The new N, Shauna?


So one card more makes Shauna good?

Is it possible that hindsight bias makes you think that Shauna is bad, because PONT was at one point a thing?

I personally think that Juniper/Sycamore should have a hand size requirement before you can play them. Munchkin has a few cards that do good stuff for a hand discard, but require a minimum hand size of 3 to play.

Then again, I don’t like the idea of “staples”. I think every card should have competition to the point that player preference or synergy dictates what you see played. (Just my opinion.)


that one more card can be a huge difference, instead of thinking about it as one more than shauna, think about it as one less than juniper.


Yeah but that one card is a bigger deal than you know. It’s the difference between a staple and a meh card, which is what Shauna has become.


@ShealynMillay so if Juniper only grabbed 6, then Shauna would be fine?

Also, if PONT was reprinted it would be “Shana plus one card” which completely outclasses Shana and makes it worthless. The real question is whether or not Shauna is good for the format. Obviously Shauna isn’t as good as N or Juniper, but N is often cited as a overpowered card. Ever since Prof. Oak, all “Discard your hand and draw 7” cards have been staples. This means that those cards don’t have good enough competition or are broken themselves.


or a balanced card and a broken one. Also,


Yes if Juniper only grabbed six, shauna would see MUCH more play, and so would N and Bianca, and juniper would see much less play.


N already sees a LOT of play. I don’t know any list that doesn’t include 4 Juniper and 4 N unless they need space.

I don’t think I agree with you that Juniper would see less play, as drawing a fresh 6 is still good.


Its not that bad, in fact its much like Professor Oak’s New Theory.


I run two N and three Juniper and it works just fine. I feel no need for N late game and I just use Shauna. It helps out A LOT