Print

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

[Gary55]

I was thinkin a couple cards:
Shipwreck
5$
Action
+3 cards or +2 coins and +1 buy
When you trash this you may gain a silver

Haunted village
4$
Action
+2 actions
Each other may discard an estate, if didnt they take a curse

Grey economy
5$
Action
+2 coins
+2 cards or trash up to 2 cards

Tell me what you think!

[Asper]

Hi and welcome to the forums

I was thinkin a couple cards:
Shipwreck
5$
Action
+3 cards or +2 coins and +1 buy
When you trash this you may gain a silver

This is a 5$ which can chose between two effects. Smithy (which is a 4$) and Woodcutter (which is a 3$, and a weak one on top of that). I think it is too weak. For example, compare it to Band of Misfits. That card is a 5$, too, and can chose between the effects of any action card costing less than 5$, as long as that card is in the supply. Allthough your card is not dependant on the supply, its choices are more than mediocre. Considering that there allready are 5$s that give +3 Cards and an attack and how weak Woodcutter is, you should definately rethink the effect. Maybe add a weak attack that happens no matter what choice you make?
I kind of like the on-trash, but of course we have seen something similar on Feodum.

Haunted village
4$
Action
+2 actions
Each other may discard an estate, if didnt they take a curse

This is a nonterminal Curser. They tend to be extremely strong, and even if the bane was "any victory card" instead of "Estate", it would still be too much. Of course the card also lacks an attack type.

Grey economy
5$
Action
+2 coins
+2 cards or trash up to 2 cards

+2$, +2Cards is very strong by itself and probably too much for 5$ on its own. The choice of another, strong option makes this even stronger. Charge more for it or add a noticeable drawback to balance this card.

[SirPeebles]

Welcome to the forum!

Firstly, this is just about the least descriptive subject line possible in this subforum  .  Maybe spruce it up a bit?

As for the cards.

Shipwreck seems fine to me.  Grey economy seems OK too.

Haunted Village looks way too strong.  Nonterminal Cursers are very strong.  I believe the only printed one is Familiar, and it has a steep potion cost which limits how quickly you can accumulate them.

Haunted Village on the other hand costs only $4, and not only is it nonterminal but it is also a Village.  This means that you can pretty easily buy lots of them, and then spam them hard.  The Estates one would be to block this are just as dead in one's deck as the Curses being avoided.  And once the Curses are gone, rather than having a deck full of do-nothing Familiars you'd have a deck full of actions, albeit ones with no +card.

Haunted Village is also worded a bit awkwardly.  I could see it being read as saying an opponent may discard an estate if they don't take a curse.  That is, they first choose to take a curse or not.  And speaking of which, you should probably say "gain a Curse", unless you have a good reason for not saying gain and want to define take.  And as long as I'm being a pedant, in Shipwreck you need to give mechanism for determining which of the two sides of the or happens.  And some punctuation would clear up ambiguity about whether it is:
(+3 cards or +2 coins) and +1 buy        or        +3 cards or (+2 coins and +1 buy)


Perhaps use

+1 buy
Choose one:  +3 cards;  +2 coins


or

Choose one: +3 cards; +2 coins, + 1 buy

[Drab Emordnilap]

Haunted Village: Non-terminal attacks (attacks that provide additional actions) are very strong, because they're very easy to play multiple in a turn. This Inez's a village, which makes it even easier to combine with a card drawer to play a bunch. And since it only costs $4, you can start on these as early as the first turn.

The Estate clause makes this card interesting, though, because it actually means its fairly likely to miss in the early game, where curses are most harmful. The fact that you have to discard the Estate makes the opt-out much less powerful on 3 and 4 player games. At first blush I thought this card was crazy busted, but now I'm not sure.

Grey Economy: A card that just said "+2 cards, +$2" would be worth $6 already, and this even lets you trash instead. It's a reasonable card, but not for $5.

Shipwreck seems fine, Smithy+ is usually a $5, and the additional option is just Woodcutter. Sometimes it'll be the only +buy, and sometimes you'll draw your whole deck and get to use this for cash. The on trash effect isn't huge, but the flavor makes it worth the clutter points for me. I think this card is the best of the three from a design aesthetic standpoint.

Edit: I disagree that Shipwreck is too weak. Sure, it's not as strong as some of the other +3 cards $5s, but hey, they can't all be Torturer. I think this card fills an interesting niche as "cards that let you get money if you need it", like nobles is "cards that let you get a village if you need it". You 'never' buy Nobles to use as a village, you buy it for cards, but sometimes you're happy the other option is there. Shipwreck feels the same to me.

[Asper]

I disagree that Shipwreck is too weak. Sure, it's not as strong as some of the other +3 cards $5s, but hey, they can't all be Torturer. I think this card fills an interesting niche as "cards that let you get money if you need it", like nobles is "cards that let you get a village if you need it". You 'never' buy Nobles to use as a village, you buy it for cards, but sometimes you're happy the other option is there. Shipwreck feels the same to me.

I guess it's not awful. Probably i was too hard to it. Nobles has VPs, though. As a Necropolis/Moat Smithy alone, i'd buy it for 3$ 4$, but not for 6$.

[jamespotter]

I think Haunted Village could work...provided the bane clause becomes "reveal a victory card". Still, I think you may have found an interesting way to create the long sought-after "attack village".

[SirPeebles]

+2 cards, +2 actions, and being able to block attacks is worth much more than $4.

[Asper]

+2 cards, +2 actions, and being able to block attacks is worth much more than $4.

I was talking about Nobles without Victory points, so probably that was misleading. It's neither attack-blocking nor can you chose actions and cards.

Edit: Forgot Nobles has 3 cards, not 2.

Smithopolis
Action, less than 4$
Chose one:
+ 3 Cards; Or +2 Actions

[Drab Emordnilap]

+2 cards, +2 actions, and being able to block attacks is worth much more than $4.

I was talking about Nobles without Victory points, so probably that was misleading. It's neither attack-blocking nor can you chose actions and cards.

Edit: Forgot Nobles has 3 cards, not 2.

Smithopolis
Action, less than 4$
Chose one:
+ 3 Cards; Or +2 Actions

How can this be less than $4? It's strictly better than Smithy.

[achmed_sender]

+2 cards, +2 actions, and being able to block attacks is worth much more than $4.

Smithopolis
Action, less than 4$
Chose one:
+ 3 Cards; Or +2 Actions

Did I miss a joke?

Smithy is already $4, this is better and cheaper?!?

EDIT: Drap Emordnilap was faster

[Gary55]

Thanks for the feedback !
This made me think and playtest more too and i changed the haunted village to bit more balanced way: instead of curses it gives a ruin and instead of "bane" estate, every victory card blocks it.
Haunted village
4$
Action-attack-looter
+2 actions
Each other player may discard a victory card,
If someone didnt discard he gains a ruin

[Drab Emordnilap]

Thanks for the feedback !
This made me think and playtest more too and i changed the haunted village to bit more balanced way: instead of curses it gives a ruin and instead of "bane" estate, every victory card blocks it.
Haunted village
4$
Action-attack
+2 actions
Each other player may discard a victory card,
If someone didnt discard he gains a ruin

Just a note, it needs to be a looter if its using ruins.

[Gary55]

Thanks for the feedback !
This made me think and playtest more too and i changed the haunted village to bit more balanced way: instead of curses it gives a ruin and instead of "bane" estate, every victory card blocks it.
Haunted village
4$
Action-attack
+2 actions
Each other player may discard a victory card,
If someone didnt discard he gains a ruin

Just a note, it needs to be a looter if its using ruins.

Oh my bad!

[SirPeebles]

Well, it doesn't have to be a Looter.  It just wouldn't do much as an attack unless some other Looter is in the kingdom.  It would still trigger Beggars though...

[Asper]

+2 cards, +2 actions, and being able to block attacks is worth much more than $4.

I was talking about Nobles without Victory points, so probably that was misleading. It's neither attack-blocking nor can you chose actions and cards.

Edit: Forgot Nobles has 3 cards, not 2.

Smithopolis
Action, less than 4$
Chose one:
+ 3 Cards; Or +2 Actions

How can this be less than $4? It's strictly better than Smithy.

Because i'm an idiot.

[Awaclus]

Smithopolis would be competitive at $5, methinks. And Shipwreck is better on paper, because Woodcutter costs $3 and Native Village at $2 is strictly superior to Smithopolis' +actions. Sure, Smithopolis has all the necessary elements for a working +cards/+actions engine by itself, but Shipwreck has 50% of the necessities and one of the factors that make a working +cards/+actions engine really strong.

[GeronimoRex]

Haunted Village is the most interesting to me, but rather than use it for Ruins, I'd stick with curses, which are available in all games.

I think if you changed it just a little, you'd fix the potential problems, though it might be borderline too weak this way:

Haunted village
4$
Action-Attack
+2 actions
Each other player reveals a victory card or gains a curse.

Allowing other players to reveal rather than discard helps eliminate the problem of spamming Haunted Villages--it also fixes the compound penalty that could occur in 3-4 player games.

Early game, this is likely to hit Estates--every opponent is essentially starting out with three moats/banes--so it won't cause too much threat in the early game. Much more dangerous in Shelter games with only one Victory card. Late game, this is also likely to hit Victory cards, making it ineffective. Probably most helpful mid-game.

What it's presence would always do is make players think twice about trashing their Estates, which is an intriguing dynamic in it's own right, and changes early strategy.

I think with my suggested wording, the card would need a minor buff to make it worth $4. I could see an on-trash secondary effect fitting in with the Haunted Village theme. Something like "You may trash this card; if you do, you may also trash a Curse from your hand or discard pile."

This would allow Haunted Villages to help reduce Curses as well, after they've outlived their usefulness as Villages and as attack cards.

[GeronimoRex]

I agree with those who think Shipwreck is fine as is, though I don't understand the name -- doesn't seem to have any connection to what the card does.

As for Grey Economy, I like the idea, but agree with others that it's underpriced or overpowerful as-is, but I'm not sure it's worth $6. Also on names, I think it's strange that it doesn't have any +buy option.

I'd expand the options a bit and try it as a $6 card. It would be strong, but I think manageable. If need be, dampen it with a no-copper clause like Grand Market to make sure it doesn't get picked up too early. Though it's more flexible than GM, it seems of similar power, but lacking the cantrip ability makes it much harder to spam.

Grey Economy
6$
Action
Choose two: +2 cards, +2 coins, +2 buys, trash 2 cards (The choices must be different.)

[LastFootnote]

Haunted Village is the most interesting to me, but rather than use it for Ruins, I'd stick with curses, which are available in all games.

I think if you changed it just a little, you'd fix the potential problems, though it might be borderline too weak this way:

Haunted village
4$
Action-Attack
+2 actions
Each other player reveals a victory card or gains a curse.

Allowing other players to reveal rather than discard helps eliminate the problem of spamming Haunted Villages--it also fixes the compound penalty that could occur in 3-4 player games.

What this change does is make it so that if you have a Victory card in hand, you get zero Curses, whereas if you don't you could get 5 all at once. It makes it hugely swingy, especially in 3-4 player games.

Though the real issue is that it's a cheap, non-terminal junker. I don't think there's an easy fix for that.

[Awaclus]

Haunted Village is the most interesting to me, but rather than use it for Ruins, I'd stick with curses, which are available in all games.

I think if you changed it just a little, you'd fix the potential problems, though it might be borderline too weak this way:

Haunted village
4$
Action-Attack
+2 actions
Each other player reveals a victory card or gains a curse.

Allowing other players to reveal rather than discard helps eliminate the problem of spamming Haunted Villages--it also fixes the compound penalty that could occur in 3-4 player games.

What this change does is make it so that if you have a Victory card in hand, you get zero Curses, whereas if you don't you could get 5 all at once. It makes it hugely swingy, especially in 3-4 player games.

Though the real issue is that it's a cheap, non-terminal junker. I don't think there's an easy fix for that.

What about this (won't fix the issue, but makes it much less bad):

+2 Actions
Each player with 5 or more cards in hand discards a victory card or gains a Curse. Players who gained a Curse may discard two cards and draw a card.

[Gary55]

Haunted Village is the most interesting to me, but rather than use it for Ruins, I'd stick with curses, which are available in all games.

I think if you changed it just a little, you'd fix the potential problems, though it might be borderline too weak this way:

Haunted village
4$
Action-Attack
+2 actions
Each other player reveals a victory card or gains a curse.

Allowing other players to reveal rather than discard helps eliminate the problem of spamming Haunted Villages--it also fixes the compound penalty that could occur in 3-4 player games.

What this change does is make it so that if you have a Victory card in hand, you get zero Curses, whereas if you don't you could get 5 all at once. It makes it hugely swingy, especially in 3-4 player games.

Though the real issue is that it's a cheap, non-terminal junker. I don't think there's an easy fix for that.

What about this (won't fix the issue, but makes it much less bad):

+2 Actions
Each player with 5 or more cards in hand discards a victory card or gains a Curse. Players who gained a Curse may discard two cards and draw a card.

Could this work?
5$
+2 actions
Each other player may reveal a victory card.
If someone didnt reveal, they gain a curse.
You may trash this and up to 2 curses.

[GeronimoRex]

What about borrowing the on-first-play mechanic from Hinterlands to make the cursing ability non-spammable? This should allow it to remain a very simple card, but still a buy in most games. If it's too strong as-is, tone it down by allowing opponents to gain the Curse into their hand; not strong enough, have them top-deck the Curse.

Haunted Village, $5
Action-Attack
+1 Card
+2 Actions
If this is the first time you played a Haunted Village this turn, each other player gains a Curse card.

[Gary55]

What about borrowing the on-first-play mechanic from Hinterlands to make the cursing ability non-spammable? This should allow it to remain a very simple card, but still a buy in most games. If it's too strong as-is, tone it down by allowing opponents to gain the Curse into their hand; not strong enough, have them top-deck the Curse.

Haunted Village, $5
Action-Attack
+1 Card
+2 Actions
If this is the first time you played a Haunted Village this turn, each other player gains a Curse card.

Very good idea! Lets see if it works, or does it stil need a bit tweaking.

[Warfreak2]

You could avoid the "on first play" clause by having them gain the Curse to their hand, and making Curse the bane instead of any Victory card. It would play differently, of course.

[eHalcyon]

What about borrowing the on-first-play mechanic from Hinterlands to make the cursing ability non-spammable? This should allow it to remain a very simple card, but still a buy in most games. If it's too strong as-is, tone it down by allowing opponents to gain the Curse into their hand; not strong enough, have them top-deck the Curse.

Haunted Village, $5
Action-Attack
+1 Card
+2 Actions
If this is the first time you played a Haunted Village this turn, each other player gains a Curse card.

Still slightly problematic in that it is spammable.  It's a bad idea to pick up 5 Witches because they'll keep colliding.  It's OK to load up on HVs because you can still play them all.  Might be OK anyway because it's expensive for a Village.  I like Warfreak's idea of letting Curse be a bane and having them gain to hand.