Thursday, 23 May 2013

Strategist

After my feature article on talisman a while ago, I wanted to make one about one of my own cards.
Strategist serves as an interesting counterpoint to Dominion's menagerie. Its objective is to reward diversity, and I think that it is a great example of a card that excels in a diverse deck, and is utterly useless or worse in a BM or monotype deck.
Strategist is interesting in that it is completely useless as an opener. If you were to play it in a starting deck, you would end up with 1 credit and 1 captain. At best, you could draw whatever your second opening buy was as well, but no card in the game is powerful enough to make that a good hand. It is a strong card in the mid to late game for an engine deck. It helps to draw all of the engine components, and while it does potentially sacrifice some doubly drawn Stocks or Credits, if your engine is powerful enough, it should counterbalance those discards by its power in drawing your engine parts consistently.

I also like how its objective is more so to add diversity to your deck in order to get the most out of it, while in Dominion, menagerie is generally best when after removing your initial coppers and estates (and before you add too many provinces). I like that it does the draw before the check for duplicates, this helps reduce dependency on shuffle luck (looking for duplicates in 7 cards instead of 4) and also turns it into a "skill card" - one that is situationally powerful but should not be played in all circumstances.

It is also interesting in that it is easier to stack Strategists than Menageries. While having too many menageries is rarely bad, at some point they just become cantrips. Conversely, playing many Strategists in a row tends to be a good thing, as you have already discarded any duplicates, so the drawback tends not to hurt as much when you chain a bunch of them together (and they can draw each other fairly easily, similarly to how Hunting Party would).

I am not completely happy with the wording on it, as it sounds ambiguously like you can discard whatever you want so long as you end up with a hand with no duplicates, while the intention is that you discard duplicates only (just in case I ever implement a Tunnel type card). I was considering something along the lines of "discard each copy of a card beyond the first" or "discard all duplicate cards beyond the first", but couldn't really find something I was happy with that was both succinct and that exactly conveyed the intended intention.

1 comment:

  1. Here is a strong contender for best wording: "Discard everything except for one copy of each uniquely named card from your hand."

    ReplyDelete