It’s been a while, but I’ve had a chance to think about the attachment/reinforcement power, and I think I know what was wrong with it before. Attachment is inherently a card power, not a player power. Not every player can or should make use of attachment, and those that do will have lots of really interesting (if abstract and potentially complex) strategies open up to them.

This is how I currently picture the “Reinforcement” power, as it would appear on a card boasting the power. Once the power has been around for an expansion or more, I imagine I could remove the (not inconsiderable) reminder text that accompanies it.

While reserved, commit +1 resource to attach this card to target reserve. (While attached, this card can’t be activated and doesn’t count toward your reserve limit. It grants all of its keyword abilities to its target.)

You may note that the power says nothing about adding values together or anything. The following rules apply: A) the card must be reserved, B) as its target must also be, C) it requires a card commitment, D) though part of the Reserves, it no longer counts toward the reserve limit, E) it can’t be activated, even though it’s in the Reserves, and F) it grants any keyword abilities it has to its target.

Consider that it takes five cards to make this happen: the target reserve and the attaching card, the cards necessary to sponsor them, and the card to commit to initiate the attachment. Why go to the trouble? Well, I’m thinking equipment-based effects will require the equipment to be attached to something to be effective.

There’s still a lot of stuff to be worked out, but I’m pretty happy with this idea. It leaves a lot of design space open for what attaching different cards can do, and it enables much more straightforward uses of the power — attach a weapon to enable your character to use weapon-based attacks. Some cards will be more effective when properly “channeled” through an attached/equipped weapon.