| |
|
Split Pile (Top Half) | Split Pile (Bottom Half) |
Translations:
----------------------------------------
Wandering Beggar
+2 Cards
At the start of your next turn:
+X$ equal to the unspent $ the player to your right had on their last turn, aswell as +1$ per unplayed Treasure card, that player discarded during their clean-up phase.
3$ Action - Duration
----------------------------------------
Tradesman
+1 Buy
+1 $
At the beginning of your Clean-Up phase, you may spend 3$ at a time to get 2 Coffers.
3$ Action
----------------------------------------
1. There is no accountibility since the card does not require players to reveal their hands (and if it did it would probably need to be an attack).
2. There is no such thing as "unspent $ in their hand". Treasures that have not been played simply did not generate any $. I understand what you are going for, but in terms of rules this is nonsensical.
I fully agree with you here, and thus changed the need to look at their hand.
3. Even if we allowed "common sense" to override the technical issues from the previous point, it is still not well-defined - if I have a Bank and a Copper in hand, how much $ is that?
This didn't occur in the testing rounds, thanks for bringing it up, it is also fixed now.
In order to fix the card, I would suggest turning it into an Attack that punishes players if they have Treasures in their hand at the end of their buy phase.
I will not turn this into an attack, as it doesn't directly affect any players in this new version, but your fix is also flawed, as this would just allow players to play the treasure cards instead, but I did include it along with the old text, to solve both problems (as you maybe intended).
I am also not in love with the 1-to-1 conversion of unspent $ into cash for you. It already feels bad to draw all your money without enough buys, this just punishes people who are already doing badly.
The 1-to-1 conversion didn't seem to be an issue, as no player received more than 4$ per card in testing, (my cards are generally to be seen as cards from prosperity (regarding colonies) so buying a colony is always an option) and not having enough buys is your fault for which you should be punished, as having a +buy card in the game is guaranteed, because of the tradesman.
But now you can simply choose not to play a gold and the next player will only gain +1$ instead of +3$,
so gaining too much using the wandering beggar shouldn't be a problem, even in province games.