ALLIES CONTEST RESULTS
Right, so we have only 8 entries. This might not seem much, but re-reading through this thread, this contest still manage to muster more activity than some others (the Cornucopia contest only had 6 entries, for instance). Still, this does show that these set contests are definitely less popular than the Weekly Design Contest, but again, what is, y’know.
Land Squatters (Ally)
When you gain a Victory card, if it has no other types, put it onto your deck, unless you spend a Favor. Otherwise, gain a Copper unless you spend a Favor.
Well, I’m quite glad we have this entry, otherwise there would have been no Allies submitted!
I’ll be honest, I think this Event is pretty difficult to parse. You’ve got a clause paired with an “unless”, and then immediately after, you’ve got something that will happen if you do the prior “unless”, that effect itself tied with another “unless”! A reversal onto a reversal.
I appreciate that it tries to follow in the footsteps of Gang of Pickpockets, as in, we’ve got an Ally that uses Favors to defuse a bad situation. However, here, forgetting alt-Action Victory cards (like the Nobles you mentioned), this Ally will probably remain dormant for a good chunk of the game. As such, I don’t think stacking up Favors through the paired Liaison card seem interesting and important enough for you to waste your time on them until then. Gang of Pickpockets at least has an ongoing turn-to-turn effect, one that can be actively mitigated via Favors over the course of the game.
Gardener (Action – Liaison)
Gain a card to your hand costing up to 
. If it cost 
or less, +1 Favor.
This is very Sculptor-like. Here the token given by having a Silver to hand will be +1 Favor instead of +1 Villager. As such, one might argue that this appears weaker than the aforementioned Sculptor. The only thing Gardener has over it is that it is not limited to Treasures and so I think getting the token is arguably easier to do; but man, what a poor use of your expensive Workshop then, I’d say. All in all, gaining a
to hand is nice, but it is of my opinion that this doesn’t offer enough to elevate it over Sculptor.
Mageling (Action – Mage – Liaison)
+2 Cards
You may discard a Mage for +1 Favor. You may rotate the Mages.
Hydromancer (Action – Attack – Mage)
+3 Cards
Discard a card. Each other player with 4 or more cards in hand discards a copy of it (or reveals they can’t).
Librarian (Action – Duration – Mage)
Choose one: +3 Cards; or +3 Actions, and at the start of your next turn, put this into your hand, then discard a card.
School of Magic (Treasure – Victory – Mage)
+3 Cards
-----
2
Interesting theme! Flavor wise, this can be seen as the Wizards’ cousins!
And speaking of Wizards, Mageling starts the pile off like Student does, in the sense that it is a Favor dispatcher. It seems fine for what is, no real complains about the card itself, but I think it being the top card of the Mage pile is just a smidge problematic. Early on, Mageling seems like an overpriced Moat draw card. As such, I’m really afraid people won’t dig into the pile. We see that happen with Tent and the Forts it completely blocks.
Hydromancer is a fine discarding Attack. It really does make Cutpurse sad doesn’t it?
Librarian, I speak from experience, is, I believe, quite strong. The concept is interesting for sure, I tried playtesting a similar card before. It was simply a +3 Cards now and a “you may discard an Action card on your next turn to put it into your hand”. Librarian seems a bit stronger than that, probably. But, on Librarian’s defense, it is slotted into a rotating split pile, making it more difficult to obtain in exchange. There are also only 4 copies of that powerful card, nerfing it somewhat. Otherwise, well, try to get all 4 of these, if possible, that’s my recommendation. It’s cool to play 4 of these each turn, no questions asked, having an almost guaranteed mindless well-working engine.
School of Magic looks at Harem and laughs. There’s been some discussion about this card in this thread. Yes, a Treasure Smithy is strong, it’s undeniable. It ties into mindless Treasure spam and man if you draw dead Action cards, who cares. You could draw another School of Magic and bow-chicka-wow-wow. Once again, thank God it is in a rotating split pile. I’d argue that this makes this overpowered effect ok, the mitigation is there. Maybe it should yield one less
or something, just to not make Harem look like a complete failure of a card (well, more than it already is, lol).
Generousity (Treasure – Liaison)
+1 Buy
You may return this to the Supply. If you don’t, each other player gets +1 Favor.
Stockpile alert! But you know, at least it’s more accurately priced this time around, ha. So uh, this is hard to evaluate, given that it heavily depends on the Ally. Still, my initial skepticism pushes me toward believing that this is too good of a money-centric strategy enabler. I think there might be a point where the drawback of giving other player Favors simply won’t matter if you find a good draw card to pair Generousity with. Even if the passive (sometimes) nature of the Allies is always an helpful tool, it does not matter much if you build a massive early
lead. Like, imagine if the Ally is Order of Bankers or something. Spamming Generousity really seem like it won’t matter much for your opponents in the end.
Still, tough to say. I’d benchmark it by doing a silly draw + Generousity deck and see how quick it goes to 4 Provinces. We have simulators for that, right?
Salesman (Action – Liaison)
+1 Action
+1 Buy
+1 Favor
+
This turn, cards cost less.
-----
Setup: Each player gets +1 Favor.
Well this seems crazy strong. Essentially, a non-terminal bridge that sacrifices a
for a Favor. Yes please. It tackles a problem that Bridge has, needing Village support. Here, your Villages can be entirely dedicated to your draw. Of course, it does cost
more and so oftentimes you’ll wait a little longer to incorporate Salesman into your engine, but it’s ok because you can build up something good until then (adding trashing, draw, etc.). Once you do get a Salesman in a ready deck, it seems pretty snowball-y from there onward.
About the setup clause, I think we oughta be careful. I think it is mostly ok, but I do fear the
/
open with Architect’s Guild, for instance. But you know, Importer does it, and so too can this. I think it’s alright in the end.
Pearl (Treasure – Gem)
Trash a card from your hand. +1 Buy for each it cost. You may rotate the Gems.
Ruby (Treasure – Gem)
You may trash a Treasure from your hand. You may gain to your hand a Treasure costing up to more than it.
Magic Crystal (Treasure – Gem)
-----
When you gain this, each other player gains a Curse.
Diamond (Treasure – Gem)
Very cute rotating split pile. I remember play-testing a rotating split pile of Treasure – Duration cards for Allies. It was too strong, ultimately (especially the top card), but I quite liked the ideas that were sprinkled in it. The Gems, in a way, revisit that idea to me. So that’s very neat!
Pearl is essentially Goat, and so it’ll be bought, I’m sure of it. Goat really does seem like a
cost card if it was a Supply card. The +Buy thingy, man I don’t know. It’s pretty wacky, but I don’t think, at least early on, it’s the main selling point of Pearl. Nifty, but a buttload of +Buys can also be problematic. I’ve seen it happen before.
Ruby is a Treasure Remodeler. Now, usually, this’d be bad, considering Treasures are separated by steps of
. However, I ain’t a fool and I see the obvious Gem synergy here. It is very Acolyte-esque in nature, allowing you to kill a Silver for a Ruby or a Pearl for a Magic Crystal. It seems pretty tough to use efficiently, but hey, at least you can always nuke a Copper, why not. Maybe Pearl steps on this card’s toes a little, in a way.
Yep, Magic Crystal is indeed the fixed Ill-Gotten Gains we want. It being in a rotating split pile makes it even more perfect. You nailed it there.
Diamond? Yes. Yes yes yes. Again, this perfectly utilises the concept of rotating split piles. I would not see a
Treasure elsewhere (not even behind a
cost or whatever). Funnily enough, I did sketch a rotating split pile some time ago and the last card was also a Treasure yielding
, so why would I not like the idea here?
New Year’s Service (Action – Reaction – Holiday)
+3 Cards
Discard 3 cards. You may rotate the Holidays. If the next card you play is a Spring Dance, +1 Action.
-----
When you trash this during your turns, you may play it.
Spring Dance (Action – Victory – Liaison – Holiday)
+1 Action
+2 Favors
You may play a Summer Fair from your hand.
-----
Worth 1 per 3 Favors you have (round down).
Summer Fair (Treasure – Holiday)
+1 Buy
This turn, cards you have copies of in play cost less. Play up to 2 Treasures from your hand. If at least one is a Harvest Festival, +.
Harvest Festival (Treasure – Duration – Holiday)
Choose one: You may trash a non-Duration card you have in play or in your hand for + and if it’s your Buy phase, return to your Action phase; or at the start of your next turn, +3 Cards.
Hehe, you made a rotating split pile where each card matches the colour of the season from which the holiday is part of. That’s thematically really swell!
New Year’s Service seems like a hodgepodge of effects, though this is not necessarily a bad thing. I’d move the “you may rotate the Holidays” at the bottom of the card, just before the dividing line. It’s easier to remember, I think, over it being sandwiched between two effects. But I digress, this isn’t much of a problem. I think the more blatant problem is that this isn’t really a Reaction card. “When you trash this” effects are not considered Reactions, because they need not to be triggered from somewhere hidden from other players. Even if New Year’s Service has a “you may” with the on-trash clause, I think it still doesn’t justify a Reaction label. See Haunted Mirror.
We have another one of Courtier’s friends in a rotating split pile through Spring Dance
. I think getting 2 Favors non-terminally for
is a little too easy. You don’t need to put in the extra work like you have to with cards such a Guildmaster. Even if Spring Dance is a card in a rotating split pile, I think it still doesn’t quite numb the strength of it quite enough, especially since New Year’s Service is a cheap decent Warehouse-esque sifter that’ll probably be bought early on.
With Summer Fair, the effect is really interesting and it makes sense to have this card as a Treasure card. It’s like a weaker Quarry, but with a +1 Buy to compensate (something Quarry would absolutely kill to have). The second effect is odd, given that you throw most of your Treasures from your hand onto your play area during your Buy phase. This effect mostly only exist to do the Harvest Festival bonus thingy (yes it buffs Storyteller and such as well). Maybe it would have been better to streamline the card by simply saying “You may play a Harvest Festival from your hand for +
”. Just an idea.
Harvest Festival is a strong finisher for the Holidays. Both effects have some worth, and it being a Treasure should help you activate either of them without much afterthoughts. Suffice to say, acquiring one or multiple Harvest Festivals seems like a good thing to do if they are left on top.
Loyalist (Action – Duration – Liaison)
+1 Favor
At the start of your next turn, +1 Action and put this into your hand.
I think the version you posted missed the “next” word, so I added it. I assume that was the intent of the card.
This card is very straightforward. It’s a Liaison card that plays into the recursive nature of Allies. Good job for mixing both ideas! I quite like this card. It might be hard to justify a
on it given that a player that draws deck can utilize the cheaper Underling. Still, I think there are some cool uses out of Loyalist, especially with a nice fitting Ally like the Circle of Witches or League of Shopkeepers you mentioned. It will also permanently change your start-of-turn hand from 4 to 6 with Gang of Pickpockets, lol. It’s also a good way to slowly inch your way toward more Island Folks turns, a damn good goal to strive for. All in all, interesting gameplay with the Allies, thumbs up from me!
Semifinialist: The Mages rotating split pile.
Finalist: Loyalist.
Winner: The Gems rotating split pile.
Well, sorry for the usual delay, but here are the results! Commodore Chuckles takes the win, I really did enjoy the design behind the Gems. I understand that Allies might not bet the most straightforward expansion to design cards for, but all in all, you guys did some outstanding work as always.
Now, what shall we do? Should we got back to fan mechanism weekly contests and wait for the eventual Fall expansion? Or do we want to try some kind of second edition contests? I think I have a preference toward the former idea, but I’m not so sure.
Whatever the choice ends up being, I definitely think Commodore Chuckles should host the Fall expansion contest, whenever it is that we will do that.
