Print

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

[The Alchemist]

VP tokens, we all know 'em, we all love 'em. But as of now, VP tokens are locked in and never decrease, so the only way to lose VP is either trashing a Victory card or getting cursed. But plenty of people have attempted to make fan cards that, for example, are attacks that decrease an opponent's VP in a way that isn't tied to the size of the curse pile, or not as swingy as trashing opponent's Victory cards. However, simply having -1 VP token has its own host of issues, not least of which is the clarification of what happens when you have 0 tokens. But alas! Something wicked this way comes! Curse tokens!

   

And of course, I'm sure you can think of interesting attacks that hand out a curse token! Each of these examples give you an idea of how versatile you can treat these tokens. The first is just a negative effect that stacks on play. The second is a resource you can stockpile for a bigger and bigger benefit, but the larger your stockpile the lower you're in the negative, and you have to be careful not to end with a "surplus" of tokens. The third is a kind of debt, except for points instead of for coin; you get the benefit upfront for a big hit in points, which you can slowly payback, effectively making each play +1 VP (and more importantly, a version of +VP that isn't broken on a cantrip/stalematey).

Obviously care should be taken in to how you intend to use these tokens for not just your submission but your cards in general (if you were to hypothetically make more). Since the second and third type of usage are naturally mutually exclusive (a stockpile and a debt cancel each other out), a potential fan expansion could not have those two cards in the same set. Alternating Incantations and Conjurations summons free Provinces out of thin air! Both are presented just as examples, feel free to choose your own method. A portion of judging will include how you choose to implement the token, and how it would synergize with other cards.

Here is the raven icon I used for the symbol: https://cdn-icons-png.flaticon.com/512/92/92034.png

I can post a version that works well in the card generator later, but if you use photoshop (or similar) like me, its just a matter of resizing.


Deadline will be Tuesday, October 5th. Cards will be judged by 3 criteria of equal importance: Implementation and balance of the token itself, simplicity and clarity of wording, and most importantly theme! Halloween is just around the corner so I want your spookiest and scariest card names and art! For this contest, I will be requiring an image that fits your card name with your submission, and ideally with both fitting the effect of the card. It doesn't need to fit a curse or scary theme, it just needs to fit a theme. This is since -1 VP is such a novel concept, I don't expect the epitome of balanced cards here, and I will be taking things like costs and card strengths pretty lightly, just don't make your attacks too brutal. Have fun with this!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bUdtb7O7Wo

[GendoIkari]

Worth noting that most basic usages that come to mind aren't doing anything special vs just using the existing tokens and reversing who gets them. Want to make a weaker Witch that gives each opponent a curse token? You could just have it give you a token for the exact same result. Similarly, an effect that gives you a curse token can be done simply by giving each opponent a token.

The example cards in the post mostly avoid that issue. While Cursed Smithy does the same thing as giving each opponent a token, because it's an optional effect, the wording would be much more convoluted to make it work with tokens instead.

[The Alchemist]

Worth noting that most basic usages that come to mind aren't doing anything special vs just using the existing tokens and reversing who gets them. Want to make a weaker Witch that gives each opponent a curse token? You could just have it give you a token for the exact same result. Similarly, an effect that gives you a curse token can be done simply by giving each opponent a token.

The example cards in the post mostly avoid that issue. While Cursed Smithy does the same thing as giving each opponent a token, because it's an optional effect, the wording would be much more convoluted to make it work with tokens instead.

Yes exactly! I did in fact consider a curse token Witch and dropped it after that very same reasoning. I encourage people to think of creative uses for the token that wouldn't easily be accomplished with "Each other player gets +1 VP" or "Exile a Curse", as I have attempted to show with the examples.

[Timinou]

If you've played the Scoundrels of Skullport expansion of Lords of Waterdeep, you'll be familiar with Corruption tokens.  Players gain Corruption tokens when they do certain actions that are more powerful than normal.  At the end of the game, each Corruption token is worth a certain amount of negative VP based on the number of Corruption tokens that all players have taken.

This is partly inspired by Corruption tokens, although the amount of negative VP doesn't scale based on the number of Curse tokens (well, other than the -1VP each Curse token gives you):

EDIT: Changed this into a pure Landmark instead of a dual Event/Landmark and reduced the VP penalty from 10VP to 6VP:

EDIT: Tweaked the card to make it more relevant in Kingdoms without +Buy or gainers.

[The Alchemist]

If you've played the Scoundrels of Skullport expansion of Lords of Waterdeep, you'll be familiar with Corruption tokens.  Players gain Corruption tokens when they do certain actions that are more powerful than normal.  At the end of the game, each Corruption token is worth a certain amount of negative VP based on the number of Corruption tokens that all players have taken.

This is partly inspired by Corruption tokens, although the amount of negative VP doesn't scale based on the number of Curse tokens (well, other than the -1VP each Curse token gives you):



EDIT: Tweaked the card to make it more relevant in Kingdoms without +Buy or gainers.

Why is it "Once per turn: You may buy a card" instead of just "+1 Buy. At the end of your Buy phase... " or any other timing (start of clean-up, end of turn, etc.)? To me "You may buy a card" is for letting you buy cards outside the buy phase, but on an event that's not relevant since you're always by default in the buy phase. Otherwise, you have to be careful to buy the event just before your last buy every turn.

Also this doesn't need the "You may take". The choice is already implicit in buying the event or not, if you move the choice to within the event, then there's no reason why one wouldn't just buy the event every single turn, and then at that point it can just be a pure Landmark (which is also a valid direction to take, and maybe preferable to avoid the awkward double typed landscape). The only counterpoint is maybe you'd change your mind in the time between buying the event and just after buying the card (maybe some on-buy trigger changed things), but that's a very edge case.

[spineflu]

Haruspex • $1* • Action
+1 §
Gain an Omen.
-
This costs $1 more per card you have in play.
Omen • $0* • Action
+1 Action
Return this to its pile to gain a card from the Supply. If it was a Victory card, put it on top of your deck. +1§ per $1 more than $6 that it cost.

(This is not in the Supply)

Clarifying: 10 Omens in the pile. the "you" in Haruspex's price refers to the player whose turn it is.

Mechanics: this was originally +1 § gain a Wish, at $4. I wanted a less automatic buy than that. I also wanted the card you got via wish to have to cycle through - maybe that'd be trivial in most engine games, but yknow, it's not all engine games. I also wanted it to be able to gain Weird Stuff - overlords, golems, etc - but didn't really want to do extra work describing which price points were Good and which were Too Much, so I came up with the Victory/crow penalties on omen to balance out a card that essentially said "gain a Colony". Haruspex is priced Like That to keep it out of the opening (except in Cursed Gold and Baker games) and make a late game pivot to it unlikely/unpleasant.

Flavor: I missed the "include a spooky image" in my first entry - my third entry (not posted until after the contest) has some very spooky art. This, one's an old painting from the 1850s, the other is from the Fantasy Flight Game of Thrones board game. A Haruspex is a divination-seer/oracle that used animal entrails to do divination stuff - see the future, etc. A carrion bird (§) and an Omen seemed appropriate.

OLD CARD / outtake
here's my prelim entry. It got kinda lukewarm reception in #variants but i'll probably replace it before the week is through (not in the least because four lines on a landscape is too much).

Cistern • Landmark
When you buy a card, move a § from its pile to this.
Provinces cost $1 less for each § here.
When you gain a Province, take 2§ or more from here.
-
Setup: put 2 § on each non-Victory Supply pile costing $5 or more.

Basic gist is cheaper provinces that go faster but are worth fewer points. Lots of the wording was borrowed from Aqueduct.

[Violet CLM]

When Embargo meets Bargain, the result is a creepy crossover we just had to call...

[Timinou]

Why is it "Once per turn: You may buy a card" instead of just "+1 Buy. At the end of your Buy phase... " or any other timing (start of clean-up, end of turn, etc.)? To me "You may buy a card" is for letting you buy cards outside the buy phase, but on an event that's not relevant since you're always by default in the buy phase. Otherwise, you have to be careful to buy the event just before your last buy every turn.

Also this doesn't need the "You may take". The choice is already implicit in buying the event or not, if you move the choice to within the event, then there's no reason why one wouldn't just buy the event every single turn, and then at that point it can just be a pure Landmark (which is also a valid direction to take, and maybe preferable to avoid the awkward double typed landscape). The only counterpoint is maybe you'd change your mind in the time between buying the event and just after buying the card (maybe some on-buy trigger changed things), but that's a very edge case.

I didn't think +1 Buy would work, since I thought you would need to resolve the rest of the card first before you actually get to use that +1 Buy.

However, you're right that this could easily just be a pure Landmark, and could say, "At the end of your Buy phase [or the start of Clean-up], you may take +1 Curse token....".

[Xen3k]

WITHDRAWN: NOT AN ENTRY

Incubus - $5
Night - Attack
You may pay or take 2 § for +2 Coffers.
You may discard a non-Victory card. Each other player with fewer § than its cost in $, take § equal to the difference.
(Heirloom: Dreamcatcher)

Dreamcatcher - $2
Treasure - Heirloom
$1
You may pay 1 § for +1 Buy.

A strange attack card that can "curse" other players quite aggressively, but due to how it functions there is a cap. The Heirloom is there mainly as a way to mitigate the attack card slightly. Players can ignore Incubus completely, and barring Platinum or certain very expensive cards, the max number of curse tokens you can give players is limited. Really not sure about the balance on this. I am interested to see what people think of this.

Edit: Decided to go with something else as this was a pretty convoluted and uninteresting design. Replacement is in a new post.

[NoMoreFun]

Fire Witch
Action/Attack - $4
+2 Cards
+1 Curse token if the Curse pile isn't empty.
Each other player may trash a card from their hand. If they trashed a Curse, they take 2 Curse tokens. Otherwise, they gain a Curse.

Rules clarification: They gain a Curse if they didn't trash anything, or if they trashed a card other than Curse.

[emtzalex]

My Submission:

HALLOWEEN TOWN ACTION Cost: $4 +2 Actions Choose one: +1 Card per 2§ you have (round down); or +1§. When you gain this, +1§.

My submission is Halloween Town, an homage to Tim Burton's excellent film Nightmare Before Christmas. A variant of City, it gives you a village effect that gets stronger as the game goes on. This powers up as you add Curse tokens, which you get on gain or by foregoing your draws with the card.

[Mahowrath]

Last minute / late entry

Midas Curse - Landmark
When you are the first player to gain a Gold, after that turn, each player bids once, up to 40 Coffers, ending with you. The lowest bidder gets 8§ and takes the Coffers they bid.

Parallel to Mountain Pass; coffers for VP once Gold is acquired.
Edit: reskin

[The Alchemist]

I've decided to extend the deadline until the end of the weekend to give a bit more time for any last-minute suggestions, since there are still only a few submissions. You will know when I post the 24 hour warning.

[Xen3k]

Occult Market - $4
Action
+1 §
For each § you have, choose a different thing: +1 Card; +1 Action; +1 Buy; +1 Coffers; gain a Silver; gain a Horse; -2 §.
Each other player may take a §
to receive a chosen thing.

This is my replacement entry. It is a build your own Market that allows everyone to join in on the fun. The options for other players is based on what the person playing the card chooses. Choosing things for the person playing the card is not optional, but there is an option to lose Curse tokens, so there is a way to prevent getting too many tokens. I can see it getting pretty absurd if you accumulate enough Curse tokens, but other players will still be able to benefit from it, so I think it is not too crazy. Feedback is appreciated.

[Amuzet]

ERRATA: Cost $6, no line break.

Cursed Cargo $6
Action - Duration
Take an amount of R , gain a card costing exactly $1 per R token taken. While you have R , at the start of each of your turns, -1R. If you could not, then gain a curse.
(R is the Raven/Curse Tokens)

I like the way crypt works, wanted to riff on that wording. If you end up with multiple of these at the start of your turns they remove the R tokens faster, but if it one of them is unable to remove a Raven Token then it gives you a curse.

[Timinou]

Cursed Cargo $4
Action - Duration
Take an amount of R , gain a card costing exactly $1 per R token taken.
-
While you have R , at the start of each of your turns, -1R. If you could not, then gain a curse.
(R is the Raven/Curse Tokens)

I like the way crypt works, wanted to riff on that wording. If you end up with multiple of these at the start of your turns they remove the R tokens faster, but if it one of them is unable to remove a Raven Token then it gives you a curse.

I don’t think it’s clear how long this stays in play.  Is the intent that it stays in play until you run out of Curse tokens, when the Curse pile empties, or both?

[Amuzet]

On Cursed Cargo

I don’t think it’s clear how long this stays in play.  Is the intent that it stays in play until you run out of Curse tokens, when the Curse pile empties, or both?

I checked Crypt and used its wording, since Durations check at clean up whether they can do something next turn.
So it should only stay while you have Curse Tokens: Coppers/Curses do not trigger its duration effect.

The way I want it to work, is if you end up with multiple Cursed Cargo you might play them in such a way that one or more of them end up with 3 Cursed Cargo and 1 Curse Token.
One cursed cargo takes away the last Curse Token.
Two cursed cargoes left each give a curse since  you no longer have Curse Tokens.

I'm imagining interactions with other cards that give/remove Curse Tokens to you/others that might mess with your Cursed Cargo!

THE POINT: It should stay around until you run out of Curse Tokens.

Also after thinking about it, $4 is far too cheap, it should be $6! at least?

[Gubump]

On Cursed Cargo

I don’t think it’s clear how long this stays in play.  Is the intent that it stays in play until you run out of Curse tokens, when the Curse pile empties, or both?

I checked Crypt and used its wording, since Durations check at clean up whether they can do something next turn.
So it should only stay while you have Curse Tokens: Coppers/Curses do not trigger its duration effect.

The way I want it to work, is if you end up with multiple Cursed Cargo you might play them in such a way that one or more of them end up with 3 Cursed Cargo and 1 Curse Token.
One cursed cargo takes away the last Curse Token.
Two cursed cargoes left each give a curse since  you no longer have Curse Tokens.

I'm imagining interactions with other cards that give/remove Curse Tokens to you/others that might mess with your Cursed Cargo!

THE POINT: It should stay around until you run out of Curse Tokens.

Also after thinking about it, $4 is far too cheap, it should be $6! at least?

It shouldn't have the dividing line if that's supposed to be part of its on play effect. The unnecessary diving line makes it unclear when the below-the-line effect is supposed to be active. See, well, Crypt:

See, no dividing line.

Wording issues aside, this is actually way too weak imo. If you use it like Workshop (gaining cards that cost or less), it's Workshop with a downside (both being slow because of staying in play, and potentially costing you ). Even just getting a causes it to be in play for a total of 3 turns! And it just gets even slower from there.

[The Alchemist]

24 Hour Warning!!!

[The Alchemist]

If you've played the Scoundrels of Skullport expansion of Lords of Waterdeep, you'll be familiar with Corruption tokens.  Players gain Corruption tokens when they do certain actions that are more powerful than normal.  At the end of the game, each Corruption token is worth a certain amount of negative VP based on the number of Corruption tokens that all players have taken.

This is partly inspired by Corruption tokens, although the amount of negative VP doesn't scale based on the number of Curse tokens (well, other than the -1VP each Curse token gives you):

EDIT: Changed this into a pure Landmark instead of a dual Event/Landmark and reduced the VP penalty from 10VP to 6VP:

EDIT: Tweaked the card to make it more relevant in Kingdoms without +Buy or gainers.

Not sure if you've noticed, but the rewording of the card means that you can't get a copy of the card you just bought. If I buy only one card in a turn and haven't gained any others, then Dock does nothing, because *when I buy the card* I haven't gained anything yet. It's always Buy card, all on-buy effects, then gain card, all on-gain effects. If you want Dock to be able to duplicate a card you just bought, it needs to be after the buy, which is why I suggested "At the end of your Buy phase".

[grrgrrgrr]

Do you actually plan to judge this contest?

[grrgrrgrr]

If I'm still in time, I have this entry:

[emtzalex]

I would like to hear from The Alchemist on an estimate for when the judging might take place. I very much understand how challenging it can be to get to it, but even when there are delays (and I certainly have been slow myself to get judging completed on multiple occasions) updates are appreciated.

[mxdata]

Worth noting that most basic usages that come to mind aren't doing anything special vs just using the existing tokens and reversing who gets them. Want to make a weaker Witch that gives each opponent a curse token? You could just have it give you a token for the exact same result. Similarly, an effect that gives you a curse token can be done simply by giving each opponent a token.

The example cards in the post mostly avoid that issue. While Cursed Smithy does the same thing as giving each opponent a token, because it's an optional effect, the wording would be much more convoluted to make it work with tokens instead.

That wouldn't be exactly the same result - a curse-token Witch would be an attack which could be moated, while a VP-giving card cannot be moated by your opponent. But certainly in games without any moat-type card the end result is the same, so it's a fairly marginal difference

[The Alchemist]

Sorry for the late judging! In my business this week I wrote a draft but didn't realize I never actually submitted it! Apologies!

However just in time for halloween, I'm glad to see all the spooky and interesting ideas y'all came up with!

Timinou's Dock:

I like the non-attack player interaction aspect of it. I mentioned the problems with the wording in another reply, but that can easily be fixed with a different timing, like "end of your buy phase", so I won't count it against you. The downside for take a duplicate card is a little too light, I think the right move would be to take it just about every turn until you think you're about to end. The underline is a nice fun addition to dissuade taking too many (and I agree 6 is a better place to have it than 10), and there may be some fun dancing around it however, so its tough to see how it will play out. Name is very fitting to a landmark, but I don't see much of a connection to the effect, so as much as I like the simplicity of Dock (and the picture is quite nice as well), you don't get full points for theme.

Spineflu's Haruspex and Omen:

Seems a bit slow. You have to play a terminal Haruspex, and then draw into the Omen, and then wait to draw the card you actually want. All that on a card that could potentially balloon to an expensive amount. I really like the underline effect, but I'm not sure if this is the card for it. Omen is a nice way to do gain any card from the Supply without it being busted, something that really needs the Curse token to be viable to temper gaining Provinces, so really good implementation of the fan mechanic there, probably one of the best. However for a card that's a flipside of wish, it is pretty long text-wise. I like the topdecking of victories but with the other downside it may be a bit much. There's just a lot of complexity going on in the combined two cards, and a lot of it seems a bit tacked on. Theme-wise I love it though. I've never heard of a Haruspex, but apparently they had a very similar role in the Roman empire as Augurs (which would actually be a better name since it more fits in with your picture for Omen, Haruspices divined entrials while Augurs divined birds). The interplay between the two and with the Curse tokens is a huge plus, probably the best theme here.

Violet CLM's Embargain:

The event in general seems very weak. $6 is not an easy pricepoint to hit, and all I'm getting for it is a $4 and a very minor attack for the opponent, except one that's just as easily likely to hurt me as well. The opponent gets +1 card which honestly is often totally worth a -1 VP, giving opponents horses is pretty good, Bargain let's you gain a $5 for it, whereas this costs more and gives you a worse card, just to put a temporary embargain token on the horse pile. As for the theme, its not my favorite to be honest. A portmanteu of two already existing cards is clever, but more a joke than an actual design, and on top of that, the picture doesn't really fit. It could have gone on any event using horses and it would be equally relevant.

NoMoreFun's Fire Witch:

Pretty weak attack all things considered. This gives the opponent two upsides, namely an effective +1 vp and a trashed card, in exchange for either a Curse or -2 VP. Very clearly weaker than an Old Witch that gave +2 cards. May even be weaker than young witch. A -2VP is much prefered over a Curse (see miserable), and really its only -1 VP since this Curse tokens the attacker as well, which honestly is a pretty sweet deal to get to trash a card from my hand. With two plays of this attack, the opponent trashes a card to gain a curse, then can trash that curse, and both players end with the same -2 VP. So really in the long run this card is helping your opponent. I think you could easily drop the self-curse token gaining and it would still be a fine attack. Anyway I'm not one for making attacks stronger anyway, so on to the theme. Its pretty straightforward actually, its a curser so its a witch but with the flame's gift on top. Simple is nice.

Emtzalex's Halloween Town:

Really neat effect, I quite like it a lot! It depends on how many Curse tokens you have, which makes the token unique and implements it well, as well as making it more interesting than just a simple effective VP for your opponent, which is exactly what I'm looking for here. It incentivises you to take Curse tokens, but not too many, which is excelent. The balancing on the amount (2 per card) seems good to me as well, though an argument could be made for 3 (its pretty good as it is I think, especially with any other cards that give curse tokens). The on-gain is a nice touch as well. Overall nice, simple, clean card. Unfortunately, while innocent enough, I don't like the idea of taking someone else's IP for a card theme. Halloween town is pretty clearly Disney's, and I would have preffered something more original for a theme. "Haunted Town" seems close enough to me and quite fitting.

Mahowrath's Midas Curse:

Very interesting concept! I personally like vanilla Dominion concepts with a new twist, and a mirror of Mountain Pass is just excellent! Good eye on realizing that since debt functionally works as an opposite to coffers, Curse tokens would be a great mirror to the VP tokens of MPass. The actual numbers may need to be modifed though I think, but that balancing could be resolved with playresting. I could see it working just as well using only VP given to the opponent instead, but the Curse token is justified in a thematic sense as a counter to the debt/coffer split. I am really curious what bid people would naturally find an equilibrium at, since I don't think it would be 14 like MPass. My only nitpick is I think it should be on-buy for Gold, otherwise the trigger can happen a bit too early in many games. The curse of Midas has also got to be one of my favorite Greek fables as well, and the tie in to gold is just perfect. Ties in to curse tokens as well! All around perfect theme-to-effect matching. "Midas Touch" may be a better name though, since it has an idiomatic meaning in English that doesn't necessarily refer to the myth, like "Achille's Heel", and therefore could fit in the lore of Dominion better.

Xen3k's Occult Market:

Interesting concept, but I'm not sure how it will work out in practice. Its pretty useless the first two times you play it, and even then its at best a baker or delayed lab on the thrid play. Not as slow as pship/miser, but then again you should be aiming for stronger $4's than those. On top of that, when you play this, you actually doubly help your opponent. You assist them in building up their occult markets faster, and they will almost surely get a +1 card from it every time you play it (except maybe the first time where you might just get +1 Action, every play after that will likely take +1 card as a choice most games). I think the person who buys it first just loses out, because they took what is basically a junk card for 2 shuffles, and the other player can just wait until they've stacked up 3 curse tokens from the first mover's markets before getting their own. What that will usually look like is neither player ends up buying it for fear of helping the opponent, just like pirate ship. On this card, until you exceed 7 curse tokens, the -1 vp is negligible and you want those 7 crows ASAP. I also think there are too many options, choosing between 7 things each time seems headachy, and it tooks too much like scrap. I don't think there should be +1 cards *and* gain a horse on this, because that basically turns this into a delayed lab, and I think you'd pick that effect over the intended market-like effect every time. I do like how its Coffers instead of coin, since your opponent can make do of coffers gained on your turn (whereas coins and actions are useless), so nice catch there, but why not go a step further and have villagers? Coffers and villagers come on the same mat anyway now, so its not any additional component, and that way they can make do with that option as well. I think a better set of options would be +1 Villager, +1 Coffers, +1 Buy, Gain a Horse, -2 Curse token. 5 is much more manageable, and it makes that -2 Ctoken option usefull significantly earlier, which is great because I like how that option is a good way to have +1 VP on a cantrip, and with these options the opponent won't just take +1 card every time. The theme is good, its a market and it definitely is occulty with all these curses flying about.

segura's Haunted Docks:

Forget about docks, here are haunted docks! Combination of two concepts I've seen before yet together come quite well. I have made a similar card that gained a villager/coffer/horse for those 3 card types, except on discard instead of gain. Those three mechanics do work quite well together, and its a shame no official card combined villagers and coffers in this way, except silk merchant. If Livery is any indication, gaining a horse on a victory card gain is quite strong especially with multiple of these cards in play, so maybe Night-Duration is a good limitation. However, I can't help but think you could simplify the card with simply having a "this turn" and making the card a terminal action instead, since having this be a night duration makes stacking them incredibly easy. On the other other hand, being a night means it gets no benefit from gaining itself, which is good. It is unclear if "the card" on the second refers to any card that is gained, or is still nested in the conditional above it, i.e. you can only topdeck/etc. if it is a action/treasure/victory. If the former, I think the defensive aspect of this card is too good. With this in play, you could just exile any green cards you buy immedietly, and with the horses you gain from them, you don't even need an engine to never dud again. Not to mention curses just lose all of their junking power. Spending some reasource to topdeck or gain to hand a card just gained is a common effect that has even been tested by Donald X, so it is a neat effect that belongs on more cards, and using Curse tokens for them is a nice, unique touch that I very much like. However I think this card is doing too much for a $5. Both effects would be pretty good on their own (the second effect on its own would still be good on a $3 I think), but combined they synnergize so well that the card seems too strong, as well as doing a lot. I think it needs to be tempered in some way. I would either ditch the top effect entirely and save it for a different card, or change the bottom effect to just do one thing only. Theme fits pretty well to me, ties in with transport and other similar cards.

Amuzet's Cursed Cargo:

I agree that this is way too weak for $4. You have to get a curse *and* -VP for each card you gain with it. This has to stay out for 6 turns just to gain a $5, and costs you 6 VP and a junk card. I would rather just buy a silver and gain the $5 normally. It uses curse tokens in almost the exact same way as my Incantation, except instead of being on a cantrip, its on a terminal stop and gains a curse. It doesn't even topdeck the card or gain to hand, just normal gain. You're almost always just better off geting a card that just gives you economy instead. There are also problems with the wording as Gubump pointed out, I agree to ditch the line. The card is also a workshop variant, so I don't get the name cargo, and either way the image is not a picture of cargo at all, just some occulty items that you could say are cursed if you had to explain it.

grrgrrgrr's Pact:

Interesting, I don't know how I feel about champion as a Project, even with a pretty steep downside. We already have Academy, but at least that has at least a bit of unique twist. I think taking 1 vp a turn is a pretty good deal for a free village, so I think to not be an auto-buy project the price needs to be a bit steeper. Theme is on point.



Once again apologies for the late judging, but here are the winners!:
Honorable mentions: Haruspex/Omen, Haunted docks
Runner up: Halloween Town
Winner: Midas Curse!

Congratulations Mahowraith! Theme really pulled you through this week, good work! Close runner up with Emtzalex, probably the best effect so great designing to you as well! Overall I enjoyed the themes and your clever uses of the token everyone. Happy Halloween!