Zblader's Cross-Design Column

[ZephyrPhantom]

Hello fellow designers,

In the interest of providing things to talk about in terms of card design (and hopefully spark a few ideas), I've decided to start this column.

Here's how it works:
1) Every 2 or 3 days, I'll be posting a card from another game. (Usually MtG), and put down a few lines of discussion of how this card could 'translate' into EtG mechanics.
2) If you're interested in giving feedback or developing the idea discussed, feel free to post. I may delay the next card to help flesh out an idea the community likes if there's a lot of discussion about 1 particular card.
3) If you want to post an idea from this thread yourself, just make sure you credit this thread as the original source of the idea.
4) If you want to suggest a card to review from another card game, feel free to PM me the card (preferably with a link to the game.)

With that being said, let's begin:

Card #1
Skullsnatcher, Magic the Gathering
Topic : Ninjustu

Since we're starting off, I'd like to provide some background info on Magic the Gathering, also known as MtG:

In MtG, you don't 'accumulate' quanta like you do in EtG - instead, how much mana (the MtG 'quanta') you have available is determined by the number of Lands you control. Like elements, there are lands of different 'colors'. MtG players start with 20 life instead of 100 HP and are limited to 4 copies per card instead of 6. In addition, creatures your opponents control can block your attacking creatures, and vice versa.

Ninjustu rewards an MtG player for being 'sneaky' - if your creature goes through unblocked, you can 'swap' the Ninjustu card with the 'sneaky' creature by paying the ability cost (usually cheaper than the casting cost.)

They never see me coming...

In EtG, we tend to place a lot of emphasis on either rushy creature damage or high-power attacks through things like Dragons or Chimeras. Implementing Ninjustu could 'reward' players that do less damage, like:

Ninja of the Black Scroll
7
7 | 1
Costs 4 instead if you've dealt less than 20 damage last turn.

Alternatively, you could use the 'sneaky' mechanic as a way to play creatures faster:

Ninja of the Red Scroll
4
3 | 1
Ninja of the Red Scroll is immediately played if a creature with 1 ATK attacks. (You don't pay the casting cost.)

What do you guys think of this idea? Would it be worth putting ingame?

[Farin44]

I like the idea of instant attack. It sounds like a really nice new mechanism. Great thinking, Zblader.

[OdinVanguard]

The tricky thing with implementing these "sneak" based mechanics in EtG is that there are far fewer avenues available to block an enemy creature.
Right now, its very nearly an all or nothing.

-Gravity pull
-Shields
-Delay / freeze

Shields are indeed available to all decks, but the other avenues are not as broadly available.

So basically, it just means that people need to pack shields or suffer… which is then easily countered by PC.

I believe this concept has been tried out in a few cards already (Tyrfing was one, DrakeXIV did another, though the name escapes me). Its a fun little concept, but I don't think it will promote the same richness in strategic thinking that it does in MtG.

In MtG, players must assign their ally creatures to block incoming enemies. There is a rich underlying strategy and mechanic behind this.
The concept of having creatures block one another is mostly (with a scant few exceptions) absent from EtG.
The attack - block strategy in MtG is deepened further by the instant cast queuing mechanic. This too is absent from EtG, although instinctive and auto-cast card mechanics could give some alternatives if they ever make it in.

So in EtG it would not be so much about being sneaky (attempting to guile your opponent into choosing the wrong creatures to block) as it would be about dominating your opponents shielding attempts through PC (and occasionally CC).

So we aren't really able to set up the "blocking" mechanic in the traditional sense that MtG uses it. The creature either bounces off a shield or GP or it goes through. There is little tactical / strategic plotting involved.

There is one possible analogue I can think of, "Field Positioning". E.g. you could have a card that gets a bonus if there is no creature in the opposing field slot (or perhaps column).

I delved into the concept of "opposing field slots" in one of my Storm-Blade series cards:
http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,47212.msg1045972.html#msg1045972
Perhaps something similar could work here. Alternately, the "Field Column" concept could be used as well.

It would still require something to give players more control over where their creatures get placed on the field to truly foster strategic planning, but its a good start.

[Chapuz]

I love this project, Z. +rep, and I will keep track of it and give my potatoes whenever I can

[Rutarete]

First, what Chapuz said.

Second, I think the Red Scroll one you posted would be a great addition!

[moomoose]

tangental potential mechanics "inspired" by the etg card off the top of my head-

triggers:
successful attacks
unblocked attacks
per x damage dealt
specific damage trigger

effects:
generate quanta
reduce cost of a specific card type (cre/spe/per)
reduce cost of a specific card
reduce ability cost(s)

balancing mechanics:
duration
previous turn
at end of turn
effects each player
cap one effect per player (ie reduction would only work once for each player per relevant card played, similar to the 'automatic' version of scavenger in a way)

obviously some of the above are only viable in conjunction with certain combinations, but am keeping it broad.

[OdinVanguard]

Building off of moomoose's idea,

An additional trigger idea:
-No creature in opposing slot when attacking

Some additional possible effects:
-Force opponent to discard (from hand and / or top of deck)
-Steal quanta
-Cause owner to draw a card
-Generate a random card
-Copy a random card from opponent's hand to owner's hand
-Reveal enemy cards
-Disable an enemy creature or permanent's ability
-Chance to disable opponent's weapon or shield
-Prevent opponent from casting the top card (or top n cards) in their hand
-Becomes invisible or makes a nearby creature invisible

[ZephyrPhantom]

Seems like Red Scroll is the more popular of the two, so I'll be running with that.

@ OdinVanguard - It's true that MtG's combat system allows for a lot more complex interactions than EtG does. What you mentioned with the "Field Positioning" system is an interesting idea, though - as Storm-Blade Defender shows, having creatures interact with the enemy slot/row/column across them could make for a more realistic 'combat' theme that cards like Iridium Warden try to develop for EtG.

@ moomoose / OdinVanguard - I think Red Scroll would have balance issues simply triggering when an opposing slot is empty, so this list of additional triggers will definitely help limit when the card is played for free.

Ideally, Ninjas already need to be 'sneaky', so the attack needs to be 'successful' and 'unblocked' (possibly just 'successful' for a weaker Ninja). is the element of aggression, so it's important we keep a sense of aggression in the card (trigger off your attacks IMHO is the best way to do this). Keeping the 'field slots' idea in mind, we end up with something like:

Ninja of the Red Scroll
4
3 | 1
Ninja of the Red Scroll is immediately played if a creature attacks unopposed. (You don't pay the casting cost.)
Note: Unopposed creatures are creatures with no enemy creature in the row opposite them and are not affected by shields.

How does that look?

Here's a few other takes on the Ninja concept, using Moomoose and Odinvanguard's list:

Ninja of the Azure Scroll
4
6 | 2
Ninja of the Azure Scroll is immediately played if a creature attacks unopposed.
At end of turn, return to your hand.

Ninja of the White Scroll
2
2 | 2
Ninja of the White Scroll is immediately played when you take noncreature damage.
Noncreature sources deal 1 less damage to you.

[moomoose]

personally i think the "opposing position" mechanic is clunky whenever i see it implemented

[ZephyrPhantom]

personally i think the "opposing position" mechanic is clunky whenever i see it implemented

Could you give reasons why you feel the 'positioning' mechanic is clunky? If anyone else  feels 'opposing position' has issues, feel free to state your reasons as well.

(remember we can work off other triggers if this one does not fit)

[Hyroen]

I personally agree with moomoose. Despite the fact that it is certainly thinking outside the box,  at least for EtG, you really have to consider far too many things in order for the suggested field slot mechanics to make sense.

Firstly, considering the fact that there are 23 creature slots which ones are considered opposing ones? Do creatures in the back oppose enemy frontlines? What is the interaction between airborne and terrestrial creatures?

Field mechanics definitely have a lot of potential, but realistically affect few creatures. Might be worth it to do a small correlational study of turns elapsed and creature slots occupied, for either player.

I'm currently on a cellphone, but will include the study if not already done when I get home.

[andretimpa]

Posting to keep an eye on this.