Print

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

[Archetype]

Hello, I thought of some cards and was wondering what you guys thought of them.

Treasure Chest $2

Treasure

Big $1

Discard the top card of your deck, if it is a Treasure Card, gain a Silver.


Armory $3 (may change the name)

Action

+2 Cards
+2 Actions
-1 Buy (yes I know, I read the rules, I technically can't put this, but I've tested it out, and it's actually not to bad)


So what do you guys think? Do you think Treasure Chest is too broken? I'm considering changing the name, knocking off the $1, making it an action, and giving it +1 Action.

[DStu]

Armory $3 (may change the name)

Action

+2 Cards
+2 Actions
-1 Buy (yes I know, I read the rules, I technically can't put this, but I've tested it out, and it's actually not to bad)

So what do you guys think? Do you think Treasure Chest is too broken? I'm considering changing the name, knocking off the $1, making it an action, and giving it +1 Action.

The point with -1buy is that this card is a dead card without gainers or other +buy or edge cases. You may build a nice engine, but it's all for nothing because you can not buy anything. In rinkworks guide is some paragraph about this I think.

Treasure Chest $2

Treasure

Big $1

Discard the top card of your deck, if it is a Treasure Card, gain a Silver.

So a cheap Silver gainer. Don't think it's overpowered the question is if I would buy this. Definitely not when going for an engine. Opening with Mint is of course quite strong. Otherwise, in a BigMoney game with interesting $5s I probably would also not open with it, because I need the fives as fast as possible. BM+$4/$3 (like Smithy) it's probably a usefull card, but I'm not sure if I would take the marginal benefit of gaining more Silvers with the (small) risk of missing my Smithy.

[HiveMindEmulator]

So a cheap Silver gainer. Don't think it's overpowered the question is if I would buy this. Definitely not when going for an engine. Opening with Mint is of course quite strong. Otherwise, in a BigMoney game with interesting $5s I probably would also not open with it, because I need the fives as fast as possible. BM+$4/$3 (like Smithy) it's probably a usefull card, but I'm not sure if I would take the marginal benefit of gaining more Silvers with the (small) risk of missing my Smithy.

Its best place is probably in a Garden deck. Open with a couple +buy cards, use the buys to grab a handful of these and spam them for mass Silver.
It's probably also useful on a 5/2 in any money-heavy strategy. You're probably willing to take on an extra copper to gain several silvers.

[jonts26]

As stated, the problem with armory is that it's completely worthless most of the time. Additionally, you can't spam them in an engine as you lose a buy for each one played.

Maybe you can add some sort of option to the card. One more powerful one, which offers the -buy and another less poweful one with +buy? That way it self synergizes.

[Archetype]

@jonts26: Maybe a secondary Effect could be just one +1 Buy? then buying two would selfsynergize, as you said, but only in a game where no +Buys are on any Kingdom cards (besides Armory of course).

@HiveMindEmulator: Treasure Chest is effective if your deck is comprised of mainly money, that way you rarely wiff on gaining the silvers. You could also stack your deck by using Navigator or Cartographer to ensure to hit a Treasure Card every time you play it.


@DStu: Yes, I do agree what you say about Treasure Chest. There are times when I get so lucky, hitting Silvers and other Treasure Chests, but are giving up a key card, such as King's Court, by discarding it. I'm glad others don't think it's too good.

On the Armory though, it can be useful. If Tactian is in play, you can chain Armory's until you draw into your Tactian, or if you are playing with Black Market, you could use that to bypass the no buying (but using Black Market usually isn't a good idea in the first place). You could, of course, grab a Woodcutter or other +1 Buy Card to cancel out the -1 Buy Armory gives you.

I do agree that in a game with no +Buy cards, Armory becomes a dead card.

[timchen]

Very interesting card concepts. For armory, how likely is a setup for there is no +buy and no gainer (even like explorer or jack can work)? In my opinion it is no big deal for a card to be worthless in as many as half of the setups. Many more published cards do not even pass this criteria. And if you insist, you can make it +1 card +1 action; if you (-1 buy), +1 card +1 action.

Treasure chest is definitely more on the overpowered side than on the underpowered side.

[Voltgloss]

@HiveMindEmulator: Treasure Chest is effective if your deck is comprised of mainly money, that way you rarely wiff on gaining the silvers. You could also stack your deck by using Navigator or Cartographer to ensure to hit a Treasure Card every time you play it.

Other top-deck-stackers come to mind as combo potential.  Scout becomes (slightly) more useful.  Courtyard/Treasure Chest sounds quite strong, especially with +buy around.  Mandarin/Treasure Chest could be deceptively powerful.  Bureaucrat/Treasure Chest is rather amusing, if maybe not the most efficient approach. 

As for Armory, what about this tweak:

Armory $3
Action
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
-1 Buy
You may discard 2 Cards.  If you do, +1 Buy.

If you use the discard option, Armory becomes Inn without its on-gain ability.  Kind of a cross between Village and Warehouse (both themselves $3 cards). 

[Insomniac]

Or for Armory you could take a Young Witch approach.

Armory $3
Action
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
-1 Buy
Setup: In games with Armory randomly select a card costing 5+ that has +Buy. Add it to the other 10 kingdom cards (11 if Young Witch is in play)

The 5+ is just a random stipulation to throw on to make it harder to build an engine around. If Hamlet/Pawn is around it seems pretty easy to build a good engine very fast

[Archetype]

@timchen: That's how I see Armory too. It's usefulness in no +Buy games can be described as Counting Houses usefulness in a BigMoney games . But, I think that there are plenty of +Buy cards that a game that contains Armory and no +Buy cards is pretty rare.

@Voltglass: Really like your idea on the Armory! It will make the +2 Cards you draw with your next Armory nearly useless, but it will definitely help with chaining the Armories. The only thing is, the two Armories together with cancel out to only give you +2 Actions. Maybe Discard 1 card instead of 2? I'll have to test it, I'll try drawing a few kingdom sets, and see the percentage of the ones that contain buys, and the ones that don't.

@Insomniac: If the discarding effect that Voltglass suggested doesn't work and the random kingdom generator results aren't positive, I'll test out your idea.

[jonts26]

The problem with armory as originally stated is actually much worse than 'might be a dead card in certain kingdoms.' Even if you have a +buy in the kingdom, it suffers somewhat from the village/smithy engine problem. The rewards are potentially greater but it comes with the risk of some seriously terrible situations. Consider you have a hand of $5 and an armory. Simply playing the armory carries a huge risk. If you fail to find a +buy card, you've basically forfeited your turn. And if you have several of these cards in your deck, even if you have a lot of +buy cards as well, you're going to have a lot of turns which are useless. Obviously risk/reward sometimes comes into play, but this level of it creates some extremely swingy situations.

I think voltgloss's idea, or something like it, is the best option. The discard mechanic, and I don't think 2 cards is too much, act basically as a fail safe. You don't get the feeling of flipping a coin every time you play this card. If you fail to draw +buy, it's ok you can still take the rest of your turn.

[Voltgloss]

@Voltglass: Really like your idea on the Armory! It will make the +2 Cards you draw with your next Armory nearly useless, but it will definitely help with chaining the Armories. The only thing is, the two Armories together with cancel out to only give you +2 Actions. Maybe Discard 1 card instead of 2?

Thanks!  I thought about "discard 1 card," but if you do that, then the card is - played once - better than Village in almost every situation.  (+2 Cards, +2 Actions, discard 1 card)

Also, two Armories together isn't "just" +2 Actions.  First, it's actually +3 Actions, all told; and second, they're also sifting 4 cards.  It's not like Warehouse gives "just" +1 Action; it's also sifting 3 cards (which is the main point of the card). 

In the end, I set the subclause at "discard 2 cards" to try to keep Armory's power in line with other similar $3 cards (i.e., Village and Warehouse). 

Also, if you're thinking of changing Armory's name, may I suggest "Hostel?"  As it's effectively something akin to a cheaper, less-effective version of an Inn. 

[Powerman]

The problem with Armory is how do you deal with negative buys?  As in if you were to play 7 of them, would you be at -6 buys, or just at zero?  And then if you then played a woodcutter, would you be back at 1 buy, or simply down to a measly -5?

[DStu]

The problem with Armory is how do you deal with negative buys?  As in if you were to play 7 of them, would you be at -6 buys, or just at zero?  And then if you then played a woodcutter, would you be back at 1 buy, or simply down to a measly -5?

You have to go negative. Without the +buy, that card is a Level2 City, so you usually will play most of your cards at the beginning, and can afterwards play most of your terminals or cantrips, because an Armorystack alone will draw most of you deck. If in this situation the -buy floors at zero, you just need 1 +buy to make up for playing this bunch of extremely good cards that only costs you $3, and that's way too strong.

[jotheonah]

How about a Crossroads-type partial fix for Armory. I think that

"If this is the first Armory you've played this turn, -1 Buy" is a lot more feasible (That way no matter how many Armories you employ, you only need one +Buy card to make it useful.

Would you buy it in a game with no +Buy? Maybe. Maybe it's worth it to draw your deck and play all your actions in order to (A) give out a ton of curses (B) remodel a bunch of things (C) trash/Forge a bunch of things (D) gain a bunch of things with some kind of a workshop variant. That's four reasons to buy these without +Buy on the board.

[eHalcyon]

How about a Crossroads-type partial fix for Armory. I think that

"If this is the first Armory you've played this turn, -1 Buy" is a lot more feasible (That way no matter how many Armories you employ, you only need one +Buy card to make it useful.

Would you buy it in a game with no +Buy? Maybe. Maybe it's worth it to draw your deck and play all your actions in order to (A) give out a ton of curses (B) remodel a bunch of things (C) trash/Forge a bunch of things (D) gain a bunch of things with some kind of a workshop variant. That's four reasons to buy these without +Buy on the board.

I think this is a pretty neat idea.

It might be overboard, but what about adding this as well:

"You may trash this card from play at any time for +1 Buy".

You could use a chain of them to set up a megaturn, trashing them all at once and buying a bunch of stuff out.

[Archetype]

@jonts26: I've tested with armory, and found that you need to chain them to maximize thier potential. Sure, you'll rack up a few -buys, but if you can draw into a Market, Grandmarket, or Council Room, they can hopefully chain eachother to cancel it the armories out.

I also tried the discarding out, and it am sorry to say it makes Armory a very good card, becoming a cross between Warehouse and Village, but given the choice between the three 3 Actions, I would almost always pick Armory. So maybe I should test it at 4?

@Voltglass: Sorry, when I said chaining the armories, and you suggested your idea, I thought you meant this:

Armory $3

Action

+2 Actions
+2 Cards
-1 Buy

or

+2 Cards
Discard 2 Cards, +1 Buy

That's why I suggested Discard 1 Card. This layout also doesn't make Armory overly good, because you need to play them in pairs to cancel each other out.

@Powerman: Yes, the negative buys are cumulative.

@DStu: My -buy thinking was this:
Number of extra buys at the start of turn: 0
Play Armory (-1 Buy) (-1)
Play Armory (-1 Buy) (-2)
Play Armory (-1 Buy) (-3)
Play Woodcutter (+1 Buy) (-2)
Play Woodcutter (+1 Buy) (-1)
Play Market (+1 Buy) (0) ( You can now by a card)
Play Woodcutter (+1 Buy) (1) (You can now by 2 cards)

By doing that, the three negative buys and three positive buy cards cancel out, acting as if you didn't play any "buy" cards at all.

@jotheonah: I think that would be a little too broken. If there was only one buy card out there to be bought (say Baron), and I had a 4-3 split, I would buy Baron then Armory, and every turn I could, buy another Armory, because after the first Armory, all the others would be a better Laboratory.

@eHalcyon: I like this. They would cancel themselves out, but be trashed. I'll have to test this out, because this could make the card viable option in almost all Kingdom sets.