Print

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

[brokoli]

I thought about this mechanic for a simple reason : dark ages come with a lot of cards that have a good effect when trashed : rats, cultist, catacombs, fortress, hunting grounds, squire ... and they make all Saboteur, knights, rogue, swindler, etc... weaker (and saboteur is already not so strong...).
So why not a card with a bad effect when trashed ? This is difficult to do, because if there is a bad effect when trashed, you simply don't want to trash it and the "on trash" effect is useless. However, I thought this card (inspired by death cart) could work :

Action - $4
+1 action
+$3
You may trash an action card from your hand. If you don't, discard 2 cards.
---
When you trash this card, gain a curse.

Your opinion ?

[eHalcyon]

I think the mechanic idea is really interesting.  This card doesn't do it for me though.

If you don't trash an action, the penalty is no worse than Horse Traders.  You don't get a +Buy, but this is non-terminal.  Still probably wouldn't ever trash this on purpose.

I'm not sure how to make something that is likely to get trashed, but would have a bad effect when trashed.  It would probably have to trash itself.  But then, it shouldn't be a forced trash either, or else it's nothing more than a delayed [bad effect] when you buy it.

Hmm.

[rinkworks]

It's a bit of a quandary, because most trashing happens under the player's own control.  Making it vulnerable to Saboteur, Knights, and Rogue is a start.  Making it a Treasure would make it vulnerable to Thief and Pirate Ship as well, plus Loan (which a player with one of these just wouldn't buy, but if the card makes you avoid Loan, that's still an interaction of sorts).  But that's still only a few cards out of many.  Otherwise, the player just chooses not to trash the thing, and it's a wash.

So I think the on-trash effect would have to be either situationally beneficial (which is not really in keeping with your idea) or some kind of situationally forced trash.  Like this, which is not a real suggestion, just an illustration of what I mean:

Just an Illustration of What I Mean
$3 - Treasure
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck.  This is worth $1 for each differently named card revealed in this way.
If all revealed cards share a type, trash this.
--
When you trash this, gain a Curse.

In other words, the on-trash effect is bad and sometimes it is unavoidable.  I think cards using this kind of structure will be inherently swingy, though, and the other thing is that if you're going to go to this kind of trouble, is this really better than simply saying "If all revealed cards share a type, trash this and gain a Curse" and dropping the on-trash entirely?

So even with some convolutions to make the card trash itself sometimes, it's still a mechanic that requires Saboteur, Knights, Rogue, etc, in the kingdom to exploit.

[Archetype]

What if it got a really good effect, that can be something bad after a while.

Maybe:

Cathedral:
Cost: 3
+1 Action
+2 Cards
Trash 3 Cards from your hand, or trash this card.
                                                       
When you trash this, gain a Curse

No guarantees that it's balanced, but a card like that would be interesting.

[Davio]

You could just make a Copper piņata like Feodum.

Then it'll be an effect which is often bad, but sometimes (Gardens) useful.

Or you can make it an effect which helps on your current turn, but hurts in the future, like Beggar's "Gain 3 Coppers".

So, for example

Placeholder
Treasure - $4

$2
---------
When you trash this, gain 4 Coppers, putting them in your hand

[WheresMyElephant]

What about

 "If any card trashes this, trash that card?" Maybe on a Silver variant or something?

 It might have some finicky verbiage issues but it could have interesting interactions. It would defend against Knights et al, and let you ditch your unwanted Chapels or Mints. On the other hand, most of the time you probably don't care, and there's nothing forcing you to trash it so it would never REALLY be a downside...hmm.

What if it got a really good effect, that can be something bad after a while.

Maybe:

Cathedral:
Cost: 3
+1 Action
+2 Cards
Trash 3 Cards from your hand, or trash this card.
                                                       
When you trash this, gain a Curse

No guarantees that it's balanced, but a card like that would be interesting.

Interesting, but consider

Worse Cathedral
Cost $3
+1 Action
+2 Cards
Trash 3 cards from your hand.


Obviously this is a worse card (you can really get screwed by bad luck) but my point is, sooner or later you're just afraid to play it and it becomes a dead card, so replacing it with Curse doesn't matter much. Okay it's -1VP, hurts TfB synergies, blah blah blah but mostly the "on-trash penalty" is just a minor tweak to an otherwise typical card, which I suspect is typical of this "good card that turns bad and trashes into a Curse" approach.