Print

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

[Awaclus]

Here are the different effects you can get out of Bard:

1. +$2, you may discard a Treasure to gain a card costing up to $4.
You get to choose between an Ironworks-ish effect and a terminal Silver. That's super versatile and fairly strong.

2. +$3, +1 action
That's super good at hitting $5.

3. +$2, you may trash a card from your hand
That's Salvager. Salvager is a very powerful card.

4. +$3, +1 buy
That's strictly better than Horse Traders without the reaction part, which is already a decent card.

5. +$2, you may topdeck a card from your discard pile
That's strictly worse than Scavenger. Probably the worst Boon you can get, it sort of sucks if you get it without anything good in your discard pile, but even then it's no worse than having a Swindler hit an Estate or having a Militia hit two.

6. +$2, gain a Silver
That's Explorer. Considering that you only paid $4 for the card, that's very good tempo in the early game. You probably don't want it in the late game though.

7. +$2, +1 card at the end of your turn
That's great at hitting $5 and in general.

8. +$2, +1 card
That's a bit more awkward than the above, but still pretty good.

9. +$2, you may discard 3 cards to gain a Gold
If you actually want the Gold, that's super strong. If you don't, well, it's not.

10. +$2, Cartographer effect
That's a lot better than Navigator, which doesn't say much necessarily, but the difference is really big.

11. +$2, gain a Wisp
Gaining a Wisp in addition to the terminal Silver is pretty good for most decks.

12. +$2, Dungeon effect
Again, that's super good at hitting $5.


Half of these make it super likely that you hit $5 on turn 3 and/or turn 4, either allowing you to open Bard/Silver and have realistic hopes of hitting $5 twice, or Bard/trashing while still having a decent chance of hitting $5 at all. The other ones are still on-par with most other cards for hitting $5, and they give you stuff like trashing, free Wisps, and sometimes something of very low utility in addition. All in all, it doesn't do anything amazing, but it is more than sufficiently strong at what it does, which is early game economy.

[faust]

Good points. That it's so good in the opening is probably the reason it doesn't cost $3.

[JThorne]

Agreed.

Opening with some way to get $2 with a single card in order to hit $5 after the first shuffle is so critical most of the time that it's usually the right call to open Silver (even in a kingdom that absolutely hates treasure) if the only other option are actions that only generate $1. Much of the time I'll trash that Silver at my first opportunity; the rest of the time it sits there like an ugly yellow lump mocking my weakness.

If there are power-5s, there's probably a decent engine, and probably ample terminal space to afford Bard as a piece of the payload.

And on balance, there are far more effects in the game that somehow combine with actions compared with effects that combine with treasure. How many events, landmarks, gainers or simply other action cards are there that do something with an action card, but would look at a Silver and shrug?

So far, Nocturne cards are surprising me with their speed after playing a few games on-line. In turns, that is. The amount of time it takes to figure out what to do, on the other hand...

[Jack Rudd]

I'm surprised your #2 didn't just read "that's a Gold".

[markusin]

I'm surprised your #2 didn't just read "that's a Gold".

He didn't say it wasn't. Also relevant, you might even hit $6 with that, especially if you also opened Silver with Bard. Nice to get an early Altar or Artisan.

[Seprix]

Let's kill this hype train right now. Bard is weak. The fact that you don't get to choose the Boons is killer to Bard. It's fun to imagine hypothetical scenarios but the lack of control is a huge weakness. It's fine in the first shuffle but afterwards it gets horribly weak and usually there's something better to do (spoilers: The heavier the set leans towards Nocturne, the more this is not the case).

[Awaclus]

Let's kill this hype train right now. Bard is weak. The fact that you don't get to choose the Boons is killer to Bard. It's fun to imagine hypothetical scenarios but the lack of control is a huge weakness. It's fine in the first shuffle but afterwards it gets horribly weak and usually there's something better to do (spoilers: The heavier the set leans towards Nocturne, the more this is not the case).

That's what early economy is. And no, it's not weak, it serves its purpose.

[trivialknot]

Let's kill this hype train right now. Bard is weak. The fact that you don't get to choose the Boons is killer to Bard. It's fun to imagine hypothetical scenarios but the lack of control is a huge weakness. It's fine in the first shuffle but afterwards it gets horribly weak and usually there's something better to do (spoilers: The heavier the set leans towards Nocturne, the more this is not the case).

I think Bard might be stronger in the context of Nocturne because Night cards don't take up terminal space, and sometimes you need those actions for Imp or Conclave.

[Kirian]

Also, +1 to attack and damage for the entire party, and that's at level 1.

[Limetime]

Bard is far from strong but it is really good at hitting 5. I hope you know how good hitting 5 is. I even buy silver sometimes to hit 5.

[Chris is me]

I think “not weak” is a reasonable statement. It’s nothing to write home about, and unreliable, but I guess if you both can spare the terminal space and really need to hit $5, it’s handy.

But like, it’s just weird to see this sort of arbitrary and one sided hype from Awaclus. I think you legitimately just sought out the blandest looking card in the set to make a hot take about and piss people off.

[Awaclus]

I think “not weak” is a reasonable statement. It’s nothing to write home about, and unreliable, but I guess if you both can spare the terminal space and really need to hit $5, it’s handy.

But like, it’s just weird to see this sort of arbitrary and one sided hype from Awaclus. I think you legitimately just sought out the blandest looking card in the set to make a hot take about and piss people off.

No, I legitimately wrote this a few minutes after I was done reading a post by JW where he said Bard was weak, which reminded me of the fact that Seprix and someone else also said that Bard was weak, so I had to fix that misconception.

[Cave-o-sapien]

The fact that you don't get to choose the Boons is killer to Bard.

If its effect was reliably good and predictable, it would probably cost more.

[theblankman]

Playing with boons in general during the preview week made me think of Tribute, a card whose effect is much harder to predict than most other actions (I had a similar reaction to hexes).  I found myself going for actions that gave boons only if the other actions were weak, or if a few of the boons were effects I really wanted that weren't available elsewhere in the kingdom.  That's similar to how I used to play Tribute before it was removed: only in specific situations or if there was just nothing better available.  Bard looks definitely better than Tribute based on price alone, so with that point of comparison, I think I'd call it situational rather than outright weak.

[DG]

The apparent problem with the bard is that he seems aimless. The bard does stuff, but is he doing stuff that will create your game winning deck?

[Awaclus]

The apparent problem with the bard is that he seems aimless. The bard does stuff, but is he doing stuff that will create your game winning deck?

No, but he might ramp you up to the stuff that will create your game winning deck one shuffle faster than something else.

[Dingan]

The fact that you don't get to choose which of the effects is a big deal. Imagine how much weaker Steward would be if instead of saying "Choose one:..." it said "Do one of these three things, chosen at random:...". Bard is like that but with (up to) 12 things instead of 3.

[Awaclus]

The fact that you don't get to choose which of the effects is a big deal. Image how much weaker Steward would be if instead of saying "Choose one:..." it said "Do one of these three things, chosen at random:...". Bard is like that but with (up to) 12 things instead of 3.

Bard is not like that at all. You get the most important effect, which is +$2, every time, and almost all of the Boons are strictly beneficial in almost any situation.

[Cuzz]

This all makes sense for Bard, but then it seems kinda funny that it costs $4 while Tracker can cost $2.

I mostly just don't get why we have both Tracker and Bard in the set. Have there ever been two cards with such similar effect in the same expansion?

[Donald X.]

This all makes sense for Bard, but then it seems kinda funny that it costs $4 while Tracker can cost $2.

I mostly just don't get why we have both Tracker and Bard in the set. Have there ever been two cards with such similar effect in the same expansion?

Are you saying that the ability to put cards on your deck is really similar to nothing?

[Cuzz]

This all makes sense for Bard, but then it seems kinda funny that it costs $4 while Tracker can cost $2.

I mostly just don't get why we have both Tracker and Bard in the set. Have there ever been two cards with such similar effect in the same expansion?

Are you saying that the ability to put cards on your deck is really similar to nothing?

I don't think I am, but maybe I should have said "on-play effect"

[Seprix]

Let's kill this hype train right now. Bard is weak. The fact that you don't get to choose the Boons is killer to Bard. It's fun to imagine hypothetical scenarios but the lack of control is a huge weakness. It's fine in the first shuffle but afterwards it gets horribly weak and usually there's something better to do (spoilers: The heavier the set leans towards Nocturne, the more this is not the case).

I think Bard might be stronger in the context of Nocturne because Night cards don't take up terminal space, and sometimes you need those actions for Imp or Conclave.

I probably wrote it in a really confusing way, but I did say exactly this. Bard gets better the less of an engine there is, and man that's Nocturne more often than any other set.

[Witherweaver]

The apparent problem with the bard is that he seems aimless. The bard does stuff, but is he doing stuff that will create your game winning deck?

Spoony Bard!

[JW]

I probably wrote it in a really confusing way, but I did say exactly this. Bard gets better the less of an engine there is, and man that's Nocturne more often than any other set.

Heavy Nocturne games will probably see fewer engines than we're used because it has too few sources of +Actions, in part because Cursed Village has bad synergy with the Night cards and because Conclave leads to limited terminal space. Bard could have been that extra source of +Actions. I've got a suggestion about how it could be changed in that direction in a thread in the Variants forum. (edit: updated link)

My complaints about Bard (and the need for more +Actions) aside, Nocturne still seems like a great addition to full-random Dominion, because it adds a lot of interesting cards.

[Accatitippi]

This all makes sense for Bard, but then it seems kinda funny that it costs $4 while Tracker can cost $2.

I mostly just don't get why we have both Tracker and Bard in the set. Have there ever been two cards with such similar effect in the same expansion?

It's actually pretty common for cards in the same set to come in different variants scaled by cost.
In rough order from most similar to least similar:
Moat & Smithy (& Council Room) (& Adventurer)
Festival & Woodcutter
Candlestick Maker & Baker
Scrying Pool & Alchemist (& Golem)
Royal Seal & Watchtower
Lighthouse & Fishing Village
Saboteur & Swindler
Diplomat & Shanty Town
Rogue & Dame Sylvia
Wandering Minstrel & Fortress & Bandit Camp (apparently the only three vanilla villages to meet in a set?)

Some of these are a big stretch, I know. Yet, I trust Donald and the guys to have blocked any cards that were too similar.

[Dingan]

The fact that you don't get to choose which of the effects is a big deal. Image how much weaker Steward would be if instead of saying "Choose one:..." it said "Do one of these three things, chosen at random:...". Bard is like that but with (up to) 12 things instead of 3.

Bard is not like that at all. You get the most important effect, which is +$2, every time, and almost all of the Boons are strictly beneficial in almost any situation.

Maybe Governor is a better analogy. "+1 Action. Choose one: ..." >> "+1 Action. Do one of these three things, chosen at random:..." Idk, maybe I'm a bit jaded cus I just played a Scrying Pool game where I got 2 Bards specifically for their +Buy and no othe reason, and well lets just say that did not work out in my favor.

Bard also feels a bit like Black Market to me. In some cases it's just a terminal Silver but in other cases it's terminal Silver plus jackpot.

EDIT: All I'm really saying is that the randomness of the bonus is just that - random. It may or may not benefit you. And as such be careful when you are putting yourself in a position where you are relying on the bonus. (Which can be said about any Fate card.)

[Witherweaver]

The fact that you don't get to choose which of the effects is a big deal. Image how much weaker Steward would be if instead of saying "Choose one:..." it said "Do one of these three things, chosen at random:...". Bard is like that but with (up to) 12 things instead of 3.

Bard is not like that at all. You get the most important effect, which is +$2, every time, and almost all of the Boons are strictly beneficial in almost any situation.

Maybe Governor is a better analogy. "+1 Action. Choose one: ..." >> "+1 Action. Do one of these three things, chosen at random:..." Idk, maybe I'm a bit jaded cus I just played a Scrying Pool game where I got 2 Bards specifically for their +Buy and no othe reason, and well lets just say that did not work out in my favor.

Bard also feels a bit like Black Market to me. In some cases it's just a terminal Silver but in other cases it's terminal Silver plus jackpot.

Some times you just don't know how a song is going to inspire you.

[Kirian]

Wandering Minstrel & Fortress & Bandit Camp (apparently the only three vanilla villages to meet in a set?)

I think you meant to say "vanillages."

[Donald X.]

This all makes sense for Bard, but then it seems kinda funny that it costs $4 while Tracker can cost $2.

I mostly just don't get why we have both Tracker and Bard in the set. Have there ever been two cards with such similar effect in the same expansion?

Are you saying that the ability to put cards on your deck is really similar to nothing?

I don't think I am, but maybe I should have said "on-play effect"

I don't understand why you wouldn't consider the whole card. Adventures has identical on-play effects for Duplicate and Distant Lands, Royal Carriage and Transmogrify, Ratcatcher and Guide.

[Reykjavik]

You don't get to pick though. That is a huge downside. It makes it tough to build and execute a plan. It might be worth picking up, but not over something more reliably good.

[Awaclus]

You don't get to pick though. That is a huge downside. It makes it tough to build and execute a plan. It might be worth picking up, but not over something more reliably good.

It doesn't make it tough to build and execute a plan. This is how you do it:

1. identify a key $5 you have to buy on turn 3 or 4
2. buy Bard
3. Bard lets you buy that key $5 on turn 3 or 4

[gloures]

You don't get to pick though. That is a huge downside. It makes it tough to build and execute a plan. It might be worth picking up, but not over something more reliably good.

It doesn't make it tough to build and execute a plan. This is how you do it:

1. identify a key $5 you have to buy on turn 3 or 4
2. buy Bard
3. Bard lets you buy that key $5 on turn 3 or 4

4. Have Bard collide with your terminal 5 cost card you just bought in the next shuffle


I mean, sure, Bard can be good at getting 5 in turns 3/4, so it sometimes can be a good opening, a bit like Horse Traders (though HT is definitely better at reaching 5), which is a decent opener, but Horse Traders gives +buy which can be super important later. One thing to also note is that Silver is also actually a pretty good card at getting 5 and you will always have that.

But, yeah, if you have spare actions and/or want action payload Bard can be a good card, but that's pretty much the same situation where you would get Fortune Teller, Navigator, Harvest and a few other power cards... (granted Bard is probably better than those, or at least in the same level as Navigator)

[Awaclus]

You don't get to pick though. That is a huge downside. It makes it tough to build and execute a plan. It might be worth picking up, but not over something more reliably good.

It doesn't make it tough to build and execute a plan. This is how you do it:

1. identify a key $5 you have to buy on turn 3 or 4
2. buy Bard
3. Bard lets you buy that key $5 on turn 3 or 4

4. Have Bard collide with your terminal 5 cost card you just bought in the next shuffle


I mean, sure, Bard can be good at getting 5 in turns 3/4, so it sometimes can be a good opening, a bit like Horse Traders (though HT is definitely better at reaching 5), which is a decent opener, but Horse Traders gives +buy which can be super important later. One thing to also note is that Silver is also actually a pretty good card at getting 5 and you will always have that.

But, yeah, if you have spare actions and/or want action payload Bard can be a good card, but that's pretty much the same situation where you would get Fortune Teller, Navigator, Harvest and a few other power cards... (granted Bard is probably better than those, or at least in the same level as Navigator)

It's way better than Navigator. It's more comparable to Scavenger's power level.

[Titandrake]

You don't get to pick though. That is a huge downside. It makes it tough to build and execute a plan. It might be worth picking up, but not over something more reliably good.

It doesn't make it tough to build and execute a plan. This is how you do it:

1. identify a key $5 you have to buy on turn 3 or 4
2. buy Bard
3. Bard lets you buy that key $5 on turn 3 or 4

4. Have Bard collide with your terminal 5 cost card you just bought in the next shuffle


I mean, sure, Bard can be good at getting 5 in turns 3/4, so it sometimes can be a good opening, a bit like Horse Traders (though HT is definitely better at reaching 5), which is a decent opener, but Horse Traders gives +buy which can be super important later. One thing to also note is that Silver is also actually a pretty good card at getting 5 and you will always have that.

But, yeah, if you have spare actions and/or want action payload Bard can be a good card, but that's pretty much the same situation where you would get Fortune Teller, Navigator, Harvest and a few other power cards... (granted Bard is probably better than those, or at least in the same level as Navigator)

It's way better than Navigator. It's more comparable to Scavenger's power level.

Eh.....not sure I agree. Scavenger's midgame of trashing mostly Copper isn't great, but its late game of trashing Province to help buy more Provinces is pretty good.

You have argued that Bard is not weak because it's good at hitting $5 and giving money early. Sure, I agree. But Silver isn't that much worse than Bard at helping you hit $5, and it's non-terminal. (I'd like to see the math if you disagree.) Is opening Bard worth not opening the other $4s, and worth having an extra terminal in your deck? I would guess that the answer is "No" at least half the time. Is buying Bard after the opening worth it? Again, I'd guess "No" at least half the time - there should be terminals you want instead by that point. At which point I'm more inclined to place it closer to Navigator in power.

[Accatitippi]

It's way better than Navigator. It's more comparable to Scavenger's power level.

Eh.....not sure I agree. Scavenger's midgame of trashing mostly Copper isn't great, but its late game of trashing Province to help buy more Provinces is pretty good.

You have argued that Bard is not weak because it's good at hitting $5 and giving money early. Sure, I agree. But Silver isn't that much worse than Bard at helping you hit $5, and it's non-terminal. (I'd like to see the math if you disagree.) Is opening Bard worth not opening the other $4s, and worth having an extra terminal in your deck? I would guess that the answer is "No" at least half the time. Is buying Bard after the opening worth it? Again, I'd guess "No" at least half the time - there should be terminals you want instead by that point. At which point I'm more inclined to place it closer to Navigator in power.

He's not talking about Salvager, he's talking about Mint.

[markusin]

You don't get to pick though. That is a huge downside. It makes it tough to build and execute a plan. It might be worth picking up, but not over something more reliably good.

It doesn't make it tough to build and execute a plan. This is how you do it:

1. identify a key $5 you have to buy on turn 3 or 4
2. buy Bard
3. Bard lets you buy that key $5 on turn 3 or 4

4. Have Bard collide with your terminal 5 cost card you just bought in the next shuffle


I mean, sure, Bard can be good at getting 5 in turns 3/4, so it sometimes can be a good opening, a bit like Horse Traders (though HT is definitely better at reaching 5), which is a decent opener, but Horse Traders gives +buy which can be super important later. One thing to also note is that Silver is also actually a pretty good card at getting 5 and you will always have that.

But, yeah, if you have spare actions and/or want action payload Bard can be a good card, but that's pretty much the same situation where you would get Fortune Teller, Navigator, Harvest and a few other power cards... (granted Bard is probably better than those, or at least in the same level as Navigator)

It's way better than Navigator. It's more comparable to Scavenger's power level.

Eh.....not sure I agree. Scavenger's midgame of trashing mostly Copper isn't great, but its late game of trashing Province to help buy more Provinces is pretty good.

You have argued that Bard is not weak because it's good at hitting $5 and giving money early. Sure, I agree. But Silver isn't that much worse than Bard at helping you hit $5, and it's non-terminal. (I'd like to see the math if you disagree.) Is opening Bard worth not opening the other $4s, and worth having an extra terminal in your deck? I would guess that the answer is "No" at least half the time. Is buying Bard after the opening worth it? Again, I'd guess "No" at least half the time - there should be terminals you want instead by that point. At which point I'm more inclined to place it closer to Navigator in power.

I'm pretty sure Bard is stronger than Navigator. Many of the boons can be good throughout the game, and I'd be much more inclined to play a couple of Bards as payload each turn than Navigator. Some boons even help you cycle in the early game, like the Dungeon one.

Similar to tracker and Bard, there is also Sacred Grove. I see why that card was made to give symmetrical. Is is very potent with that +buy.

And yeah, you are thinking of Salvager, but #3 in Awaclus's list is the Salvager comparison (with Flame's Gift).

To give some more credit to Awaclus's argument, Nocturne introduced a bunch of Night cards that cost $5 (and Raider at $6).

Maybe the appropriate comparison to make for Bard is Monument. Are the boons that Bard gives going to overcome the +VP from Monument? Maybe, maybe not. Certainly in any game with a throne variant, you'll want Monument.

[FemurLemur]

Wandering Minstrel & Fortress & Bandit Camp (apparently the only three vanilla villages to meet in a set?)

I think you meant to say "vanillages."

I thought we were supposed to call them Vanilitters?

[smuggler]

and tribute got revised in v.2, because it was too random ...

[LastFootnote]

and tribute got revised in v.2, because it was too random ...

Incorrect.

[Cave-o-sapien]

and tribute got revised in v.2, because it was too random ...

Incorrect.

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16338.0

Tribute: This isn't that good, but is better than most of these cards. It's not popular though. Hosing Nobles / Harem / Great Hall is not great. Some people feel like it's attacking them, since it can flip over good cards; I think it tends to help as much as hurt, but so what, I don't need people to feel bad over a non-attack. I'll say it for everyone: it wasn't the greatest card in the world; it was just Tribute.

Based on this, I conclude that removing Tribute was the punchline to a Tenacious D joke that was years in the making.

[William Howard Taft]

EDIT: All I'm really saying is that the randomness of the bonus is just that - random. It may or may not benefit you. And as such be careful when you are putting yourself in a position where you are relying on the bonus. (Which can be said about any Fate card.)

The big lesson I've internalized playing Nocturne is fate often pays off, which makes skipping Boons is a serious risk. I've played games where I skip Bard due to lack of reliability, only to allow my opponents to get the upper hand with early trashing, cycling, Gold, Will O' Wisps, free $4 cards, etc.

If you don't want to leave your deck up to fate then you don't have to, but random magic is going to occasionally help your opponents.

[markusin]

EDIT: All I'm really saying is that the randomness of the bonus is just that - random. It may or may not benefit you. And as such be careful when you are putting yourself in a position where you are relying on the bonus. (Which can be said about any Fate card.)

The big lesson I've internalized playing Nocturne is fate often pays off, which makes skipping Boons is a serious risk. I've played games where I skip Bard due to lack of reliability, only to allow my opponents to get the upper hand with early trashing, cycling, Gold, Will O' Wisps, free $4 cards, etc.

If you don't want to leave your deck up to fate then you don't have to, but random magic is going to occasionally help your opponents.

Sounds like Bard is the real Jack-of-all-trades.

[greybirdofprey]

So...

Bard is like Baron?

They both share cost, type, first three letters, let you hit $5 early, and they can be bad.

[Awaclus]

So...

Bard is like Baron?

They both share cost, type, first three letters, let you hit $5 early, and they can be bad.

Pretty much. I think Bard is better as an opener, but Baron has the +buy which is important in the late game.

[Gazbag]

Bard is kinda like a friendly Swindler, you don't know exactly what it's going to do, but it's usually better than Silver.

[William Howard Taft]

Tracker > Bard

Considering some of the Boons gain Gold, Silver, or Will-O-Wisps (basically Laboratories in the early game), Tracker's topdecking ability is way more valuable to me than $1 extra from Bard.

[Awaclus]

Tracker > Bard

Considering some of the Boons gain Gold, Silver, or Will-O-Wisps (basically Laboratories in the early game), Tracker's topdecking ability is way more valuable to me than $1 extra from Bard.

Considering some of the cards in the game cost €5, the extra €1 from Bard is way more valuable than the topdecking.

[markusin]

Tracker > Bard

Considering some of the Boons gain Gold, Silver, or Will-O-Wisps (basically Laboratories in the early game), Tracker's topdecking ability is way more valuable to me than $1 extra from Bard.

Considering some of the cards in the game cost €5, the extra €1 from Bard is way more valuable than the topdecking.

I feel like Bard is somewhat effective in money strategies, making it better for hitting Province later in the game. Tracker is more of a utility card for engines that you pick up on a spare buy.

[Awaclus]

Tracker > Bard

Considering some of the Boons gain Gold, Silver, or Will-O-Wisps (basically Laboratories in the early game), Tracker's topdecking ability is way more valuable to me than $1 extra from Bard.

Considering some of the cards in the game cost €5, the extra €1 from Bard is way more valuable than the topdecking.

I feel like Bard is somewhat effective in money strategies, making it better for hitting Province later in the game. Tracker is more of a utility card for engines that you pick up on a spare buy.

Bard/BM is probably okay, but I think its main utility is definitely that it's very good at hitting €5 after the first reshuffle. I agree with your characterization of Tracker.

[markusin]

Tracker > Bard

Considering some of the Boons gain Gold, Silver, or Will-O-Wisps (basically Laboratories in the early game), Tracker's topdecking ability is way more valuable to me than $1 extra from Bard.

Considering some of the cards in the game cost €5, the extra €1 from Bard is way more valuable than the topdecking.

I feel like Bard is somewhat effective in money strategies, making it better for hitting Province later in the game. Tracker is more of a utility card for engines that you pick up on a spare buy.

Bard/BM is probably okay, but I think its main utility is definitely that it's very good at hitting €5 after the first reshuffle. I agree with your characterization of Tracker.

The other thing to consider is that when it's not helping you hit $5 more than a terminal Silver, it is probably gaining you something. Reading your OP, five of the options are helping you hit $5-$6 (roughly a terminal Gold) more than a terminal silver would, and another four are gaining you something. The Wisp is particularly useful if you get it early enough. The remaining three include a trasher and a cartographer effect. The top deck from discard effect is the dud early on.

The problem with Bard is that it doesn't do any particular thing consistently as a terminal. There are terminals that always trash (e.g. Remake, Temple) , or always gain (e.g. Armory, Duplicate), or always sift/cycle (e.g. Smithy, Navigator). Bard is this small bag of tricks that makes me feel that it is best when your deck doesn't need to do anything particularly impressive, which is why I say Bard works nicely in money games. Those games are not as popular nowadays.

It also sucks if the $5 is terminal and keeps colliding with Bard.

[Skumpy]

Tracker > Bard

Considering some of the Boons gain Gold, Silver, or Will-O-Wisps (basically Laboratories in the early game), Tracker's topdecking ability is way more valuable to me than $1 extra from Bard.

Considering some of the cards in the game cost €5, the extra €1 from Bard is way more valuable than the topdecking.

I feel like Bard is somewhat effective in money strategies, making it better for hitting Province later in the game. Tracker is more of a utility card for engines that you pick up on a spare buy.

Bard/BM is probably okay, but I think its main utility is definitely that it's very good at hitting €5 after the first reshuffle. I agree with your characterization of Tracker.

Another card whose main utility is that it's very good at getting you $5 cards after the first reshuffle is Feast.

[Drab Emordnilap]

Bard/BM is probably okay, but I think its main utility is definitely that it's very good at hitting €5 after the first reshuffle. I agree with your characterization of Tracker.

Another card whose main utility is that it's very good at getting you $5 cards after the first reshuffle is Feast.

Another card whose main utility is that it's very good at getting you $5 cards after the first reshuffle is Silver.

[Awaclus]

Bard/BM is probably okay, but I think its main utility is definitely that it's very good at hitting €5 after the first reshuffle. I agree with your characterization of Tracker.

Another card whose main utility is that it's very good at getting you $5 cards after the first reshuffle is Feast.

Another card whose main utility is that it's very good at getting you $5 cards after the first reshuffle is Silver.

Except it isn't very good, it's the standard by which everything is judged and Feast and Bard are very good in comparison.

[Screwyioux]

One thing to bear in mind when evaluating booners and hexers is that some of the balancing comes from unpredictability.
Yes, everything you described makes up a fine $4 terminal silver, but some of Bard's general ineffectiveness comes from not being able to plan your turn or your shuffle around it.

Usually, putting a card in your deck means you have a plan for it, right? At least it should. So where does Bard actually fit into sound decision making in Dominion? When you have essentially infinite terminal space due to excessive villages or no competing terminal actions, so whenever any other terminal silver would fill the role.

[Commodore Chuckles]

One thing to bear in mind when evaluating booners and hexers is that some of the balancing comes from unpredictability.
Yes, everything you described makes up a fine $4 terminal silver, but some of Bard's general ineffectiveness comes from not being able to plan your turn or your shuffle around it.

Usually, putting a card in your deck means you have a plan for it, right? At least it should. So where does Bard actually fit into sound decision making in Dominion? When you have essentially infinite terminal space due to excessive villages or no competing terminal actions, so whenever any other terminal silver would fill the role.

Precisely. Whenever you decide to get Bard, the rationale is always "eh, sure, why not?" The things it does (trashing, +Buy) can be important, but only if you can do them a lot and reliably. Bard does neither, so it will never be a crucial card. That alone is enough to make it very weak.

[Awaclus]

Precisely. Whenever you decide to get Bard, the rationale is always "eh, sure, why not?" The things it does (trashing, +Buy) can be important, but only if you can do them a lot and reliably. Bard does neither, so it will never be a crucial card. That alone is enough to make it very weak.

No, the rationale is always "I need to ramp up to price point X by next shuffle". Which Bard does, so it's a crucial card whenever that's crucial.

[Screwyioux]

Precisely. Whenever you decide to get Bard, the rationale is always "eh, sure, why not?" The things it does (trashing, +Buy) can be important, but only if you can do them a lot and reliably. Bard does neither, so it will never be a crucial card. That alone is enough to make it very weak.

No, the rationale is always "I need to ramp up to price point X by next shuffle". Which Bard does, so it's a crucial card whenever that's crucial.

So Bard is a silver. Great, we're on the same page.

[Awaclus]

Precisely. Whenever you decide to get Bard, the rationale is always "eh, sure, why not?" The things it does (trashing, +Buy) can be important, but only if you can do them a lot and reliably. Bard does neither, so it will never be a crucial card. That alone is enough to make it very weak.

No, the rationale is always "I need to ramp up to price point X by next shuffle". Which Bard does, so it's a crucial card whenever that's crucial.

So Bard is a silver. Great, we're on the same page.

No, it's more comparable to a terminal Gold.

[faust]

Precisely. Whenever you decide to get Bard, the rationale is always "eh, sure, why not?" The things it does (trashing, +Buy) can be important, but only if you can do them a lot and reliably. Bard does neither, so it will never be a crucial card. That alone is enough to make it very weak.

No, the rationale is always "I need to ramp up to price point X by next shuffle". Which Bard does, so it's a crucial card whenever that's crucial.

So Bard is a silver. Great, we're on the same page.

Well by your reasoning Swindler is also just a Silver because man is it unreliable.

[Screwyioux]

Precisely. Whenever you decide to get Bard, the rationale is always "eh, sure, why not?" The things it does (trashing, +Buy) can be important, but only if you can do them a lot and reliably. Bard does neither, so it will never be a crucial card. That alone is enough to make it very weak.

No, the rationale is always "I need to ramp up to price point X by next shuffle". Which Bard does, so it's a crucial card whenever that's crucial.

So Bard is a silver. Great, we're on the same page.

Well by your reasoning Swindler is also just a Silver because man is it unreliable.

Swingler does the same thing the vast majority of times you see it-- gives you the opportunity to make your opponent's deck worse. How well it does that is super unreliable, but it does a thing, and you buy it to do that thing.

I do see what you're getting at though. As far as it being a terminal gold, I disagree and think a terminal gold would be much more powerful.

It has a 2/12 chance to be a terminal gold, but if it did that every time, that would mean you could say, "I could use terminal $3, I'll buy this."
You can't do that with Bard.

[Screwyioux]

Let's make this point by talking about something irrelevant-- Gloomhaven.

It's an RPG where you spend resources to upgrade your character with various stat buffs and special effects.
You want to get through shields, you buy the shield breakey thingy. You want to heal, you buy the healing thingy.

You can also spend a much more common resource, or less of whatever you're spending, etc, to get a random chance to do those things.
It's cheaper, a lot cheaper. But you it's not as good to heal or shield break at random times. It's good to do it when your opponent has a shield, or you need health.

Booners kind of have that same drawback.

Man, Gloomhaven is cool.

[Screwyioux]

The other argument for buying Bard over silver is when all of the possible boons are useful to you, useful enough to be worth a terminal action. That situation is quite rare.

[markusin]

Precisely. Whenever you decide to get Bard, the rationale is always "eh, sure, why not?" The things it does (trashing, +Buy) can be important, but only if you can do them a lot and reliably. Bard does neither, so it will never be a crucial card. That alone is enough to make it very weak.

No, the rationale is always "I need to ramp up to price point X by next shuffle". Which Bard does, so it's a crucial card whenever that's crucial.

So Bard is a silver. Great, we're on the same page.

Well by your reasoning Swindler is also just a Silver because man is it unreliable.

Swingler does the same thing the vast majority of times you see it-- gives you the opportunity to make your opponent's deck worse. How well it does that is super unreliable, but it does a thing, and you buy it to do that thing.

I do see what you're getting at though. As far as it being a terminal gold, I disagree and think a terminal gold would be much more powerful.

It has a 2/12 chance to be a terminal gold, but if it did that every time, that would mean you could say, "I could use terminal $3, I'll buy this."
You can't do that with Bard.

It's a terminal Gold more often than that because of the +1 Card boon and the draw 2 discard 2 boon that can draw Copper even on the second shuffle. When it isn't a terminal Gold, it's doing other useful things for you, as outlined in the OP.

A terminal Gold would still be good for other things, though.

[Awaclus]

It has a 2/12 chance to be a terminal gold, but if it did that every time, that would mean you could say, "I could use terminal $3, I'll buy this."
You can't do that with Bard.

You can do it with Bard. If it doesn't give you the equivalent of +$3 (which it does 50% of the time as concluded in the OP), it gives you +$2, which still helps you hit $5, plus something else that benefits you in some other way.

EDIT: As it turns out, I didn't conclude that in the OP. I must have concluded it on Discord.

[Screwyioux]

It has a 2/12 chance to be a terminal gold, but if it did that every time, that would mean you could say, "I could use terminal $3, I'll buy this."
You can't do that with Bard.

You can do it with Bard. If it doesn't give you the equivalent of +$3 (which it does 50% of the time as concluded in the OP), it gives you +$2, which still helps you hit $5, plus something else that benefits you in some other way.

EDIT: As it turns out, I didn't conclude that in the OP. I must have concluded it on Discord.

I'm definitely not arguing that the boons are nothing. They're added value to the $2. But you can't put that value on the same level as one one of the boons because of your inability to anticipate it for your build/shuffle.

Bard can do things that a good card would do, but when is buying it instead of silver actually a good idea? When any given one of those things is worth your action due to excess actions in pool or non-competition from any other terminal action you'd rather play.

Sound familiar?

[Awaclus]

Bard can do things that a good card would do, but when is buying it instead of silver actually a good idea? When any given one of those things is worth your action due to excess actions in pool or non-competition from any other terminal action you'd rather play.

It doesn't have to be any given one, it has to be most of them. And most of them are worth your action when you're buying a terminal to boost your early game economy. You don't plan your strategy around the 1 in 12 chance of revealing Moon's Gift because 11 out of 12 times it doesn't happen.

[markusin]

Bard can do things that a good card would do, but when is buying it instead of silver actually a good idea? When any given one of those things is worth your action due to excess actions in pool or non-competition from any other terminal action you'd rather play.

It doesn't have to be any given one, it has to be most of them. And most of them are worth your action when you're buying a terminal to boost your early game economy. You don't plan your strategy around the 1 in 12 chance of revealing Moon's Gift because 11 out of 12 times it doesn't happen.

I think the impact of Bard is largest in the early game. Awaclus points this out, but it really needs to be emphasized. Dominion is a game where snowballing early is possible, and Bard is often more effective than the other cards at its price point at accomplishing this. Hitting $6 with Bard, gaining a Wisp, getting two engine components with Earth's gift on gain-limited boards, or helping you find your turn 3 buy sooner with Sun's Gift or Moon's Gift all works towards this. Even the Gold gain is situationally powerful.

Later in the game, the terminal space taken up by Bard is significant, and you are a lot less happy to play Bard over other terminals that help keep your deck running.

There is also issue that not every game is a race to hit $5. In such games Bard might be too much of an opportunity cost, and the comparison to Fortune Teller and Navigator is much more apt.