Print

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

[Asper]

I created these over the course of several years with the main goal to bring original but relatively easy to understand concepts to life. The cards can be split up into several groups:

• Dominion Legacy: Cards and Events using existing game mechanics, but in new ways. This is the biggest bulk. (Cog icon)
• Fame cards: A minor mechanic about cards that get better if the player fulfilled certain "Feats" tracked on a board (Also cog icon).
• Spellcasters: Cards that allow you to "cast" Spells that you previously bought. (Wand icon)
• Seasons (created by Co0kieL0rd and me): Cards that change over the course of the game. (Hourglass icon)
• Team Dominion: Cards created for a Dominion variant that has players team up against each other. (Shaking hands icon)
• Edicts: Sideways cards that introduce straight-up rules changes. These predate Projects, by the way.

Format:
Card Name
Cost
Types
Text
-
Under-the-line texts


Legacy
These are cards that use existing mechanics. No real new rules.




















(predates Allies)















(predates Nocturne, was called Necromancer, and now I'm bored of changing its name)
(my Necromancer also came with Zombies starting in the trash, howaboutthat, I renamed those, too)
(you have three guesses how this card was called before Nocturne)

















Events
These are just some new Events.

Blessing
0
Event
Once per turn: +1 Buy; Trash a card from your hand.


Tithe
0
Event
Once per turn: You may trash an Action card from your hand, for +1 Buy, +$2


Synthesis
P
Event
Once per turn: +1 Buy; Name a card. When you discard copies of that card from play this turn, you may put them onto your deck.


Plundering
2
Event
Gain a Spoils from the Spoils pile.


Exodus
3
Event
If at least one Supply pile is empty, gain a non-Victory card costing up to $5.


Parting
3
Event
Flip your Journey Token over. If it is face-up, gain a card costing up to $5.


Buerocracy
5
Event
Move your Bureaucracy Token to another Supply pile. (When you gain a card from a pile with your Bureaucracy Token on it, put it onto your deck).
Setup: Each player puts their Bureaucracy Token on the Province pile.


Improve
5
Event
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing up to $3 more than it.


Sale
6
Event
+1 Coffers; Gain a card costing up to $5.


Contest
6
Event
Gain a card of your choice from the Contest pile.
-
Setup: Make a Contestdeck out of 10 different unused Kingdom cards costing $5.


Edicts
Edicts are straight-up rules changes. They can never be bought or added to anyone's deck, and are basically a broader variant of Landmarks.

Expansion
Edict
At the start of your turn, you may take your -$1 Token, to get +1 Action.


Appeasement
Edict
When another player plays an Attack card, you may discard an Estate from your hand, to be unaffected by it.


Diplomacy
Edict
At the start of your turn, you may discard 2 cards, for +1 Card.


Isolation
Edict
When you gain a card, you may exile it and gain a Copper.


Gigantism
Edict
Setup: Use 3 additional Kingdom card piles.


Trade Agreement
Edict
When you shuffle your deck during the game, you may gain a Silver and shuffle it in.


Imperialism
Edict
Setup: If it isn't already there, add the Platinum pile to the Supply.


Inflation
Edict
Cards can never cost less than $2.


Monarchy
Edict
Once per turn, when you play an Action card, you may set it aside here to play it again. Trash it at the start of your cleanup phase.


Reformation
Edict
Setup: Add a Province to the Supply per player.


Simplicity
Edict
Setup: Each player gets +5 Villagers


Tyranny
Edict
When you gain a Treasure card, take your -$1 Token.


Supervision
Edict
Setup: Before drawing starting cards, all players may look through their deck and put its cards in any order.


Banishment
Edict
When you buy a Victory card, trash a cheaper Victory card from the Supply.


Urbanisation
Edict
Setup: Each player replaces one of their starting Estates (or a Shelter of their choice) with a Copper.


Spellcasters & Spells
When a card with the Spellcaster type is in the supply, 3 Spells are chosen at random and put next to the Supply. Spells are effects similar to Events, which never go into your deck, but which you can buy in your buy phase. Each player gets 5 Spell Tokens in their color. When you buy a Spell, you put one of your tokens on the Spell you bought. That Spell is now "prepared". The only way to actually perform what a Spell does is when a Spellcaster card tells you to „cast a Spell“. By casting a Spell, you do what it says, then remove your token from the Spell. Naturally, you can have up to five Spells prepared.


Trickster
2
Action – Spellcaster
+2 Actions; You may cast a Spell.


Magician
3
Action – Spellcaster
+1 Buy; You may cast a Spell.
-
While this is in play, Spells cost $1 less, but not less than $0.


Shaman
3
Action – Spellcaster
+2 Cards; You may cast a Spell. If you do: +1 Card.


Stone Circle
3
Victory – Spellcaster
Worth 2 VP.
-
When you gain this, you may cast a Spell.


Shaman
3
Action – Spellcaster
+2 Cards; You may cast a Spell. If you do: +1 Card.


Ivory Tower
4
Action – Spellcaster
+1 Card, +1 Action; Discard up to 2 cards. Cast a Spell per card discarded.


Grimoire
4
Treasure – Spellcaster
+$1, +1 Buy; When you play this, you may cast a Spell. You may discard a card, for +$1.


Sorcerer
5
Action – Spellcaster
+3 Cards, +1 Buy; You may cast a Spell.


Warlock
5
Action – Spellcaster
+2 Cards, +1 Action, +1 Buy; You may cast a Spell.
-
When you gain this, gain a Curse.


Wizard
5
Action – Spellcaster
+1 Card, +1 Action, +$1; You may cast a Spell.


Esprit
1
Spell
+3 Buys


Purity
2
Spell
Trash any number of cards from your hand.


Wisdom
2
Spell
+2 Cards


Dexterity
4
Spell
Gain a card costing up to $5.


Harm
3
Spell
Gain a Silver. Each other player gains a Curse.


Wealth
4
Spell
+$3


Glory
7
Spell
Gain a Province.


Seasons
Season cards were created as a project together with the user C0okyL0rd. They change as the game progresses. When one or more Season cards are in the Supply, use the Season mat. The Season Mat has 20 spaces on it that go in a circle, and shows the 4 Seasons. A token is used to track the current time of year, starting the game on space 1, the first of Spring. After each full round (that is, after the last player in turn order took their turn) the token is moved forward one space. After each 5 turns a new Season begins. Summer starts with turn 6, Fall with turn 11, and Winter with 16. After turn 20 it is Spring again, and so on. Season cards check the current Season and do different things depending on it.






(should probably be renamed to Pupil now...)

[Archetype]

First!

[Archetype]

Contraption: With the trash option, it may be a bit too strong. But the on-gain clause is unique and looks like it may help counter that. This one needs to be play tested to determine its strength.

Archive/Cryptograph: Interesting! I think the Crytograph should be 1$, 1 VP. I'd almost never let you keep it and Archive may be a bit too strong.

Hospital: Hm, I'm not sure I like this. Seems highly board dependent, which I don't really like. It may be too strong, but I personally would dislike playing with this if it were a printed card.

Parliament: This is so cool! I'd add another row: $5......play it once. Also, change the text to 'an Action card'. 'A card' is a bit too ambiguous.

Charter: This is pretty cool. Usually having the ruins go to players hand is useless, but it's a small nerf that may be needed. Nice one!

Clearance: I'm not exactly seeing the utility of this. I mean, it's good if you're falling behind someone who's rushing Provinces, but it really changes up the dynamic of the games it's in. But if you dont mind those kind of games, then I'd say use it. I can't think of any good replacements for the top, but the placeholder is good enough.

Swamp: So it's an alternate to Curses and Ruins, in a way.  Hm. I don't like that it has 3 sections, and I'm almost not sure you need that second part. And if not, then the third. I just think you need 2 different cards for each idea than trying to shove the two together. But if you don't mind the 3 spaces, then go for it!

Grand Vizier: Cool concept. I've never seen one like it before. 'Gain a Victory $6 or less' is a little clunky and I think you can get away with 'Gain a Duchy'. But you'd know better than me if you can. Really like the concept of having a small hand size, increasing it, but then discarding a card to fuel another one. The top part rocks so I think the only thing that can potentially be changed is the Victory part.

Hedge Maze: Name may need to be changed, but the idea is nice. To simplify it, I'd remove the "on top of your deck" clause.

Dragon: Nifty. Not sure what else to say.

Unicorn: Looks balanced. I'd remove the "Put your deck into your discard pile" and put in "+2 Buys"

Siren: Eh, it's a bit too similiar to Ghost Ship for me. But it's probably alright.

Chameleon: The Setup clause is interesting, but I think that a lot of people already play that way.

Overall, some cool cards here. My favorite has be Grand Vizior, but my least favorite is Hospital. Cool collection, thanks for posting!

[Asper]

Wow, thank you for your feedback. I'm glad you like most of them.

Contraption: Will do

Cryptograph: The choice is so cards like Thief and Pirate Ship can still trash it.

Hospital: I understand why you wouldn't like it printed - it takes pretty long to resolve it, especially when you have several cards to choose from. I'll playtest and reconsider it.

Parliament: Oops, is of course supposed to be "action card". I figured a 5$ card usually will be played directly, unless you go for Conspirators or handsize matters. I'm really glad you like it

Swamp: I put it together that way because both parts are pretty irrelevant on some boards. I'll playtest and rethink this, too. Maybe it's really better to split it for simplicity.

Grand Vizier: Thank you, though i stole the top part from Oasis... I'd really like to give a choice which victory card to gain, so that it interacts with Harem, Nobles and such... Hm...

Hedge Maze: There are not many situations where you'd want it on your deck (Outpost), so probably you're right and it's better without that part or even better directly putting the Curse in hand.

Unicorn: Hmm... Yeah, why not. Not a Trusty Steed bonus, but pretty nice. Thanks for the idea

[scott_pilgrim]

For now I'll just comment on the ones that jump out at me:

Hospital - Cantrip victory token gainers don't really work in general; I'm sure you've heard of the problems with it before.  So you gave it a drawback.  I'm not sure that any sufficient drawback for the cantrip victory token card exists, but I'm pretty sure that your solution won't be enough to balance it.  I mean, maybe on many boards it will be, but there's always going to be a board where none of the (non-Hospital) cards costing $4 or less are appealing, and then Hospital just becomes a normal cantrip victory token gainer.

Charter - Non-terminal junking is crazy good.  Familiar limits itself by costing potion (meaning you usually only get one once per shuffle at maximum).  Cultist is at least kind of terminal in that it can only chain with itself, and it can also be drawn dead by other cards.  Charter is a treasure so you can't draw it dead, and there's no restrictions on how many times you can play it per turn.  Gaining to hand is a nice nerf though.  It's probably a power card but maybe not worse than Cultist.

Dragon - I am totally baffled by what you are trying to say in that comment.  If you get to choose whether they discard one card or their whole hand, doesn't that make it stronger than if there was no choice?

Siren - Terminal gold with a plus for $5 probably compares too favorably to Harvest.  Also, the wording is a little weird.  I would say "Each other player sets aside cards from his hand until he has 3 cards in his hand..."  I agree that it's a lot of text for a not-so-exciting effect.

[Asper]

Thank you for your feedback too, scotty

Hospital: Yeah, i'm not really happy with it right now, and that both of you share this view shows it needs work. I'll try to think of something else, but i still like the idea of a cantrip VP card.

Dragon: You don't get to choose the card he discards, just how many. So if a player has a good hand, he will have to discard it, but if he has been hit by several Dragons and now has a terrible hand, he may still discard his worst card and draw a new one (you won't let him discard all those terrible cards). I assume the wording had you think you could choose the card to discard, so i'll make it a bit clearer. (Actually i wasn't sure whether the wording was clear enough and it shows it was not).

Siren: Wording changed and Vanilla placeholder added instead of +3$. I don't know what i was thinking there.

[Asper]

So would Swamp look better this way, maybe?

Swamp
0$, Action
+2 Actions
Discard a card. If this is the first time you play a Swamp this turn: +2 Buys
----
In games using this, when you would gain a card and this is in the supply, you may gain this, instead

[AJD]

So, I misread Hospital and thought it said you gain a card costing up to $4.

But I wonder how that would actually work out, on a cantrip VP-token earner? The problem with non-terminal token earners, right, is that you can just keep playing them and nothing else and never end the game. But having cantrip VP with mandatory gain solves both those problems: you can't just trash your deck down to those and nothing else, because they re-bloat your deck for you (though okay, if you're lucky you can get a bunch of Sages or Pearl Divers or something), and it definitely forces the game toward an end on piles.

[scott_pilgrim]

Dragon: You don't get to choose the card he discards, just how many. So if a player has a good hand, he will have to discard it, but if he has been hit by several Dragons and now has a terrible hand, he may still discard his worst card and draw a new one (you won't let him discard all those terrible cards). I assume the wording had you think you could choose the card to discard, so i'll make it a bit clearer. (Actually i wasn't sure whether the wording was clear enough and it shows it was not).

That is a good explanation of how the card plays out (I didn't quite think through it upon first reading), although I'm still a little confused by the comment.  I guess I don't know what the one card choice was added to (if I've seen the original card it's been a while), so maybe that is the source of the confusion?

I was just thinking that the original must have read "+3 cards; Each other player discards his hand. He then draws the same number of cards he discarded." in which case the new version is strictly better.  But maybe that's not what the original card said.

Anyway, I think the wording was clear as it was.  It's a very interesting card, though it may be too weak for $5.

[Asper]

Dragon: You don't get to choose the card he discards, just how many. So if a player has a good hand, he will have to discard it, but if he has been hit by several Dragons and now has a terrible hand, he may still discard his worst card and draw a new one (you won't let him discard all those terrible cards). I assume the wording had you think you could choose the card to discard, so i'll make it a bit clearer. (Actually i wasn't sure whether the wording was clear enough and it shows it was not).

That is a good explanation of how the card plays out (I didn't quite think through it upon first reading), although I'm still a little confused by the comment.  I guess I don't know what the one card choice was added to (if I've seen the original card it's been a while), so maybe that is the source of the confusion?

I was just thinking that the original must have read "+3 cards; Each other player discards his hand. He then draws the same number of cards he discarded." in which case the new version is strictly better.  But maybe that's not what the original card said.

Anyway, I think the wording was clear as it was.  It's a very interesting card, though it may be too weak for $5.

Well, the former version was this:
+3 Cards
Each other player reveals his hand. You decide whether he has to discard it and draw 5 new cards.

The problem here was that you could keep playing Dragons until everybody had a terrible hand. The decision between two alternatives was a nerf. I'll add it to the comment for others. And yeah, it might be a bit weak because of it.

[Asper]

So, I misread Hospital and thought it said you gain a card costing up to $4.

But I wonder how that would actually work out, on a cantrip VP-token earner? The problem with non-terminal token earners, right, is that you can just keep playing them and nothing else and never end the game. But having cantrip VP with mandatory gain solves both those problems: you can't just trash your deck down to those and nothing else, because they re-bloat your deck for you (though okay, if you're lucky you can get a bunch of Sages or Pearl Divers or something), and it definitely forces the game toward an end on piles.

The idea was to give others the choice of bringing the game closer to it's end. Obviously doesn't work out the way i wanted to.

[AJD]

So, I misread Hospital and thought it said you gain a card costing up to $4.

But I wonder how that would actually work out, on a cantrip VP-token earner? The problem with non-terminal token earners, right, is that you can just keep playing them and nothing else and never end the game. But having cantrip VP with mandatory gain solves both those problems: you can't just trash your deck down to those and nothing else, because they re-bloat your deck for you (though okay, if you're lucky you can get a bunch of Sages or Pearl Divers or something), and it definitely forces the game toward an end on piles.

The idea was to give others the choice of bringing the game closer to it's end. Obviously doesn't work out the way i wanted to.

Maybe not. But I wonder what a cantrip VP token card where you gain a card when you play it would be like? Say, "gain a card costing less than this"—so you must either block the cantrip chain or run piles out or both in order to use it. Not sure if it's a $4 or a $5 or what, though.

[Asper]

Oh yeah, sorry, i got what you wanted but my answer didn't have anything to do with it... 
I'll consider that approach for another version
Sorry, i'm very tired...

[Asper]

So, I misread Hospital and thought it said you gain a card costing up to $4.

But I wonder how that would actually work out, on a cantrip VP-token earner? The problem with non-terminal token earners, right, is that you can just keep playing them and nothing else and never end the game. But having cantrip VP with mandatory gain solves both those problems: you can't just trash your deck down to those and nothing else, because they re-bloat your deck for you (though okay, if you're lucky you can get a bunch of Sages or Pearl Divers or something), and it definitely forces the game toward an end on piles.

The idea was to give others the choice of bringing the game closer to it's end. Obviously doesn't work out the way i wanted to.

Maybe not. But I wonder what a cantrip VP token card where you gain a card when you play it would be like? Say, "gain a card costing less than this"—so you must either block the cantrip chain or run piles out or both in order to use it. Not sure if it's a $4 or a $5 or what, though.

Hmm... 4$ or 5$, that's tough. I'll playtest it at 5$, it seems still too good at 4$.

Hospital
5$, Action
+1 Card
+1 action
+1 VP
Gain a card costing less than this.

Will also redo the upper half of Swamp, probably. Still have to think about how to push Dragon a bit, +1 Buy seems good, but is too similar to Margrave. And removed Siren for now.

[AJD]

Hmm... 4$ or 5$, that's tough. I'll playtest it at 5$, it seems still too good at 4$.

Maybe, but note you might rather gain a lot of $4 cards than $3 card. But I suppose it... (wait for it...) depends on the board.

[Asper]

Hmm... 4$ or 5$, that's tough. I'll playtest it at 5$, it seems still too good at 4$.

Maybe, but note you might rather gain a lot of $4 cards than $3 card. But I suppose it... (wait for it...) depends on the board.

True, true. But at 4$ it's still a nonterminal cantrip Silver gainer with VP, at the least. The more i think about it, the more i feel it's even stronger than my original version... I'll playtest it at 5$ and, depending on the result, maybe at 4$ and/or 6$.

Edit: Ugh, just playtested it on a random kingdom... And that Kingdom mas Duchess, Develop, Shanty Town, Masquerade, Bishop, Monument, Mining Village, Hospital, Mountebank and Border Village, with Colony. That was soooooooo helpful in estimating the power level of 5$-Hospital... 
(Hospital/Bishop lost to Border Village/Mountebank, but not by much... Probably also didn't help i played terribly. I guess it's too strong, too.)

[scott_pilgrim]

Dragon: You don't get to choose the card he discards, just how many. So if a player has a good hand, he will have to discard it, but if he has been hit by several Dragons and now has a terrible hand, he may still discard his worst card and draw a new one (you won't let him discard all those terrible cards). I assume the wording had you think you could choose the card to discard, so i'll make it a bit clearer. (Actually i wasn't sure whether the wording was clear enough and it shows it was not).

That is a good explanation of how the card plays out (I didn't quite think through it upon first reading), although I'm still a little confused by the comment.  I guess I don't know what the one card choice was added to (if I've seen the original card it's been a while), so maybe that is the source of the confusion?

I was just thinking that the original must have read "+3 cards; Each other player discards his hand. He then draws the same number of cards he discarded." in which case the new version is strictly better.  But maybe that's not what the original card said.

Anyway, I think the wording was clear as it was.  It's a very interesting card, though it may be too weak for $5.

Well, the former version was this:
+3 Cards
Each other player reveals his hand. You decide whether he has to discard it and draw 5 new cards.

The problem here was that you could keep playing Dragons until everybody had a terrible hand. The decision between two alternatives was a nerf. I'll add it to the comment for others. And yeah, it might be a bit weak because of it.

Okay, that actually makes a lot of sense now.  Thanks for clearing that up.

With the new Hospital gaining for yourself I would think it's way too strong, even at $5.  I don't think we've had a cantrip gainer before (except Upgrade, but that's dependent on trashing).  It does balance for the fact that it's a cantrip victory token gainer, but the benefit of gaining is probably greater than the amount of nerf it gives to the rest of the card (if that makes sense).  Actually, if there are any cantrips costing $4 or less, you can just spam them (presumably they slightly improve your deck, even if they are something like Spy or Pearl Diver), and that won't slow down your victory tokening at all.

[mail-mi]

Dragon: You don't get to choose the card he discards, just how many. So if a player has a good hand, he will have to discard it, but if he has been hit by several Dragons and now has a terrible hand, he may still discard his worst card and draw a new one (you won't let him discard all those terrible cards). I assume the wording had you think you could choose the card to discard, so i'll make it a bit clearer. (Actually i wasn't sure whether the wording was clear enough and it shows it was not).

That is a good explanation of how the card plays out (I didn't quite think through it upon first reading), although I'm still a little confused by the comment.  I guess I don't know what the one card choice was added to (if I've seen the original card it's been a while), so maybe that is the source of the confusion?

I was just thinking that the original must have read "+3 cards; Each other player discards his hand. He then draws the same number of cards he discarded." in which case the new version is strictly better.  But maybe that's not what the original card said.

Anyway, I think the wording was clear as it was.  It's a very interesting card, though it may be too weak for $5.

Well, the former version was this:
+3 Cards
Each other player reveals his hand. You decide whether he has to discard it and draw 5 new cards.

The problem here was that you could keep playing Dragons until everybody had a terrible hand. The decision between two alternatives was a nerf. I'll add it to the comment for others. And yeah, it might be a bit weak because of it.

Okay, that actually makes a lot of sense now.  Thanks for clearing that up.

With the new Hospital gaining for yourself I would think it's way too strong, even at $5.  I don't think we've had a cantrip gainer before (except Upgrade, but that's dependent on trashing).  It does balance for the fact that it's a cantrip victory token gainer, but the benefit of gaining is probably greater than the amount of nerf it gives to the rest of the card (if that makes sense).  Actually, if there are any cantrips costing $4 or less, you can just spam them (presumably they slightly improve your deck, even if they are something like Spy or Pearl Diver), and that won't slow down your victory tokening at all.

OIr you make it cost $3 so you have to take an Estate or Copper or something (Or a $2 action)

[Jack Rudd]

*sets up five-card hand of Highway-Highway-Parliament-Parliament-some draw card*

EDIT: Ah, that doesn't work: it works on the printed cost, not the modified cost. Neat wording.

[Asper]

Figured i should actually use this thread for my card ideas.

I tried two other takes on my old idea, Hedge Maze. Do you think one of them is balanced? If yes, which is better?

Hedge Maze, Action - Attack - Victory, 5$ (1)
Each other player gains a Curse.
-----
Worth one VP per empty supply pile.


Hedge Maze, Action - Attack - Victory, 4$ (2)
Each other player gains a Curse in hand.
-----
Worth one VP per empty supply pile that is not Province's.


Also a second card: First i wanted to post this in the "Very bad card ideas" thread, but maybe it's not that terrible - might be overpowered when compared to Junk Dealer or Market, though:

Pony, Action, 5$
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1$
Gain a Silver



What do you think?

[silverspawn]

Figured i should actually use this thread for my card ideas.

I tried two other takes on my old idea, Hedge Maze. Do you think one of them is balanced? If yes, which is better?

Hedge Maze, Action - Attack - Victory, 5$ (1)
Each other player gains a Curse.
-----
Worth one VP per empty supply pile.

Let's see, so it's usually either worth 2VP (curse and Province) or 3VP (3 piles). You'll want to buy it really early, like most junkers. You probably won't get more than 2 of them. So, compared to Witch, you'll lack the +2 card beneift early, but have 4/6 VP's more endgame. That seems weak to me, but I'm not sure. It's defintiely worse than Mountebank, but what card isn't, so that's not an issue.

Hedge Maze, Action - Attack - Victory, 4$ (2)
Each other player gains a Curse in hand.
-----
Worth one VP per empty supply pile that is not Province's.

I don't like this version. Firstly because, following the same logic, it's usually either worth 1VP or 3VP, very swingy. Second, I don't think we need another curser for $4. In games without trashing, it'll be must-buy, a duchy which deals out curses. In games with good trashing, it's an Estate with a slight attack, you'll often get rid of the curse right away. I don't see that being fun. Try the 5$ version.

Also a second card: First i wanted to post this in the "Very bad card ideas" thread, but maybe it's not that terrible - might be overpowered when compared to Junk Dealer or Market, though:

Pony, Action, 5$
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1$
Gain a Silver



What do you think?

I like the name. Aside from that, I think the card is fine. If it were in the game, it would probably be one of the most frequently missused cards, because it kills your engines. It's a BM card, you're flooding yourself with silver, not a card for engines. Because of this, comparing it to market or Junk Dealer doesn't make all that much sense. I think the closest comparison is Jack of all Trades. Both give you a silver, both have you back at 5 cards when playing them. JOAD also trashes your estates and curses and defends against discard attacks, this card simply provides +1$, and it isn't terminal. I could see them working fairly well together, not to the point where you ever buy it over gold, but you might buy it rather than another silver.

Despite what I said, it might be a good addition to some engines, but only after they're set up, to increase their buying power. In that way it'd work similiar to Explorer: if you draw the silver in the turn you get it, it's +3$ for your current turn, +2$ for every following turn, +1 card for your deck. Explorer is +3$ for your current turn, +3$ for every following turn, +1 card for your deck; but it's terminal and you need to already have a province. Explorer also doesn't draw, but it doesn't make you have to draw the gold either, so it's like +1 card in that way.

Might also be good for some other stuff. Anyway, I like it. Needs testing though.

[Asper]

Thanks for your feedback. The name of Pony comes from the fact that it gives each of Trusty Steed's bonuses, but in a weaker form. I can see why you like it, though

I myself had the feeling that the 5$ version of Hedge Maze was more dull than the other one, so that's why i wanted to have the 4$. I can definitely see you concern about it, though.

I'd still like to have an Attack-Victory, but maybe i can come up with something more clever. Using Ruins seems an obvious choice, but probably that's not good, either.

[Asper]

Junk me, baby!

I noticed two ideas for alt victory cards i had some time ago went in very similar directions. So i combined them:

Demolition, 6$, Victory
Worth 2VP if you still own your Demolition token.
---
Setup: Each player takes a Demolition token. He removes it when he trashes one of his Victory cards.
---
When you gain this, gain a Duchy and an Estate and trash a Province from the supply.


Things worth noting:
This is a Province for 6$ that junks your deck and demands that you don't trash junk.
The Province trashed from the supply is none of your cards and doesn't remove the token or trigger Market Square.
The card is a Victory card that works horribly with Rebuild, maybe against it.
If it seems too weak, i could change Estate and Duchy for "two differently named VP cards costing less than this".

About the 2nd line i don't really know what to do. I feel the idea itself is sufficiently simple, but obviously 2 lines is a no go. If somebody has an idea how i could reach a similar goal with just one, i'd greatly appreciate it. Or do you think the rules allow me to put the first two together? Like: "Setup: Each player takes a Demolition token. He removes that token when he trashes one of his VP cards. This card is worth 2VP for players that still have their token."

I'm really uncertain of what to do with this, so please help me out a bit here

[clloxin]

 

Junk me, baby!

I noticed two ideas for alt victory cards i had some time ago went in very similar directions. So i combined them:

Demolition, 6$, Victory
Worth 2VP if you still own your Demolition token.
---
Setup: Each player takes a Demolition token. He removes it when he trashes one of his Victory cards.
---
When you gain this, gain a Duchy and an Estate and trash a Province from the supply.


Things worth noting:
This is a Province for 6$ that junks your deck and demands that you don't trash junk.
The Province trashed from the supply is none of your cards and doesn't remove the token or trigger Market Square.
The card is a Victory card that works horribly with Rebuild, maybe against it.
If it seems too weak, i could change Estate and Duchy for "two differently named VP cards costing less than this".

About the 2nd line i don't really know what to do. I feel the idea itself is sufficiently simple, but obviously 2 lines is a no go. If somebody has an idea how i could reach a similar goal with just one, i'd greatly appreciate it. Or do you think the rules allow me to put the first two together? Like: "Setup: Each player takes a Demolition token. He removes that token when he trashes one of his VP cards. This card is worth 2VP for players that still have their token."

I'm really uncertain of what to do with this, so please help me out a bit here

I'm not an expert, but it seems that it wouldn't be worth it to not trash when you have the option.
In games without trashing, it is a cheap province which junks your deck, but its a unanimous buy late game.
I might be wrong, but I don't think this card would fit it's purpose, and be just cheap victory points for $6, either a province or a duchy and an estate for $6.

[eHalcyon]

@silerspawn -- Hedge Maze is not worth either 1VP or 3VP.  It's worth 1-4 VP usually, with a chance of being worth MORE than 4VP.  If the game ends in a 3 pile, Hedge Maze is worth a net 4VP because of the Curse.  It can be worth an intermediate value because games that end on Provinces often ALSO have another empty pile or two.  It can be worth more because there are sometimes games where more than 3 piles are emptied on the last turn.  For the version that counts the Province pile as well, it's worh a net 2-4VP (because there is a guaranteed empty pile at the end).

Also note that this is a curser itself.  That almost guarantees that the curse pile will empty, further lowering the variance.

Despite the variable VP, I don't think it is that swingy.  Before you buy it, you can reasonably predict how many empty piles there will be.  If it's a powerful engine board with Hamlet or Fishing Village as the only +actions, then you can be pretty sure that that pile will drain quickly.  If it's a dull BM board with no +actions or +buy or gainers, probably no pile will empty.



Despite defending the card on those fronts, I think a bigger problem is that it just wouldn't be that interesting or fun.  Players tend not to like attack cards that give no benefit (e.g. Saboteur, Sea Hag) on play.  I like the VP portion (there's a similar one in one of the mini-set design contests, I think?) but the cursing just isn't exciting at all.








On Demolition -- the double line is off-putting.  I like the general idea (cheap province that junks you a lot more) but I'm not sure about the implementation.  It makes trashing attacks even swingier than they normally are.  Swindler hits your Estate... now your Demolitions are all worthless.  I'm also not sure if it would be fun to feel constricted against trashing.