Print

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

[Asper]

I still don't see it. After you play Oasis, you continue your turn like normal, except now you have an extra coin, a new card, and 1 less total card in hand. Just like having played a Peddler, except the 1 less total card in hand part. The main point is that it's not something you play at the end of your turn. You can follow it with a terminal, or just continue your engine; drawing and playing all sorts of more cards. Auction is forced to always be the last card you play. It won't cycle your deck; and it won't give you any money at all if you have no unused cards in your hand. If your entire hand is 1 Oasis, then Oasis is basically a Copper. If your entire hand it 1 Auction, then Auction is a Ruined Market.

The fact that you play Auction at the end is a bonus. Auction is better than a mere nonterminal, as order doesn't matter. You can play a Smithy first, draw a single Auction, and make all junk to cash. With Oasis, you'd first have to play one Oasis per junk card and THEN a Smithy. Every Oasis after the first doesn't cycle, either - it just replaces itself with another card you'd have in your hand anyhow if you had gone for a single Auction instead. That's doing a lot for nothing. Comparing one-card hands is neither fair nor realistic. If your hand is a lot of junk with a single Auction, Auction will easily be better than Gold, while Oasis is Peddler. Thinking of the Smithy scenario, that's also far more realistic as a one-card hand.

[LastFootnote]

For what it's worth, Auction briefly cost $3 when I first tested it. It dropped to $2 pretty quickly.

Asper, I can see the parallel that you're drawing between Auction and Oasis. You can look at both of them as cards that turn other cards into Coppers. That said, I don't think Auction makes Oasis look obsolete, not by a long shot. I generally think of Oasis as a card that brings your hand closer to $5. All other things being equal (no discard attacks, etc.), if you played 5 Oases, you'd have $5 and an empty hand. Auction guarantees you $4. And a buy. And it only takes one copy! But $4 is so, so much worse than $5. This is just one way to say that Oasis's +1 Card is huge.

There are a lot of things that factor into card cost besides power level and Auction has multiple things pushing it toward $2. Like Chapel and Courtyard, Auction is not a card you usually want a bunch of. If you're drawing your whole deck every turn, you want one. If you're not, then maybe you want two or three if your deck is full of junk and terminal draw. It seems fine to let you pick up your Auction(s) on an otherwise dud hand or with an extra buy. Usually when I want an Oasis, I want lots of them. Not all of them, necessarily, but quite a few.

The other factor that pushes Auction toward $2 is how much work you have to do to get value from it. Poor House costs $1 and can provide up to +$4! But you have to put a lot of work into making that deck. I think that, on average, Auction is a Treasure worth $1 that gives +1 Buy, which is a pretty weak $2 card. It needs to be paired with a way to increase your hand size for you to get real value out of it.

Anyway, it all comes down to perception and testing. Auction wasn't an attractive option at $3, but players buy it at $2. It's possible that it's not worth a slot at all, but it's doing OK for now. Refurbish is on the chopping block ahead of Auction.

[Asper]

Hmm... I guess you're right. The fact that a multitude of Auctions isn't really great favours a cost of $2. The $4/$5 gap is pretty big, too. I'd suggest to try and pair it up with some big card draw to test how it does there. Smithy/Auction seems like a great opening to me. Maybe you can have a game where both this an Oasis are available, seeing which the others prefer?

[LastFootnote]

Hmm... I guess you're right. The fact that a multitude of Auctions isn't really great favours a cost of $2. The $4/$5 gap is pretty big, too. I'd suggest to try and pair it up with some big card draw to test how it does there. Smithy/Auction seems like a great opening to me.

I think Smithy/Auction is a fine opening if you need the extra buy. Especially if you want a bunch of $2 cards (Native Villages, etc.) so that you can buy two with Auction even if they don't collide. I'm guessing that Auction's average Coin value after a Smithy draw is +$2. So, Silver. And of course, you can always open Smithy/Silver.

Thanks a lot for the critique of the whole set, by the way! I'm working on a reply, but I thought I'd get in on the Auction conversation first.

[Minotaur]

Oasis can be a bit finesse-y.  You at most want as many of them as you have junk or pure VP per hand.  Auction is much more engine-oriented, where Oasis can afford to be a bit agnostic.  And Peddler comparisons are a bit questionable all around, since it just gives you free money without costing any cards or actions at all (unless you draw it dead).  If an Oasis were "just" a Peddler who needs a little fuel, it wouldn't cost $3.  That "just" is an understatement.  It's not a free money- it turns other cards into Coppers, which is a complete deal-breaker when it comes to spamming the suckers.

[GendoIkari]

If your hand is X Oases, you play those Oases, draw X cards, and discard those same X cards, getting $X.

Then you've played Oasis terribly wrong. If you do this, you may as well have just bought Copper instead of Oasis for all X of them.

[Asper]

Hmm... I guess you're right. The fact that a multitude of Auctions isn't really great favours a cost of $2. The $4/$5 gap is pretty big, too. I'd suggest to try and pair it up with some big card draw to test how it does there. Smithy/Auction seems like a great opening to me.

I think Smithy/Auction is a fine opening if you need the extra buy. Especially if you want a bunch of $2 cards (Native Villages, etc.) so that you can buy two with Auction even if they don't collide. I'm guessing that Auction's average Coin value after a Smithy draw is +$2. So, Silver. And of course, you can always open Smithy/Silver.

Thanks a lot for the critique of the whole set, by the way! I'm working on a reply, but I thought I'd get in on the Auction conversation first.

I kind of owed it to you, though i feel you gain less from my feedback than i from yours.

[Minotaur]

If your hand is X Oases, you play those Oases, draw X cards, and discard those same X cards, getting $X.

Then you've played Oasis terribly wrong. If you do this, you may as well have just bought Copper instead of Oasis for all X of them.

Probably just typed too fast.  I'm pretty sure almost no one plays Oasis like that consistently.

[pubby]

I like most of the cards in your expansion, and a few of them are especially good. Still, there are a few that I don't like, and so here are my thoughts. I haven't read through the rest of this thread, so my apologies if this has already been covered.

Jubilee:
I can imagine myself playing an engine that has to buy 2 of these every other turn because it's the only village on the board. I guess some people like that sort of thing, but not me. Even if this wasn't the case, the card just seems dull.

Redistrict:
Seems rather boring and it adds nothing new, especially considering your expansion has several other (and more interesting) trash-for-benefit cards.

Silversmith:
I feel like this should be a "you may trash". Mandatory trashing is silly when there's below-line text. Also, it sounds very weak.

Profiteer:
This sounds like a trap card. Something beginners buy and then they lose the game because of it.

Barrister:
It seems like the type of card you're forced into buying and causes the game to last longer than it should. I'm not a fan of Pirate Ship and Rogue and so I'm not a fan of Barrister. Now, the Domain card is kinda neat and I wouldn't mind seeing it used elsewhere.

Conquest:
The effect is rather mean. I would buy this because if I wanted to be an asshole, not because I wanted to win the game. Also, it doesn't need to be non-terminal.

Harbor:
I like this a lot card, but have you tested it as a big money enabler? It seems like it would be top-tier there.

Vendor:
So I get to look through my discard pile regardless of whether I paid the token or not? Not super excited about this card, but I suppose nothing's wrong with it.

[LastFootnote]

Another simple, clever idea. My favourite of your set.

Thanks, I'm glad you like it! I think of Clerk as the least interesting card in the set. It's just a miniature, cantrip Counting House. It's simple, which is great. It's popular and combos with other cards in the set, so I'm glad I have it.

I'll be honest: I'm not a fan of one-shots. Somehow i feel they go against the whole deckbuilding premise. Sure, not doing any would be wasted design space, but you make it the premise of an entire set. I'm not sure one-shots are a mechanic special enough to carry that. Most certainly it doesn't seem like the kind of set i'd recommend for a beginner to get used to Dominion, if that says anything.

Then again, most of us aren't beginners, and i'm definitely astounded how much variety you achieve while staying inside this one design space. One-shots ARE underrepresented in official Dominion, too, and even if you made a lot of them, there are so many cards that "one-shot-heavy" boards are unlikely anyhow. So i guess personal preference is all i can give as reasons why i'm a bit more sceptical here.

Looking at the individual cards, i see nothing wrong with Jubilee. It's probably balanced, and being the only "hard" trade token one-shot makes it a bit more interesting then it would be without. I guess i can spare you analysis of how good or bad it might be, you know that better than me. Interest-wise, it's good enough, but as there are a few more interesting trade token cards in the set, they steal Jubilee's spotlight. I feel it looks a bit like how Monument would look if Prosperity had not three, but eight +VP cards. So i guess that's another problem i have with having so many trade token cards - individual cards seem less exciting.

Jubilee evolved from one of Donald's outtake cards. It was a two-shot Gold (trash it and gain a Spoils, for $5). I'm not surprised that it died; there's tough competition at $5. But a two-shot Silver for $2 seemed more interesting to me. Something you wouldn't mind picking up with a spare $2. But it seemed like it needed more jazzing up, so I made it a village instead of a Treasure. It hasn't changed from my first printed version except that it goes back to the Supply rather than being trashed.

Anyway, Jubilee is the village you have to keep buying back. But it's really cheap. It's been working out great so far.

I'm not sure what the best use case for this is. It's interesting that what you get isn't dependant on Redistrict, but the card it trashed. Not sure i like the wording, but i guess "the trashed card" would seem to refer to Redistrict itself. I'm a bit indifferent, but it's obviously okay. I probably underestimate it.

In practice, we mostly use it to trash Estates for a $3 card and a $4 card. The second most frequent use case is trashing Curses and Coppers (for nothing). When I created it, I envisioned trashing e.g. a $4 card for a $5 card and a $6 card. Probably I should do that more often. It's working out well, regardless.

Hmm... Now that i think about it, on-gain/on-buy IS a one-shot mechanic... Maybe i'm misjudging this entire thing... Either way, Floodgate seems cute. And it's cheap enough for its ability to be actually useful. I like it.

I don't know why it took me so long to lower Floodgate's cost from $4 to $3. It's a hot ticket at the lower price point.

I didn't like this one at first, but it has some appeal. At least it's not like it's going to harm you at any point. It probably feels unsatisfying to trash it very early, and i don't think the one-time Lab makes up for it. On the other hand i think the idea is clever and interesting, which is why Gambler made it on my list of "other people's cards that i want to print to use myself".

Yes, $3 for a one-shot Lab is not a great value. At least it's a one-shot Lab where the second card you draw is a good one (or you would have trashed it). I sometimes think of Gambler as a "fixed" Lookout. The worst that can happen is that you trash your Gambler. Anyway, the card is swingy, but not problematically so. It has lots of fans.

A Village that rewards you for junk? Hm... I guess gaining some cheap engine components is easy enough, especially early, so you don't have to go for Mill Town megaturns to get something of it. Fine, i think.

It's nice to have cards that give you goals to shoot for. Get this in your hand with 8 Coppers, that's the dream.

I like the on-play, and i realize it interacts with the bottom. Still, i feel it's not as interesting as a whole, maybe because the bottom part is, well, Silversmith. Sorry if i'm being harsh. I'm a bit tired, i hope it doesn't shine through in me spilling unreflected nonsense...

Harsh is good. Honest feedback is how this set becomes better.

Refurbish is popular in my IRL groups, but probably that's just because it's a trasher. Anyway, it's probably the next card I'll cut as I try out new stuff. It's fine, but not special. And I have too many $3 cards right now.

One of the trade token cards i meant when i said there are more interesting ones than Jubilee. Actually i like it quite a bit. It's my second favourite of the set, right now.

Thanks, I'm glad it's been well-received. So far it's working out. I need to buy it more personally to see how it plays.

Not as special as Tinker, but still nice. Very simple to grasp, too. I like it more than Terrace or Jubilee, but i don't really know why. Maybe because it's new?

Well, this version is new.

The fun of Convoy is using a pile of Trade tokens to play the same Convoy a bunch of times. Really great for Mill Town mega-turns. I need to test it more in general, though.

Finally, a way to get trade tokens. If you had none of these, something would feel lacking. In that respect, i like it. The effect as such isn't really special, but not every card needs to be. The token gaining is enough to make it stand out, i think.

Craftsman gets some lot of flak for being an infinite supply of Trade tokens, so it's nice/interesting that you feel it's necessary. Interaction with other Trade token cards aside, it's a solid card by itself. And of course the combos are nice.

Dignitary finally gives us a trashing reaction, so that's cool. I'm one of those people who don't like discarding reaction cards, because i always feel it makes me lose something... Beggar is agonizing to me. Dignitarys reaction is something like a counterpart to its on-play, though, so i guess you just have to decide whether the cards in your hand are too good (keep some for later) or too bad (get something else). Don't know what to do when inbetween, but maybe that's the challenge.

Well, the +2 Cards restores your hand size to 5 (or whatever it was), so hopefully it doesn't feel too bad to discard your Dignitary. At least this version of the reaction is super easy to parse.

I don't really know why, but i kind of dislike Conscripts Profiteer. Conscripts is basically a Silver most of the time, sure, and it can curse other players (once), but it can also be drawn dead. That alone might make some people feel they have been Swindlered. Still, i think my main concern is that Conscripts is pretty complex, especially for a card you can't decide against. I play with quite a few people who are not experienced Dominion players and if i give them a Curse or a Silver, they immediately get that i do something bad or nice. If they think they don't understand a card in the supply, hey, they can just ignore it and buy Smithy instead. Either way, if you don't want to play a Conscripts deck, i can still make you. I think that's really what i mean with "Swindlered" - not that the card is bad, but that the card isn't something i wanted. Sure, there's Masquerade and Ambassador that can give you different cards, but typically you'll get Estates or Coppers, anyhow.

I understand your concern, but eh, it's working well so far. Conscripts is not so hard to parse that I feel bad about handing them out. It's nice to have two uses for Conscripts, and "give each other players Conscripts" is going to feel more different from Barracks that any form of "gain some Conscripts" ever will. As always, you have to adapt to what your opponents are doing. If they're giving you Conscripts, maybe reevaluate that BM-Smithy strategy. Of course, you'll often be able to play the Conscripts before you play the Smithy anyway.

It's allright. Like Convoy and Jubilee, it suffers from the fact they act a bit similar. The effect still seems good enough to be worth the spot, though. as i said, i like Convoy a tad more.

Terrace is sort of a staple at this point. Although I do have a lot of villages. Well, Jubilee and General are only half-villages, so maybe it's a good amount.

Much better than Profiteer. I can see how this avoids my complaints about Conscripts from before... Hmm. It's also clever how you made a semi-one-shot Curser work

Thanks. So far this new version of Barracks is working great. The old "dig for an Attack card" version was cool, but slow.

I don't really like it. It has just too much going on, a bit like a minigame inside a game. Also, isn't Barrister strictly better than Explorer? Again, sorry if i'm harsh. Edit: No, of course it's not. Sorry, i didn't think. Still, i'm not really convinced of the mini game. :/

Yeah, I hear you. It's the wordiest card left in the set. And I mean, one of the cards has to be wordiest, so that isn't killing the card by itself. But I'm not 100% happy with it.

Part of the reason I want to cut it is that I've replace my Thieves with a card that's almost identical to Barrister, but without the Domains.

Bandit
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $5
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck, trashes a revealed Treasure other than a Copper, and discards the rest. Gain one of those trashed cards or a Silver, putting it into your hand.

It's less wall-of-text-y without the dividing line. I'd like to replace Barrister, possibly with a cheaper Domain-stealing Attack, possibly with some other Attack. But I just cut Axeman and the set is very Attack-light right now. Any new Domain-stealing attack will probably steal Domains from other players' hands now that Axeman is gone.

Hm, i guess the +1 action makes the most sense when you gain the card in hand... On it's own it probably isn't worth the jump to $5, but i guess buying this with a few Silvers makes it a really worthwile buy. It's good.

Cool.

It seems like not only Domain, but every dual-type card makes this better. Hmm... A Lab that gets an advantage from dual-type cards? That's new. I like it

I'm glad. It's probably the least on-theme card of the set. But unless I come up with a slew of great $5 terminals, it'll stick around.

The "to $6" is the only thing keeping this from being strictly better than Saboteur, which seems a bit thin. Sure, Saboteur is weak and has the greatest effect when hitting Provinces (or, heaven forbid, Colonies), but still it will usually just hit Silvers and such. The +1 action makes this really spammable, too. I think it's too good.
I remembered this is a one-shot set and re-read the text. Of course it trashes itself. I think it's fine.

It's very new. We'll see how it works out.

I had a very similar idea once (Stocks), which also gave a Silver in hand. The biggest difference was that it gave a Silver to the other players, too. That said, your card seems better balanced. I like it.

I wish Fund were more popular in my IRL games. Treasures just seem to be less popular than Actions in general.

It's very simple and looks good. Not sure about the name, though. I feel it implies an attack type, as if you could only return attack cards with it. Good that that's not the case.

I think the idea was that it would combo with Conscripts. It sort of still does, since you can put a Conscripts on top of your deck, giving it another shot at lining up with another Attack.

I think i allready mentioned i like this. Well, if not, i like this. It's nice and easy.

Nevermind, this is at least as off-theme as Convocation. It's been solid so far, though, and hell if I'm cutting another $5 terminal right now.

Good for you that Donald never made the vanilla $4 Peddler... He couldn't after this. It's not bad, but i'm not sure whether doing a Peddler+ at $4 isn't something you should avoid.

I don't know why, but i thought this costed $4... I'm really tired it seems... Either way, Peddler looks a bit weak for $5, but then again the one-shot bonus is really, really nice. I think it's fine.

This version (stronger than the last) is new. Hopefully it'll work out. It's a tough sell. I think there are lots of Peddler-With-A-Bonus cards at $5, but most people are like, "I only get to do it once? No thank you."

The drawback is something i've waited to see on a card, and i think it's nice here. A nice mix of Library, discard for benefit, and Council Room (in a way). I think i like it

Hopefully Donald won't resurrect his version anytime soon (assuming there even is another expansion after Adventures). I was pretty bummed when I thought I'd have to cut Wheelwright.

Thanks again for the critique!

[LastFootnote]

I like most of the cards in your expansion, and a few of them are especially good. Still, there are a few that I don't like, and so here are my thoughts. I haven't read through the rest of this thread, so my apologies if this has already been covered.

Thanks for the critique! I'm glad that you like some of the cards. Which ones do you particularly like? That's good to know as well.

Jubilee:
I can imagine myself playing an engine that has to buy 2 of these every other turn because it's the only village on the board. I guess some people like that sort of thing, but not me. Even if this wasn't the case, the card just seems dull.

Ah, too bad. So far it's been good in practice. Can't please everybody all the time, I guess.

Redistrict:
Seems rather boring and it adds nothing new, especially considering your expansion has several other (and more interesting) trash-for-benefit cards.

Redistrict has some fans. I think it's fairly novel. Basically a one-shot remodel that trashes a card and gains two better cards. No published card does that.

Silversmith:
I feel like this should be a "you may trash". Mandatory trashing is silly when there's below-line text. Also, it sounds very weak.

Non-mandatory trashing is an option I could try. Would you gain a Silver if you didn't trash a card? Refurbish is probably getting cut soon anyway, though.

Profiteer:
This sounds like a trap card. Something beginners buy and then they lose the game because of it.

The first few games it seemed that way. I've bought it and won quite a bit lately, though (against players who didn't buy it). It all depends on if there are other attacks, if there's an especially good use for Gold, if there's trashing/sifting, etc., etc.

Barrister:
It seems like the type of card you're forced into buying and causes the game to last longer than it should. I'm not a fan of Pirate Ship and Rogue and so I'm not a fan of Barrister. Now, the Domain card is kinda neat and I wouldn't mind seeing it used elsewhere.

Yeah, I hear you. I'm not sure how I'd use Domain as it is without an Attack that could steal it, though. I could have a remodel for Domains, but maybe nobody trashes theirs. Hmm, maybe if it was a really strong remodel.

Conquest:
The effect is rather mean. I would buy this because if I wanted to be an asshole, not because I wanted to win the game. Also, it doesn't need to be non-terminal.

It needs to be non-terminal so that you have an Action to play the Action card you just put into your hand. Anyway, Conquest is new and highly experimental. There's a good chance it won't work out.

Harbor:
I like this a lot card, but have you tested it as a big money enabler? It seems like it would be top-tier there.

I can't remember if I did any Big Money stress testing on Harbor, so probably I didn't. It's clearly stronger than Courtyard, although it's also much more expensive. I'll have to try it out later.

Vendor:
So I get to look through my discard pile regardless of whether I paid the token or not? Not super excited about this card, but I suppose nothing's wrong with it.

It might not work out. I've only tried this version in one game so far, and the old (weaker) version was not popular.

Well, about half the cards you named are either brand new (and might be duds) or cards I've been thinking of cutting or overhauling anyway, so I must be doing something right. Thanks again for the feedback!

[pubby]

Which ones do you particularly like? That's good to know as well.

Auction, Floodgate, Convoy, Terrace, Harbor, Conclave, and Wheelwright are the cards I really like.

Ah, too bad. So far it's been good in practice. Can't please everybody all the time, I guess.

If there are fans then it is probably worth keeping, but have you considered something like this?

Jubilee
+2 Actions
You may trash this card, or pay a trade token. If you do, +$2.
------
When you gain this, take a coin token.

That way you could use it as a Necropolis without having to re-buy it all the time, but otherwise is the same.

Redistrict has some fans. I think it's fairly novel. Basically a one-shot remodel that trashes a card and gains two better cards. No published card does that.

Oh, I didn't realize it could gain two cards; I thought it was always just one. That's slightly more interesting, but not fantastic.

Yeah, I hear you. I'm not sure how I'd use Domain as it is without an Attack that could steal it, though. I could have a remodel for Domains, but maybe nobody trashes theirs. Hmm, maybe if it was a really strong remodel.

A transmute-style remodel that cared about the type of card it trashed could be an option? I dunno, just throwing out random ideas.

It needs to be non-terminal so that you have an Action to play the Action card you just put into your hand. Anyway, Conquest is new and highly experimental. There's a good chance it won't work out.

Oh that's right, the +1 Action is necessary. For some reason I forgot that skipped my mind when posting.

[pacovf]

Is it important for you that all possible ways to spend Trade Tokens be roughly equal in powerlevel? You can gain them in a multitude of ways, but in the end it doesn't matter where your TTs come from, you can spend them with any card you choose. So if you balance TT cards in a vacuum and you end up with cards that can spend TTs with different efficiencies, then people will feed all the TTs that come with the less efficient card to the more efficient one, and never use the extra option of the former. I don't know if that bothers you, or if it's a purely aesthetic problem I am raising.

Don't know if this has been done already, but let's compare the things you can do with trade tokens:

- ~Gain a Tokenless Jubilee (Jubilee)
- Gain a card costing up to the cost of two trashed cards (Tinker)
- ~-1 card, -1 action, -1 Trade Token, Gain a card costing up to $5 (Craftsman)

- +3 cards, discard a card (Convoy)
- Discard your hand, draw 5 cards (Terrace)

- Put a card from your discard into your hand (~Barter, Vendor)

Off the top of my head, I am tempted to say that Craftsman is a bit weak in this respect; so is Jubilee, but in its case it might be hard to dissociate from the card itself...? Convoy is a bit strong compared to the rest, but the main effect of the card is somewhat weak for its cost, so that's what you are paying for the chance to spend Trade Tokens more efficiently.

Thoughts?

[Co0kieL0rd]

I think Pacovf raises a very interesting point. I've always only compared the value of a TT token card as a combination of its fix effect and its one-shot effect. But it is appropriate to compare all the effects you can pay a TT for with each other. Trade tokens are a universal currency in your set so you could say they should all be equal in strength. OTOH, one should not forget that it matters a great deal when you get the chance to use a TT for a specific effect. Usually, the more expensive the card using tokens, the more rarely you are able to buy and play it, but there are obviously various other things factoring in. So you might also say, the less frequently you get to play a TT card, the more powerful its one-shot ability may be.

I will try to extend Pacovf's list of features by the "replay potential" of each card.

- Jubilee: Gain a Jubilee without a token. You can do it every other time you play it but you also have to re-buy Jubilee and then it's just a Silver with +2 Actions. But the point of the card is not to replay it anyway but rather gain tokens for other cards.
- Tinker: Gain a card costing up to the cost of the two cards you trashed. There's a good chance you get 2 or 3 Tinkers in a game and will eventually collide them with two cards you can forge into a Province. In that respect, the effect seems pretty strong.
- Craftsman: -1 Card, -1 Action, -1 Trade token, gain a card costing up to $5. It's true that the effect seems weak compared to most other effect. But then again, Craftsman provides infinite Trade tokens and you can get a $5 every other time you play it so it's reasonable the effect is weaker than others.
- Convoy: +3 Cards, discard a card. Like with Tinker, you will probably have a few Convoys in your deck and there will be a point where you play one of them 4 times in a row which will be pretty strong. But as Pacovf already pointed out, Convoy isn't great for $4 without using a token. Also, the benefit of its TT effect is more uncertain than that of most of the other effects.
- Terrace: Discard your hand, draw 5 cards. There are situations where this effect can be very useful. But this situation might as well never come once in a game. I've only played one game with Terrace so far and there it served as a Village and TT supplier for old Cathedral (the combo worked out great). I suppose Terrace's TT effect will be used rarely enough that the fact it has so much potential value is compensated.
- Vendor: Put a card from your discard into your hand. The current version lets you look through your discard pile first which I think is fine for a one-shot effect. I personally think that it's not such a powerful effect that I'm willing to pay $5 to do it once. Will I ever get the chance to get the right card at the right time, and even if I do, will it matter that much? To me, this seems like the weakest of all the TT effects. It's still a good effect but I would slap it on a cheaper card.
- Barter: Put the card you just gained into your hand. This is even more narrow than Vendor's effect but at least you can make sure you get the right card out of it. It's also smart and good that you have an opportunity to get more than 1 TT per Barter you buy. It seems fine.

[pacovf]

I mean, when you say that the point of Jubilee is to gain TTs for other cards, you are proving the point I am making: Jubilee spends TTs so inefficiently, you would rather spend its TTs on anything else, so in the end the player has less choices because you will never use the extra option on Jubilee. The same could probably be said of Craftsman. Of course, sometimes the kingdom will have no extra source of buy or gain, and you will use those options anyway, but still.

IF (big 'if') I wanted to make those two cards more TT-efficient, I would try:
-Craftsman: make the +1 action +1 card independent of Trade spenditure. If that was too strong, downgrade the extra card into +1 coin. And no more tracking whether your Craftsmen are terminal or not!
-Jubilee: this one is tricky because of its low cost and one-shot nature. One idea would be to make the +2 coins conditional on spending the TT, and then make it +3 actions instead of +2 actions just so that it isn't completely terrible when you don't spend trade tokens. You wouldn't be able to use it as a one-shot silver anymore though...

Of course, I don't know if TT comparative efficiency is a big enough issue to change cards that already work fine. Maybe not.

I disagree that Vendor and Barter have weak TTs spend effects. I would classify getting a card from your discard into your hand as roughly equal to Hunting Party in power.

Convoy's TT effect is still the strongest, but maybe the fact that is terminal draw suffice to balance it compared to the others? Dunno.

[LastFootnote]

Sorry it took me so long to respond to these great posts. I was at a wedding this weekend and didn't bring my computer with me.

The idea all along has been that all the uses for Trade tokens are approximately equal. In retrospect, maybe I screwed up badly there. However, it hasn't really been a problem in practice. It hasn't been ruining games, I mean. Now it's possible that that's at least partially a function of my playtest group; they're not top-tier players. But I think there are other reasons, too.

I think you (pacovf and Co0kieL0rd) are correct that Jubilee and Craftsman are probably your worst value for your tokens. Perhaps coincidentally, they're also the least dependent on your hand/deck state in order to do their job. You could stockpile the tokens you get from these two cards, but maybe you won't even be able to use them before the game ends. Maybe you'll draw all your Vendors with no discard pile. Maybe you'll never get your Tinker in hand with two things you want to combine. I think sometimes you're better off using most of your tokens on Jubilees and keeping a couple around in case of emergency.

I wouldn't say that the "point" of Jubilee is to gain tokens for other cards. I think it's fine (even good) that you can do that as long as it doesn't ruin games. So far it hasn't. My most skilled playtester has commented once or twice that he thinks some cards (Tinker and maybe others) are too strong with a cheap source of tokens, but I don't think that's actually panned out in games thus far.

I am loathe to change Jubilee and Craftsman since they've been working out so well in general and haven't been causing issues with other token cards as far as I've seen. Jubilee especially I don't want to complicate and it's nice that it can be a one-shot Silver/Village. I am considering trying Craftsman with +$2 instead of +1 Card/+1 Action. So when you didn't pay a token, you'd get +$2 and take a token. I guess I don't see gaining a $5 card as being that weak. A $4 card that gains a $5 card when you pay a token seems decent, even if it's not spectacular. I actually really like how currently your decision about which way to use Craftsman partially depends on if you have Actions to burn, but I'm willing to give that up. The set is hurting a bit for terminal Action cards.

Other random thoughts:
• I think it's impossible for the token effects to always be perfectly balanced because, like cards, their strength is board-dependent. Vendor is better in Platinum games and Big Money decks. Convoy is way weaker without a village. Keeping your Jubilee is good value when it's your only village and +Buy is available, but not prevalent.
• Convoy's token effect is strong, but each consecutive play is weaker (you have less garbage to discard because you've been discarding it and may not have drawn more).
• If you have a Gold in your discard pile, your token for Vendor is a $3 value. So when you spend a token, Vendor can be +1 Card/+1 Action/+$4. And then it's a Peddler for the rest of the game. That seems plenty strong to me. I actually played a game recently where my Vendors really came through for me. In fact, I actually missed an opportunity to play a village, then a Soothsayer, then a Vendor to grab the Gold. I still won, but that would have been sweet.
• Co0kieL0rd, I have actually found that Terrace's token ability is used pretty frequently. I guess different players have different thresholds for what counts as a bad enough hand that you're willing to spend a token to get a new one. Usually if I have the two Actions from the Terrace and no Action cards to spend them on, I'll pay the token to try to draw some. And of course sometimes your hand is e.g. two cards and you're using the token for draw.

[pacovf]

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to say that there's a problem with the cards. They all do sufficiently different things that where you spend your TTs will depend just as much on what they do as on rough powerlevel. I am mostly arguing for the sake of making some decisions on where to spend your TTs feel like a tough choice.

I think the reason why Craftsman and Jubilee feel weak is because their effect actually costs 2 trade tokens instead of one. You could effectively make Craftsman always gain a trade token, and make the card gaining conditional on spending 2 TTs, and it would be exactly the same card. In a slightly more contrived way, Jubilee "saves" your Jubilee from returning to the supply in exchange of paying a TT, so that's sort of like paying 2 trade tokens for a normal Jubilee, kinda, more or less, sort of.

I definitely understand not wanting to change Jubilee, because it is such a tight card already. But there seems to be some misunderstanding regarding Craftsman:

I am considering trying Craftsman with +$2 instead of +1 Card/+1 Action. So when you didn't pay a token, you'd get +$2 and take a token. I guess I don't see gaining a $5 card as being that weak. A $4 card that gains a $5 card when you pay a token seems decent, even if it's not spectacular.

I'm not saying Craftsman is weak. I am saying that the option to gain a 5$ card is really expensive compared to the other one. I would argue that paying 2 TTs is already more than enough cost to gain a 5$ card, given what one TT can usually do. So, IMHO, whatever else craftsman does, it should do it independently of whether you are spending or taking a TT.

I think you (pacovf and Co0kieL0rd) are correct that Jubilee and Craftsman are probably your worst value for your tokens. Perhaps coincidentally, they're also the least dependent on your hand/deck state in order to do their job.

This is actually a good point that I hadn't thought about.

[LastFootnote]

I am considering trying Craftsman with +$2 instead of +1 Card/+1 Action. So when you didn't pay a token, you'd get +$2 and take a token. I guess I don't see gaining a $5 card as being that weak. A $4 card that gains a $5 card when you pay a token seems decent, even if it's not spectacular.

I'm not saying Craftsman is weak. I am saying that the option to gain a 5$ card is really expensive compared to the other one. I would argue that paying 2 TTs is already more than enough cost to gain a 5$ card, given what one TT can usually do. So, IMHO, whatever else craftsman does, it should do it independently of whether you are spending or taking a TT.

Right. I guess I was talking about changing [+1 Card; +1 Action] to [+$2] just so that you wouldn't have to track which ones you played were terminal.

So when I said that I try to make all token uses about the same value, that value in my mind is about $2. Jubilee's use is probably a little less than that because a one-shot [+2 Actions; +$2] that you are essentially "gaining" is probably not worth $2. (Quick tangent: Jubilee itself does not cost $2. It costs $2 and a buy, which is a small distinction but a meaningful one. One of the reasons costs in the $2 to $4 range are so similar is that you're limited by the number of buys you have. Otherwise you could open $2/$2/$3 on a 4/3 split and fewer of the cards that currently cost $2 could keep that cost.) Vendor and Barter's uses are worth $2 when you're pulling Silver into your hand, the baseline "good" card. Obviously it will often be better than $2, but that's situational. Convoy is better than $2 when you have Actions remaining. Otherwise it's often worse than $2. Tinker, who knows. Seems good so far.

By this metric, I can see what you mean by Craftsman's token-gaining being better than its token spending. [+1 Card; +1 Action; +$2] is usually better than [−$2; gain a card costing up to $5], and certainly strong for a $4 card, assuming you have something better to spend your tokens on. You'll still gain the card sometimes, but dang.

I could just give Craftsman a flat +1 Action, but my set has a dearth of terminal Actions, especially terminal Trade token cards and terminal $5 cards. So here's the new version I'm considering (written in Donald's notation, which I will probably switch to for all my card text blurbs):

Craftsman: Action, $5
+$2. You may spend a Trade token to gain a card costing up to $5. Otherwise, take a Trade token.

So when you take the token, it's sort of like Merchant Ship. You get +$2 now and something that's worth about $2 for later. With villages/thrones you may be able to spend the token this turn instead of next, but you know. It's comparable. When you spend the token, it effectively gains you a card costing up to $5 (you get +$2 and spend a token worth $2), which I think is a pretty solid $5 value. I liked a lot of things about the old version, including that it was a $4 card that gained $5 cards, but I think this new version will potentially be better. Opinions?

[Co0kieL0rd]

Craftsman: Action, $5
+$2. You may spend a Trade token to gain a card costing up to $5. Otherwise, take a Trade token.

So when you take the token, it's sort of like Merchant Ship. You get +$2 now and something that's worth about $2 for later. With villages/thrones you may be able to spend the token this turn instead of next, but you know. It's comparable. When you spend the token, it effectively gains you a card costing up to $5 (you get +$2 and spend a token worth $2), which I think is a pretty solid $5 value. I liked a lot of things about the old version, including that it was a $4 card that gained $5 cards, but I think this new version will potentially be better. Opinions?

I think it makes sense to try Craftsman as a non-terminal. I don't really get how you calculate the cost-equivalent of "spend a token to gain a card costing up to $5", i.e. why is that ability worth $2? You pay $4 for a Feast and that only works once. I'm not disagreeing, I just don't comprehend it.

[LastFootnote]

I think it makes sense to try Craftsman as a non-terminal.

Just a flat [+1 Action] and keep it at $4? If I wasn't hurting so badly for terminal $5 cards, I might try that first. But also I think it just looks bad compared to a version that gives +$2. It's just way worse when you play it the first time. Maybe it's not so bad. You can always play it unless you draw it dead. Hmm...

I don't really get how you calculate the cost-equivalent of "spend a token to gain a card costing up to $5", i.e. why is that ability worth $2? You pay $4 for a Feast and that only works once. I'm not disagreeing, I just don't comprehend it.

Well, Feast is pretty weak. I bet Feast could be non-terminal or give +$1 and still be fine at $4. I think of [Gain a card costing up to $5] as a solid but boring $5 card. Altar costs $6 and trashes a (usually) bad card for you as well. Rogue, Jester, and the like give +$2 and can gain you $5 cards, but are unreliable. I just feel like [+$2; You may spend a Trade token to gain a card costing up to $5] is likely to work out.

[Co0kieL0rd]

I think it makes sense to try Craftsman as a non-terminal.

Just a flat [+1 Action] and keep it at $4? If I wasn't hurting so badly for terminal $5 cards, I might try that first. But also I think it just looks bad compared to a version that gives +$2. It's just way worse when you play it the first time. Maybe it's not so bad. You can always play it unless you draw it dead. Hmm...

Sorry, I miswrote. I meant to say "terminal". I think it's a good idea.

[pacovf]

Oh hey, just wanted to repeat that my "complaint" was on "aesthetic" grounds, and playtesting is what makes or breaks a card. You don't have to change anything if you don't think it's needed!

That being said:

Craftsman: Action, $5
+$2. You may spend a Trade token to gain a card costing up to $5. Otherwise, take a Trade token.

So when you take the token, it's sort of like Merchant Ship. You get +$2 now and something that's worth about $2 for later. With villages/thrones you may be able to spend the token this turn instead of next, but you know. It's comparable. When you spend the token, it effectively gains you a card costing up to $5 (you get +$2 and spend a token worth $2), which I think is a pretty solid $5 value. I liked a lot of things about the old version, including that it was a $4 card that gained $5 cards, but I think this new version will potentially be better. Opinions?

New notation, I don't know if I will be able to adapt... In a World that changes so quickly, I thought Enterprise could be my rock. Alas...

Anyhoo, this version looks good at $5, though I am a bit sad to see the 4$ version go. It looks less exciting now, somehow.

[LastFootnote]

Anyhoo, this version looks good at $5, though I am a bit sad to see the 4$ version go. It looks less exciting now, somehow.

Well, it was cool to have a $4 card that gained $5 cards. I could lower it to +$1 and try it at $4, though it's nice to give +$2 rather than +$1 when possible, I think. I liked how before you were unlikely to gain Craftsmen with other Craftsmen. I guess since the $5 version is terminal, you're still unlikely to do that.

[XerxesPraelor]

I like the $4 ness of the previous one, just on aesthetic grounds. It makes it feel akin to armory/workshop / feast in a nice way.

[pacovf]

Anyhoo, this version looks good at $5, though I am a bit sad to see the 4$ version go. It looks less exciting now, somehow.

Well, it was cool to have a $4 card that gained $5 cards. I could lower it to +$1 and try it at $4, though it's nice to give +$2 rather than +$1 when possible, I think.

You could always make it a copper variant. It would be somewhere between Talisman and Quarry. I don't know, I'm just brainstorming.