Print

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

[rinkworks]

One of my favorite card types is the Duration card.  Seems like others like the Duration cards a lot too and, like me, want to see more in the future.  It seemed to me initially that the space for vanilla Duration cards was largely filled, but then I started wondering about Duration cards that don't do *anything* for you on the turn you play them, only on the one afterward.

Tactician is like this, but to a greater extreme.  Not only doesn't Tactician do anything that first turn, it actively sabotages what's left of it.  But how about some middle ground?  Duration cards that do nothing but consume a card slot and action when played, with all of the benefit happening on the second turn?

I thought of a few:

Dinghy
$4 - Action/Duration
On your next turn, +1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Buy, and +1 Coin.

This is sort of like a delayed Market.  Sort of, because eating an Action one turn and bumping you up to 2 Actions the next turn is very different from what a Market does, which is simply to replace itself.  Still, it seemed close enough to a delayed Market to price 1 coin cheaper.  The reasoning behind the name Dinghy is that a Dinghy is a pretty paltry vessel by itself, but eventually it'll take you somewhere bigger.

Sailboat
$4 - Action/Duration
On your next turn, +2 Cards, +1 Action.

This makes a glorious second turn, equivalent to having played two Laboratories and a Village on that second turn.  But I still thought $4 was the right price, as it feels significantly weaker than a Wharf, given how it consumes a card and an action on that first turn without providing you any benefit on it.

Huckster
$3 - Action/Duration
On your next turn, +1 Buy, +3 Coins.

Instinctively, $3 seems too cheap for a +3 Coins card.  But I arrived at the price two separate ways:  (1) Start with Woodcutter.  Have it give you an extra coin, and bump up the price to $4 accordingly.  Then delay the bonus and knock the cost back down to $3.  (2) Start with Horse Traders.  Take off the reaction, and it should probably cost $3.  Take off the discard requirement, and it could be bumped back up to $4.  Delay its effect, and it should probably go back down to $3.

Still, a $3 card with a +$3 bonus feels pretty sweet, and I wonder if it's balanced in practice.

Opinions?  Other ideas?

[guided]

Have it give you an extra coin, and bump up the price to $4 accordingly.

Just like Gold costs $1 more than Silver?

[WanderingWinder]

I'm sure all of these are overpowered, which is the number one thing I see in fan-designed cards (so don't feel bad!). There's one important principle here that the costing of these cards seem to ignore, and that's that having imbalanced hands is generally better than having balanced hands. This is actually the principle behind tactician, and the reason why it can be good even if there are no cards to combo off of it. Two hands at once is better than separately. But at any rate, all these cards trading benefits now for later are pretty strong. Now let's look at the cards one by one.
Dinghy: I would probably prefer this to market like 95% of the time if it were costed at $5. Maybe it's still printable there (seems the strength might be reasonable there, though a little strong), but I think it might also be too close to being 'strictly better'.
Sailboat: Hello. This is so much better than caravan it's not even funny. Printable at $5? Maybe, but it would be one of the top 3 non-attack 5s rather easily, maybe even clearly the strongest, so it's probably not the best idea. It combos with itself so well - you could pretty easily, pretty quickly use only it to be drawing your whole deck every turn.
Huckster: If this gave $2 rather than $3, it would be much better than woodcutter. As is, I think it would be strong and interesting at $5.

[agrajag]

I like the idea of trading away things now to get a benefit next turn. How about a delayed Cellar variant? Discard any number of cards this turn, draw that many extra cards at the start of your next turn.

[rinkworks]

I'm sure all of these are overpowered, which is the number one thing I see in fan-designed cards (so don't feel bad!).

Heh.  This is funny, because my first couple attempts were priced too high.  I've self-corrected to the median!

Dinghy: I would probably prefer this to market like 95% of the time if it were costed at $5. Maybe it's still printable there (seems the strength might be reasonable there, though a little strong), but I think it might also be too close to being 'strictly better'.

Easy enough to drop one of the bonuses, I guess.  When thinking about this card, I keep -- perhaps incorrectly -- flashing back to the realization that Caravan is exactly (barring a few interactions with Conspirator, Peddler, etc) the same as playing a Laboratory one turn later.  But the difference between that and this is that Caravan costs nothing (in terms of a card slot or action) to play, whereas this does.

Therefore, if a delayed Laboratory that's free to play costs one less than Laboratory does, can't a delayed Market that's *not* free to play cost one less?  But, as I already pointed out, Dinghy isn't precisely a delayed Market.  Maybe it's the +1 Action that it needs to lose.

Sailboat: Hello. This is so much better than caravan it's not even funny. Printable at $5? Maybe, but it would be one of the top 3 non-attack 5s rather easily, maybe even clearly the strongest, so it's probably not the best idea. It combos with itself so well - you could pretty easily, pretty quickly use only it to be drawing your whole deck every turn.

How?  Unlike Caravan, where you can freely play as many as you want every turn, Sailboat eats an action when you play it.  Wharf seems the closer point of comparison.  Sure, if you could play eight Wharves in one turn, you'd have a powerhouse next turn.  But it takes a seriously massive infrastructure to be able to do that in the first place -- and then, on your mega-turn, you can't replay those Wharves for the turn after, because they're still in play.

Admittedly, the extra actions from the previous turn's Sailboat(s) give you the extra actions you need to play more Sailboats this turn.  Is that what you mean?  Even so, I can't quite visualize how these are stackable in a truly sustaining fashion.  I'm sure you're right -- you have more experience with this game than I do -- but I can't quite envision it.

Huckster: If this gave $2 rather than $3, it would be much better than woodcutter. As is, I think it would be strong and interesting at $5.

If it gave $2, it would basically be a Woodcutter, just delayed a turn.  But I gather you're saying that eating the card/action to play it on an earlier turn, as opposed to the turn in which you reap the benefits, makes it stronger?  That makes a lot of sense to me.  So if Huckster gave +1 Buy and +2 Coins on the next turn, then $4 would be a reasonable price?

Thanks for your analysis!

[WanderingWinder]

Dinghy would effectively be a delayed market if it only gave the money and buy, or if you want to be analogous to caravan, gave the card and action immediately, money and buy next turn. As written, it's stronger.
I play one sailboat this turn, two next turn, three the next turn... it blows up quickly. Also a net gain of two cards is ridiculously powerful. So you basically got that.
The modified Huckster you propose with $2 is too weak at 4. Let's face it, woodcutter's not all that strong. You could price it at $3, but then it's too much like woodcutter. I'd test it at $5 giving $3, but I'd be worried about it being too strong.

[Superdad]

I think the critical thing about "2 hands at once is better than 1 hand at a time" is actually the +buy. I don't think I believe it without the +buy. For example, imagine warf without the +buy. It's really not that good anymore. Doubly so, these actions are all terminals. Using a terminal on a card that does nothing on the turn you play it is beyond risky.

Imagine the following pure-delay:

Late Merchant Ship
+$4 on your next turn.

This card is actually terrible. It would need to be priced pretty low to be worth it. It certainly is junk at $5. It will ruin the turn you play it on. On the next turn, you have no guarantee that the money isn't completely wasted. I mean what if you get $10 on turn 5 with this in a province game? You are still going to buy the same gold that you were able to afford anyways. It's not like you'll get a turn 5 province.

That being said, for colony games, it could be useful to vault yourself to a quick platinum. In a colony game it would be a midgame strong card that turns near useless endgame, when it turns your $11 one-buy turn into a $15 one-buy turn, while screwing your turn previous.


I think the key component to these kind of cards is +buy (or +action to a lesser extent). This is a big reason why Wharf and Tactician are SO much better than Merchant Ship.

[rinkworks]

Ok, reining Sailboat in a bit, how about this?

Sailboat
$5 - Action
On your next turn, +2 Cards and +1 Coin.

The lack of +Actions means they don't chain exponentially from turn to turn.  The coin is there to keep it from being (substantially) strictly worse than Wharf at the same price.

I considered pricing a version without the +1 Coin at $4, but then I realized that was basically just a delayed Smithy at the same cost.  Kind of boring.

Dinghy
$4 - Action
On your next turn, +1 Card and +1 Action.

This is like Caravan that substitutes a delayed Village effect for the cantripness.

[Taco Lobster]

Imagine the following pure-delay:

Late Merchant Ship
+$4 on your next turn.

This card is actually terrible. It would need to be priced pretty low to be worth it.

I would say that card is potentially broken unless it's at least $5 (and probably more).  Getting $4 on my next turn and having 5 cards means it's easy to hit $8 even with only coppers in my deck.  If I get two of these and a village, I'm going to buy a province next turn no matter what I draw.  Sure, I may not get to spend all my money because I don't have a +buy, but if I'm getting a province every turn after I play it, I don't care.  Or, I will gain a card that gives me a +buy.  This card is like Tactician, minus the action and buy, but also minus discarding my hand.

Having a +buy on Warf, Council Room, and Tactician is gravy - the extra cards significanly overshadows the +buy.  Platinum is +$5 without an extra buy, and a card that's almost a platinum but costs $5 (or less) is scary. 

[WanderingWinder]

Good points. That's mostly because you're thinking about buying stuff, and these guarantee you being able to buy a lot. In a deck where you can't get that level of money, having 6 and 0 is generally better than having 3 and 3. If the point is more setting up a big chain of actions, the extra buys don't matter as much. But +buys are relatively common, so that this kind of card can often be broken, even if it isn't always. And that's a big problem.
Actually, I think Wharf would be good without the buy, just not the clear best non-attack $5 in the game.
Delayed merchant ship would be way too good at $4, and I don't think much worse (if any) than the actual merchant ship at $5. Indeed, it's probably better than the real thing in colony games.

[Taco Lobster]

I like where your heart is rinkworks, but part of me wonders if all the effort to have a village on your next turn is worth it.  It reminds me of the discussion we had regarding a $3 card that reads "+$2, +1 action".  90% of the time, this is a silver.  Does it make sense to have such a card for the 10% of games where it is different?  Maybe, but it's not that interesting as untapped design space. 

That said, these are probably useful exercises for establishing baselines of cost/power in terms of delayed power cards.  There might be an effect that is only worthwhile if it has a delay (like Tactician). 

One last problem is Haven - that card already does most of what you're trying to do, particularly with non-terminal cards like Market.  I can turn any non-terminal action card into a delayed action card with Haven.  Is there additional functionality and gameplay from having Haven built into a card?  Maybe, but I don't know that Market or Village are the cards where this mechanic could shine.

Anyone know why there aren't any duration attacks?*  That seems like the most natural fit to me - a powerful attack that you can see coming.  To be interesting, it would probably have to be based on the turn that was played while the duration was on the board.  Something like:

Duration Followers
Duration - Action - Attack
On your next turn, each opponent discards 2 cards and gains a curse for each victory card they gained during their last turn.

Or something like that.  The duration element becomes relevant because the opponent can take steps to mitigate the attack, which allows the attack itself to be more powerful.

*Oh yeah, they're screwy with Reaction cards, aren't they.  That probably makes duration attacks a bad idea.  Oh well.

[rinkworks]

I like where your heart is rinkworks, but part of me wonders if all the effort to have a village on your next turn is worth it.

Well, it's also a Laboratory next turn as well, but I didn't mention that, because that's also what a Caravan does.  So the full summary of what it would do is eat a card and an action this turn, then set-up next turn as if you had played both a Laboratory and a Village at the start of it.  Given that Laboratory is virtually always powerful, and Village is powerful in the right circumstances, I figured it might work.

[agrajag]

I think Duration-Attacks could work, you'd just need some extra rules saying that Reactions only trigger at the start of the second turn (when the Attack actually happens).

Also maybe a Duration-Reaction? Like "Anytime a player does X while this card is in play, get benefit Y"

Ok, reining Sailboat in a bit, how about this?

Sailboat
$5 - Action
On your next turn, +2 Cards and +1 Coin.

Isn't this way worse than Wharf at the same price? Because Wharf happens on both turns instead of just the next one, and I think I'd rather have the +1 Buy instead of +1 Coin anyway.

[rinkworks]

Sailboat
$5 - Action
On your next turn, +2 Cards and +1 Coin.

Isn't this way worse than Wharf at the same price? Because Wharf happens on both turns instead of just the next one, and I think I'd rather have the +1 Buy instead of +1 Coin anyway.

How about both?

[minced]

To understand the strength of a delayed card, add +1 card +1 action to its delayed effect. E.g. caravan *reads* +1 card next turn, which seems piddly, but is actually equivalent to a laboratory. The only reason caravan is weaker than lab is because you need twice as many caravans as labs to draw your entire deck each turn (you can only draw a caravan when it isn't in duration). So a delayed +1 card +1 action is a delayed city, and a delayed +2 cards is equivalent to playing two labs (!), or a smithy and a village.

Hope that helps. Delayed cards that do nothing on one turn are actually pretty interesting.

[livious]

Huh.  My reaction was that these are all kind of weak. 

- I think you're underestimating how bad missing the reshuffle is, especially for card drawers are speeding up your shuffling.  For drawing your whole deck every turn Caravan is only half a Laboratory.  Open Huckster over Silver and 42% of the time both Huckster will miss the 2nd reshuffle and you're shuffling in a card worth $2 less than it would've been.  That's pretty devastating.

- +1 Action is something you really want this turn to match supply and demand for actions together.  A deck full of caravans can always play all its actions.  Not so much for a deck full of Sailboats.

- The imbalanced turn thing is mitigated if you're buying multiples.  If you're deferring benefits and then next turn drawing more cards that just defer again the turns are being smoothed back out.

[rinkworks]

I've now playtested all three cards.  WanderingWinder, you completely nailed Huckster.  As written, the card is a strong, but probably not too strong, $5-cost card.

I revised Dinghy to only offering +1 Card, +1 Action on the next turn.  This turned out to be too weak at the $4-cost level, as, using Caravan as the point of comparison, the extra second-turn Village effect was not nearly enough compensation for the loss of first-turn cantripness.  Mostly this is because it's hard to predict if you'll need the extra action on the next turn or not.  At a cost of $3, it felt better, but it still feels weak and makes me wonder if my original version was really that overpowered at $4.  However, I think I'll leave it the way it is.

Sailboat is tough.  I haven't figured out what I'm going to do with that one yet.  Part of the trouble is that the +2 Cards part makes Wharf the obvious point of comparison, but, given how powerful Wharf is for its cost, trying to be competitive with it probably isn't the best goal.

[ThetaSigma12]

I think I might be winning the Necro Wars:

[tristan]

I think I might be winning the Necro Wars:

This has to cost 2 as it is strictly weaker than Market Square.

[ThetaSigma12]

I think I might be winning the Necro Wars:

This has to cost 2 as it is strictly weaker than Market Square.

No it's not. Next turn it's a super-lost-city. Remember that duration effects on your next turn have a +1 Card +1 Action built in. That's why caravan is considered a lab variant.

[tristan]

I think I might be winning the Necro Wars:

This has to cost 2 as it is strictly weaker than Market Square.

No it's not. Next turn it's a super-lost-city. Remember that duration effects on your next turn have a +1 Card +1 Action built in. That's why caravan is considered a lab variant.

Yes it is. Anything now is better than anything latter.
This why a delayed Lab like Caravan costs 4 instead of 5 and why a delayed Peddler (with a bonus!) like Caravan Guard costs 3 instead of 4.

By your logic "At the start of your next turn: +2 Cards" is superstrong as it is a Double Lab next turn, ignoring that now it is a dead card and worse than Moat sans reaction.
Your card is a delayed Market Square sans reaction so it is worse in every aspect. Now if it provided something on the current turn it would be a different thing.

[ThetaSigma12]

I think I might be winning the Necro Wars:

This has to cost 2 as it is strictly weaker than Market Square.

No it's not. Next turn it's a super-lost-city. Remember that duration effects on your next turn have a +1 Card +1 Action built in. That's why caravan is considered a lab variant.

Yes it is. Anything now is better than anything latter.
This why a delayed Lab like Caravan costs 4 instead of 5 and why a delayed Peddler (with a bonus!) like Caravan Guard costs 3 instead of 4.

By your logic "At the start of your next turn: +2 Cards" is superstrong as it is a Double Lab next turn, ignoring that now it is a dead card and worse than Moat sans reaction.
Your card is a delayed Market Square sans reaction so it is worse in every aspect. Now if it provided something on the current turn it would be a different thing.

No, next turn it's a Lost City AND a Market Square.

[tristan]

I think I might be winning the Necro Wars:

This has to cost 2 as it is strictly weaker than Market Square.

No it's not. Next turn it's a super-lost-city. Remember that duration effects on your next turn have a +1 Card +1 Action built in. That's why caravan is considered a lab variant.

Yes it is. Anything now is better than anything latter.
This why a delayed Lab like Caravan costs 4 instead of 5 and why a delayed Peddler (with a bonus!) like Caravan Guard costs 3 instead of 4.

By your logic "At the start of your next turn: +2 Cards" is superstrong as it is a Double Lab next turn, ignoring that now it is a dead card and worse than Moat sans reaction.
Your card is a delayed Market Square sans reaction so it is worse in every aspect. Now if it provided something on the current turn it would be a different thing.

No, next turn it's a Lost City AND a Market Square.

You are right, a delayed Market Square would be +1 Card, +1 Action and the +1 Buy in the next turn.
Your card is even worse than that as it doesn't just postpone the extra buy but even the cantrip; in the current turn it is dead and you have a much harder time playing Dinghies consistenly than with Market Square.

By your logic At the start of your next turn: +1 Card, +2 Actions would be far better than Village as it is TWO VILLAGES AND A LAB !!!! next turn, again ignoring that it is a dead card in the current turn.

If by now you still don't see that anything latter is strictly worse than anything now I cannot help you.

[ThetaSigma12]

I think I might be winning the Necro Wars:

This has to cost 2 as it is strictly weaker than Market Square.

No it's not. Next turn it's a super-lost-city. Remember that duration effects on your next turn have a +1 Card +1 Action built in. That's why caravan is considered a lab variant.

Yes it is. Anything now is better than anything latter.
This why a delayed Lab like Caravan costs 4 instead of 5 and why a delayed Peddler (with a bonus!) like Caravan Guard costs 3 instead of 4.

By your logic "At the start of your next turn: +2 Cards" is superstrong as it is a Double Lab next turn, ignoring that now it is a dead card and worse than Moat sans reaction.
Your card is a delayed Market Square sans reaction so it is worse in every aspect. Now if it provided something on the current turn it would be a different thing.

No, next turn it's a Lost City AND a Market Square.

You are right, a delayed Market Square would be +1 Card, +1 Action and the +1 Buy in the next turn.
Your card is even worse than that as it doesn't just postpone the extra buy but even the cantrip; in the current turn it is dead and you have a much harder time playing Dinghies consistenly than with Market Square.

By your logic At the start of your next turn: +1 Card, +2 Actions would be far better than Village as it is TWO VILLAGES AND A LAB next turn, again ignoring that it is a dead card in the current turn.

If by now you still don't see that anything latter is strictly worse than anything now I cannot help you.

Okay, I'm a little confused on what you are trying to prove. I think we can both agree that this isn't strictly worse, but it could be worse. And yes, at the start of your next turn: 1 Card, +2 Actions is probably better than village. I think tactician demonstrates pretty clearly that even if it's horrible now, being good later can make it up. Also, I was going off of rinworks' quote here:

I revised Dinghy to only offering +1 Card, +1 Action on the next turn.  This turned out to be too weak at the $4-cost level, as, using Caravan as the point of comparison, the extra second-turn Village effect was not nearly enough compensation for the loss of first-turn cantripness.  Mostly this is because it's hard to predict if you'll need the extra action on the next turn or not.  At a cost of $3, it felt better, but it still feels weak and makes me wonder if my original version was really that overpowered at $4.  However, I think I'll leave it the way it is.

That's why I added the +Buy, to give it a slight buff.

[tristan]

Okay, I'm a little confused on what you are trying to prove. I think we can both agree that this isn't strictly worse, but it could be worse. And yes, at the start of your next turn: 1 Card, +2 Actions is probably better than village.

By your weird logic Fishing Village would be better than Bazaar as it is a Bazaar next turn and something now. Obviously this is preposterous.
By your logic Swamp Hag would be WORSE if it provided the 3 coins right now because IT IS A TRIPLE PEDDLER NEXT TURN !!!.

This is not a matter of opinion. A delayed effect is simply worse than the immediate effect. I want my stuff now, not next year when I am dead or next turn when the game might be already over.