Print

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

[SirPeebles]

I think it needs 1 VP to keep it from suffering VPless-tunnel issues.  There's not always a gainer.

The VP helps Tunnel serve a purpose when there's no discard.  But maybe just as important, it's nice to put the Tunnel clause on a VP card so that you don't mind discarding it.  You don't need to waste time on the decision, as you sometimes do with Market Square.

Rather than VP, you put something else on the card that makes it useful.  For instance, Fortress is a village.  I'll often buy a Fortress with no relevant trashing on the board simply because there are no other villages (at least none costing $4 or less).

[scott_pilgrim]

I really think that it's just a matter of what's fun.  If there was a supply pile of 40 Villages available in every game, I doubt that cards like Worker's Village, Farming Village, etc. would exist.  Perhaps it would be more interesting if the Silver supply pile was swapped out for a stack of 40 of these $4 Silver variants in some games (I don't know how you would determine which games).  Having it as a kingdom card is usually just going to feel like you're using up a kingdom slot to add a very minor rule variation to the game.

Now that's a great point. According to that reasoning, Royal Seal shouldn't really exist either, which I'd be perfectly okay with.

Yeah, I suspect that Royal Seal only exists because DXV overestimated it.

[popsofctown]

I think it needs 1 VP to keep it from suffering VPless-tunnel issues.  There's not always a gainer.

The VP helps Tunnel serve a purpose when there's no discard.  But maybe just as important, it's nice to put the Tunnel clause on a VP card so that you don't mind discarding it.  You don't need to waste time on the decision, as you sometimes do with Market Square.

Rather than VP, you put something else on the card that makes it useful.  For instance, Fortress is a village.  I'll often buy a Fortress with no relevant trashing on the board simply because there are no other villages (at least none costing $4 or less).

There's no Silver variant that requires other cards on the board for it to be different from Silver.  Maybe Diadem would be a better comparison.  The card needs to impact the board without specific interactions. 

[LastFootnote]

I really think that it's just a matter of what's fun.  If there was a supply pile of 40 Villages available in every game, I doubt that cards like Worker's Village, Farming Village, etc. would exist.  Perhaps it would be more interesting if the Silver supply pile was swapped out for a stack of 40 of these $4 Silver variants in some games (I don't know how you would determine which games).  Having it as a kingdom card is usually just going to feel like you're using up a kingdom slot to add a very minor rule variation to the game.

Now that's a great point. According to that reasoning, Royal Seal shouldn't really exist either, which I'd be perfectly okay with.

Yeah, I suspect that Royal Seal only exists because DXV overestimated it.

I suspect the community underestimates it in general. It's also more useful in a non-engine deck, which are more common in games with three or more players.

It might be nice if it had +1 Buy. That way you could more easily opt for topdecking two good cards rather than buying one Victory card.

[SirPeebles]

It seems really odd to me that Royal Seal and Watchtower were both in the same set. Royal Seal makes sense, fitting the Treasure theme.  Watchtower could have easily fit into a different set, perhaps Seaside (topdecking impacts the next turn) or even Hinterlands (on-gain synergy) or Dark Ages (on-trash synergy).  Putting Watchtower in Dark Ages would have let us appreciate Royal Seal more, I think.

[popsofctown]

Oh god, Watchtower in Dark Ages.  Dear lord.