this strictly better than Cutpurse, since it never misses and takes away the same amount of $?

No it's way worse than Cutpurse since it doesn't reduce handsize, the only thing Cutpurse is good for after the first reshuffle

[eHalcyon]

Usurer
Action - Attack - $4
+$2
Each other player takes  ⟨1⟩

Except for the edge cases of Storyteller and Coppersmith, isn't this strictly better than Cutpurse, since it never misses and takes away the same amount of $?

No it's way worse than Cutpurse since it doesn't reduce handsize, the only thing Cutpurse is good for after the first reshuffle

Cutpurse can still hit Copper after the first reshuffle...?

Having a smaller handsize doesn't usually hurt outside of whatever it was in your hand that was lost.  Sometimes it matters (e.g. Cellar) but mostly it's about what you had to throw away.  It's rarely a problem to discard two Estates to Militia.  Cutpurse mainly hurts because you lose $1 when it hits, which is what that version of Usurer is doing.

[Mic Qsenoch]

Cutpurse can still hit Copper after the first reshuffle...?

Having a smaller handsize doesn't usually hurt outside of whatever it was in your hand that was lost.  Sometimes it matters (e.g. Cellar) but mostly it's about what you had to throw away.  It's rarely a problem to discard two Estates to Militia.  Cutpurse mainly hurts because you lose $1 when it hits, which is what that version of Usurer is doing.

I can't say I agree with what drsteelhamm3r said about Cutpurse, but usually losing cards from your hand, even crappy ones, is a lot worse than you're suggesting. You can't use them for the  Cellar-types and you can't trash them as easily. You can't Ambassador them or pass them with Masq. If you reshuffle during your turn then they're in your deck, which is bad if they're junk and can also further disrupt certain drawing cards (Herald, SP, etc.). It means you need more draw before you have the whole deck in hand to do gain and play.

There are some kingdom cards where having the junk cards in the discard is a boon, but overall the balance is strongly with having them in hand. And it can really matter for how good your turns are and how quickly you get your deck in order.

[eHalcyon]

Cutpurse can still hit Copper after the first reshuffle...?

Having a smaller handsize doesn't usually hurt outside of whatever it was in your hand that was lost.  Sometimes it matters (e.g. Cellar) but mostly it's about what you had to throw away.  It's rarely a problem to discard two Estates to Militia.  Cutpurse mainly hurts because you lose $1 when it hits, which is what that version of Usurer is doing.

I can't say I agree with what drsteelhamm3r said about Cutpurse, but usually losing cards from your hand, even crappy ones, is a lot worse than you're suggesting. You can't use them for the  Cellar-types and you can't trash them as easily. You can't Ambassador them or pass them with Masq. If you reshuffle during your turn then they're in your deck, which is bad if they're junk and can also further disrupt certain drawing cards (Herald, SP, etc.). It means you need more draw before you have the whole deck in hand to do gain and play.

There are some kingdom cards where having the junk cards in the discard is a boon, but overall the balance is strongly with having them in hand. And it can really matter for how good your turns are and how quickly you get your deck in order.

Fair enough.

[pst]

What will the $14 event do?

"The game ends now".

So when this is in play even a small lead is a threat of immediate win.

Not correct, so this was obviously a fan card all along. I think now it should yield you some negative VP before ending the game, so that not a very minor lead is enough. Then I think it could work, but I haven't tested.

[drsteelhammer]

So far, I find the split piles mechanic the most interesting. Since our statisticians predict more split piles than we have already seen, what could those be?

So far, we had a terminal money card that has a way to get to the bottom card which is a lot more money, so basically a combination of ecnomoy/payload with a little synergy. Then we have a village where you have to dig through a less desirable pile of cards, but they become pretty good after getting some of the villages aswell. Lastly, we had an attack that needs support, and the support comes with it! I'm pretty sure Catapult will become one of my favourite cards.

So, what other synergistic concepts are possible with this?

I expect that there will be a split pile with a draw card the bottom since there hasn't been any yet. My idea would be a terminal draw card at the bottom with some cheap cantrip on top for $2-3, which you may play from your hand after the terminal draw card (basically giving you the +action back you needed to play the draw card).

Getting a bit crazier: Maybe there is also an alt-vp card under a bunch of action cards? It would be a bit weird with the pile size, although you could play with 6action cards on top and four alt vp cards on the bottom and adding two alt vp cards in multiplayer. (4->6 seems in line with 8->12)
That said, it hasn't been mentioned that the split is 5-5 all the time, right? So it might happen. There could also be some other crazy splits like 4-4-4 or 4-4-2, which I would love to see aswell.

[Seprix]

Having to spend 1 Debt to be able to buy a card isn't as scary as a stacking debt. I know it's basically just a silly variant of the -1 Card token with the version I'd like, but I wouldn't want to have people stacked with debt. I could see an attack giving up to 3 debt maximum per turn though, and that would be okay. It wouldn't even work if someone was 3+ in debt already.

[trivialknot]

Oh no, the rule book might appear at any moment and I haven't made enough speculations!

I think there will be a split pile where the top card can trash things from the supply, and the bottom card has an on-trash bonus.  For example:

$2 Action
+2 cards
Trash a kingdom card from the supply.

$4 Action-Victory
Trash a card from your hand.
2 VP
When you trash this, +2 VP.

[Seprix]

...

Not a bad idea. There is another card that can trash from the supply, so it is possible for sure. There is already Gladiator, that allows you to get to Fortune quicker if you get a card your opponent does not have.

[LostPhoenix]

Some names I think may show up: Amphitheater, Aqueduct, Bailey, Arch, Forum, Realm.

Aqueduct, Forum, Triumphal Arch. Close enough.

[Seprix]

I actually expected an Emperor card.

[eHalcyon]

How would a debt attack work?  Maybe something like this:

Action - $5
Until your next turn, when anyone buys a card, they take 1 debt.  Now and at the beginning of your next turn, +1 Buy.
-------
While this is in play, cards cost $1 and 1 debt less, but not less than zero.

It could be the long-awaited cost increasing card.

Tollgate
$4 - Action-Attack-Duration
At the start of your next turn:
+$3
+1 Buy
While this is in play, cards in the Supply cost <1> more.

The two main problem with cost increasers is that they can lock people out of the game (can't even buy Copper!) and they're confusing with cost reducers.  Using debt solves both of those problems.

I think this can count as a prediction of Tax.

[pacovf]

I actually expected an Emperor card.

You can play Overlord as Crown. Then start spreading the Civil Code all over Europe.