Print

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

[Snorka]

Manhunt turns any card into a Shadow. Well, sorta.

[faust]

+2 Coffers, +1 VP is very strong as a Treasure, but is it busted relative to other 5$s? I don't think so. And yeah the shadow option is very weak, but is that a bad thing? I also don't think so. I actually love this design; I think it's cool to have a card where the shadow is the sidestory. It's still a big enough factor to change the card a lot.

I think the main problem is that it's super easy to just buy Tunas and Provinces, and that's not the most exciting thing ever. Plunder prevents that by having you already lean into building an engine via Encampments.

True if that strategy is competitive with engines. Which it probably isn't? Since, like, engines are pretty good.

It's a very easy to execute strategy, and the smoothing out of money due the the Coffers makes it strong. I agree that it won't be competitive with good engines, but the problem is that it's going to beat casual players fairly reliably.

Reminder that Tuna lives at the bottom of your deck, so you're going to have to draw down to it to get the tokens. This is great if you're drawing your deck, because it stays on the bottom without hindering your draw, but if you're playing Tuna money, it's going to be missing the shuffle a lot unless you Peddler it (which I expect is often a good choice).

But this is a good point and might mean it's not too strong.

[infangthief]

Silhouettist
$3 Action - Shadow

+$1
You may play a Shadow card from your deck.
-
You can play this from your deck as if in your hand.

Clarification: If there is such a thing as a Shadow card without any play-ability, Silhouettist can still play it but it does nothing; the situation would be handled in the same way as when Territory gets played via Hasty or Patient.

In the unlikely event that I win this contest I will not be available to set the next one. I just couldn't resist having a go at designing a Shadow card.

[grep]

Coffee House
$3 - Reaction - Shadow

At start of your turn, you may play this to look through your discard pile and put a card from it into your hand.
----------
You can play this from your deck as if in your hand.


* It is not an Action card, so it does not consume an Action and can only be played at start of the turn.

[fika monster]

Coffee House
$3 - Reaction - Shadow

At start of your turn, you may play this to look through your discard pile and put a card from it into your hand.
----------
You can play this from your deck as if in your hand.

This seems usually a bit busted to me. If i get 5 of them and have 5 cards in my discard pile, well, thats like a tactician in draw!
You could draw into these and have them be useless of course, and they wont allways be great.
But it just seems too good for me.

I think my suggestion would be to make it

"Discard a card from your hand and the top of your deck . You may look through your discard pile and put a card from it into your hand.

You may play this at the start of your turn
(You can play this from your deck as if in your hand).

My reasoning:
1: rn the card is just free +1 card usually, (all shadow cards have an implied "+1 card" since you dont have to draw them to play them). now, its card neutral but gets the card you need from your discard pile.
2:Shadow cards hide at the bottom of your deck so usually the problem is that you might not have the actions to play them before you draw into them, negating a large benefit. But since coffee house is "may play" then the action dilemma is gone.
But by having it discard the top card of the deck, you get a bit mor options for what to put into your hand but also accelerate how quickly you draw through your deck, risking drawing those pesky shadow cards instead of just keeping them at the bottom.

i hope this is making sense and im not rude

[grep]

Coffee House
$3 - Reaction - Shadow

At start of your turn, you may play this to look through your discard pile and put a card from it into your hand.
----------
You can play this from your deck as if in your hand.
[/size]

This seems usually a bit busted to me. If i get 5 of them and have 5 cards in my discard pile, well, thats like a tactician in draw!
You could draw into these and have them be useless of course, and they wont allways be great.
But it just seems too good for me.

For compact decks, you usually don't have many useful cards in the discard pile (typical problem with Mountain Village and Courier), and if the deck is bloated, usefulness is limited by the sifting speed. As it is not an Action, it is not affected by thrones and +X tokens, which limits the options for weird combos.

[faust]

Coffee House
$3 - Reaction - Shadow

At start of your turn, you may play this to look through your discard pile and put a card from it into your hand.
----------
You can play this from your deck as if in your hand.


* It is not an Action card, so it does not consume an Action and can only be played at start of the turn.

I would change the way the text is arranged. Right now, the first part ("At the start of your turn, ...") is an on-play effect, which doesn't really make sense. I suggest:

Coffee House
$4 - Reaction - Shadow

Look through your discard pile and put a card from it into your hand.
----------
At the start of your turn, you may play this from your deck or your hand.

I also made another suggestion in there, which is to increase the price to $4. I agree with fika monster that it's very strong right now, especially compared to Harbinger.

[silverspawn]

+2 Coffers, +1 VP is very strong as a Treasure, but is it busted relative to other 5$s? I don't think so. And yeah the shadow option is very weak, but is that a bad thing? I also don't think so. I actually love this design; I think it's cool to have a card where the shadow is the sidestory. It's still a big enough factor to change the card a lot.

I think the main problem is that it's super easy to just buy Tunas and Provinces, and that's not the most exciting thing ever. Plunder prevents that by having you already lean into building an engine via Encampments.

True if that strategy is competitive with engines. Which it probably isn't? Since, like, engines are pretty good.

It's a very easy to execute strategy, and the smoothing out of money due the the Coffers makes it strong. I agree that it won't be competitive with good engines, but the problem is that it's going to beat casual players fairly reliably.

Oh, for sure; Tuna + any card that draws is probably Rebuild+ powerlevel. I wouldn't really consider this a design flaw necessarily, but if you do, it definitely has it.

[segura]

Judging will be in roughly 24 hours. You can post until the very end.

[JW]

Portent
Action - Shadow - Omen
$4
+1 Sun
+2 Actions
If you played this from your deck, discard a card. If not, +1 Card.
———
You can play this from your deck as if in your hand.

[segura]

Shed by Jonatan Djurachkovitch
6/10
Not much to say here. The likelihood of Shadow whiffing is decreased by the abilities and I like that the topdeck ability also interacts with non-Shadows.

Furnace by Tiago
2/10
So Furance potentially topdecks Furnace. This would be nice with a normal Smithy, but what is the point of it given that you can play that bottom-decked Furnace anyway as if in your hand? That makes no sense and if anything that ability is a nerf so the card is weaker than Barge.

Kamidana by BryGuy
0/10
The second version was solid and I liked it a lot (8/10).
This is version is far too good (the only card besides Royal Blacksmith which can net draw 4) and also too complex (the discarding Debt part, you won't ever need that unless there are Debt-costed cards in the Kingdom).

Shaded by binbag420
7/10
A Shadow trait is fairly natural and I really like the downside.

Doppelganger by NoMoreFun
4/10
I don't know. Suppose there is Ironworks and Dopperganger in the Kingdom and you always blow up your Doppelgangers. Ironworks constantly gains Doppelgangers, so here we have -1 Card. Doppelganger Thrones those cards so we have +1 Card at best. The vanillas cancel each other so Ironworks kind of works like Throne Room.
At worst, i.e. if Doppelganger is in your hand or in your discard pile, which will often happen in this scenario due to Ironworks, we have net vanillas of -1 Card. So no, I am not convinced.
On the other hand, it is a one-shot $2 so it should be weak.

Pickpocket by X-tra
2/10
This does not excite me. Guaranteed spiking to $5 after the first shuffle is nice but that is really all that this card achieves.
Baseline scenario is terminal Silver. Sure, you can be thin and have no Treasures (terminal Gold) or you have to discard a Silver (terminal Copper), but terminal Silver seems to be the most likely and also the average case.
Compared to other terminal Silvers that draw like Cargo Ship (get that $5 the very next turn), Fortune Hunter (can make $4 or $5) or Garrison (draws potentially a lot), this seems weak, boring and not worth the terminal space.

Monopoly by faust
8/10
This is super novel and obviously brilliant. The only thing that does not convince me is the card effect, it is very extreme. I am also not a huge fan of the war of attrition-ish minigame that arises once everybody can draw their deck.
Compared to e.g. Flag Bearer or Treasurer, which feature similar minigames, the minigames occur here less often, the payoff is larger and the cost (Flag Bearer can be gained without being bought) is also larger.

Fairies by DashingEpistocrat
2/10
So Scheme but with cards from your hand and potentially more than 1 Card.
I think this does not work. In a decent engine, which is kind of the main situation in which your want this, you often draw your Fairies during your turn so it is no longer a cantrip.
In a decent engine, you can draw stuff dead but you mostly have your good stuff in play.
Increasing consistency with a card that is not all that consistent is not a decent insurance policy.

Stalker by silverspawn
9/10
Unlike the previous two Smithies that could be weaker, this is a proper Smithy+. It simple, it is either a Smithy or a Hunting Grounds, and the only thing that we can discuss is the parameter of 4 cards.
In a normal draw deck it is OKisk, because you can pull Village-Stalker-Village-Stalker with the second Stalker being buffed. I also think this illustrates that the first version with 5 cards was likely wrong.
In a deck with many Durations and cantrips, like Peddlers or splitters or whatever, this will shine.

Badge/Sheriff by LibraryAdventurer
7/10
Badge is vanilla-wise a Copper, a Treasure-Peddler (not underpriced like Supplies), a Fugitive or a Lab. Although it is obviously stronger in Kingdoms with Attacks, I like that you made sure that it is also decent in Kingdoms without such that those Sheriffs might see the light of day.
Sheriff is vanilla- wise often something like +2 Cards +2 Coins +1 Buy. This is pretty strong (and totally fine for the lower part of a split pile) given that +2 Cards +2 Coins is probably a $5.

Kappa by fika monster
?/10
I have a hard time to judge the strength of this:
Inn sifts with a net draw of -1.  This is a DoubleVillage with, at best, a net draw of -2. Seems weak.
On the other hand, a ShadowVillage is strong and massively increases the consistency of your deck.

Dojo by LTaco
10/10
I really like this Throne. It is very clear and "sharp", i.e. the advantage and disadvantage relative to Throne Room are immediately apparent.
It is slightly more (emergently) complex than Throne: Throne is good once you have a decent Action density whereas this also makes you want to build a deck with a variety of Actions.

Private Shrine by emtzalex
8/10
I have a soft spot for trash-for-Debt cards because unlike many trashers they are non-trivial to analyze and because they amplify the "payload trough" problem of trashing.

Swordsmith by AJL828
5/10
Similar to Conjurer. I think this could be simpler as the conditional non-terminality will rarely trigger.

Tuna byMochaMoko
1/10
What other posters said: far better than Plunder. Also, a deck with Market and 4 Tunas might not really want to green (quickly). That is more of a theoretical thing but it highlights the issue of pairing Coffers with VPs on a non-terminal.
I like the idea of a Treasure-Shadow that can work like a Treasure-Peddler though.

Manhunt by Snorka
0/10
This is a boring BM card. Spike to a Manhunt, buy a Copper (to be able to produce 8 Coins) and then just buy Manhunts/Provinces.

Silhouettist by infangthief
9/10
Basically a Shadow version of Courier. I like it, simple yet complex and it feels like it could be an official card.

Coffee House by grep
10/10
Man, this is sweet. Kudos for making a Lab via a pure Reaction.!
You often have no discard so this does not work as a mono-engine card. It could be a $4 but to test it $3 is the right price.

Portent by JW
4/10
The sifting makes this is too similar to Rustic Village for my taste.
The increase of consistency a Shadow splitter provides is nice but like with Kappa, a net draw of -1 can hurt you.


Lots of interesting cards so no easy choice. The winner is Coffee House by grep.

[JW]

You evaluated Manhunt as if it puts all copies into your hand, but it only puts one copy into your hand.

[segura]

You evaluated Manhunt as if it puts all copies into your hand, but it only puts one copy into your hand.

True that, I misread that. A Moat for $5 that digs for one card is pretty weak.

[X-tra]

Shadow cards weren't meant to be exciting; they are there to give you an extra option by being accessible (nearly) at all times. That's why we've got """boring""" official cards like Fishmonger where it's literally just a buy and a coin. It's the tactical nature of it being a Shadow card that makes them enthralling. Trying to recreate the vision Donald X. had for Shadow cards shouldn't be punished for not tickling your sense of excitement. And so, I'm sorry, but I did not like the way you judged my card. I normally never protest after judging is done, but giving a flat two outta ten for something that fits the design space of a Shadow card like a glove is flat out insulting.

2/10 judging.

[segura]

And so, I'm sorry, but I did not like the way you judged my card. I normally never protest after judging is done, but giving a flat two outta ten for something that fits the design space of a Shadow card like a glove is flat out insulting.

2/10 judging.

You might keep in mind that card judging is always a very subjective matter before you accuse somebody of insulting you. I find your card super boring, somebody else might consider it brilliant. Posting aggrandizing self-praise is pretty weird though and it is, at least to my knowledge, not how the contests work.

[X-tra]

You might keep in mind that card judging is always a very subjective matter before you accuse somebody of insulting you. I find your card super boring, somebody else might consider it brilliant. Posting aggrandizing self-praise is pretty weird though and it is, at least to my knowledge, not how the contests work.

Aggrandizing my card means very little when it scored a measly two out of ten. I do not care about winning these competitions – I have lost enough of them to fill a bank. What I do care about is having my card not being deemed completely worthless for petty reasons. I mean, you’ve straight up ranked some cards here with a bunch of zeros. What do you think this means for the creator of said cards? That what they put forth is complete and utter garbage? Dude, even putting something on these threads has some inherent value.

You talk about how, in your mind, my dissatisfaction has no place in these contests, but to me, what has no place is adding a per-card score value to your judging, especially if you’re going to go absolutely bonkers on the zeros.

[segura]

How people judge, whether they use scoring, playtest with the cards or whatever, is up to whoever runs a Weekly Contest. Trying to micromanage other people is one of the most disgusting character traits.

About „going absolutely bonkers on the zeros“, I rated two cards zero (I also rated two cards 10, so it looks kind of symmetrical). The first is a card whose previous version I rated 8, i.e. I made it clear that I like the idea a lot but that the power level was way off. The second one is a card that I misread.

[binbag420]

Any word from grep?

[fika monster]

I feel that both segura and xtra could have sent each other a dm instead of writing like this

[silverspawn]

Will elaborate because naked upvote is kinda cowardly: I upvoted because I think the non-subjective language (" is far too good"/"[is] too complex"/"obviously brilliant"/"is extreme"/"is boring"/etc etc etc) is unnecessarily emotionally harsh and imo it was only a matter of time before someone complains. (People tend to have a minimum threshold of annoyed-ness before they pick fights, so if one person does, it's usually safe assumption that other people were annoyed as well.) It's not only the isolated phrase as well, the tone overall tends to give that vibe. This applies to many non-judgment comments as well. I admit I don't even find the particular judgment on X-tra's card super noticeable/different from the rest.

I also think numerically rating all cards is cringe but I'm well aware you're not the first one to do it.

As I sidenote my favorite submission this contest was Tuna, would have given that a 9/10 probably, so it's just empirically not really the case that any of this stuff is obvious. People disagree on what is or isn't brilliant.

But iirc I've told you basically the same thing at least once before and you didn't seem interested in modulating behavior, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[grep]

I really appreciate segura's judging, but I don't feel comfortable with judging the next tournament. I'd kindly ask LTaco to do the next round

[segura]

Will elaborate because naked upvote is kinda cowardly: I upvoted because I think the non-subjective language (" is far too good"/"[is] too complex"/"obviously brilliant"/"is extreme"/"is boring"/etc etc etc) is unnecessarily emotionally harsh and imo it was only a matter of time before someone complains. (People tend to have a minimum threshold of annoyed-ness before they pick fights, so if one person does, it's usually safe assumption that other people were annoyed as well.) It's not only the isolated phrase as well, the tone overall tends to give that vibe. This applies to many non-judgment comments as well. I admit I don't even find the particular judgment on X-tra's card super noticeable/different from the rest.

I also think numerically rating all cards is cringe but I'm well aware you're not the first one to do it.

As I sidenote my favorite submission this contest was Tuna, would have given that a 9/10 probably, so it's just empirically not really the case that any of this stuff is obvious. People disagree on what is or isn't brilliant.

But iirc I've told you basically the same thing at least once before and you didn't seem interested in modulating behavior, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

This post is done in bad faith given that I made it pretty clear whenever my opinion was mainly based on my likes („I like“, „I have a soft spot for“, etc.) and dislikes and whenever it was more of an objective ‚power level is way off‘ thing.

So yeah, you an x-tra obviously have an axe to grind with me because I don’t „modulate“ my behaviour to your taste. I don’t, you can post whatever and however you like. If you attack me personally though, I am gonna respond like right now.