Jump to content

Design vs. Impact


Recommended Posts

This discussion has been happening constantly, so we may as well have a thread for it.

Now, there are cards that have inherently "bad" design, yet relatively low impact. Examples of these are numerous, and include Final Countdown, Exodia, and Chain Strike.

Similarly, the inverse is true. There are cards that are designed quite well, and have higher impact simply because they are good. Examples of this are Scrap Dragon, the Traptrix Engine, and (arguably) FF Bear.

Now for the discussion: which of these two aspects of cards is more important? Which should be more important?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Design is what makes things inherently a -1 or up to like a +2-3

It also depends on what those +s are.

I think the game is evolving the general kind of + to be something different.

Easier to do, crazy payoffs, and all with that hard OPT on them acting like it means the card is designed well.

 

So really, Design is reliant on:
1. Ease of Use

2. Number of +s

3. How to trigger these +s

4. What those plusses are

5. What those plusses can do

 

For example, a Beast Striker summons Moja from the deck. Seems perfectly fair, even kind of weak considering who he summons.

But then, say something like Graff or Cir of the Burning Abyss. They SS something from the deck or graveyard as soon as they hit the damn graveyard, and then the thing they summon can lead to all kinds of s***. Not saying they're awful design but I don't exactly think they're good design.

Not the best example but I think it makes a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pot of Greed is a badly designed card, but it's impact is minimal. Oh wait, that's cos it's banned.

 

I think you got it backwards: It was banned because it has a high impact on the game.

 

Anyways, I don't consider myself an expert on card design so I can't say I'm qualified to give an exact defintion for both Design and Impact, plus I don't have any idea of how to begin with a definition.

 

I will say, however, that in my opinion Design is and should be more important: I would rather have a well designed card regardless of its impact, than a card with a huge impact on the game or metagame but may or may not be well designed.

If a well designed card has an impact in the game, then it's great; and if it doesn't, at least it would remain mostly harmless and wouldn't be unhealthy for the game.

On the other hand, if a card has an impact on the game, it can be either as fair as, let's say, Pot of Duality, or as ridiculous as a Dragon Ruler or idk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue with this thread, and cards like it....
While it's cool and all to try and reinvent the game with a gimmick/mechanic/etc, it's often stupid because they tend to outright break everything, and just overshadow the whole design aspect of things, which is typically what it boils all down to.

Exodia

You know, it's funny.... If we didn't have Exodia, Konami could try and experiment with more generic draw engines.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The MtG design and development team have literally hundreds of articles online on good design which are applicable to all card games. Anyone interested on the topic should start there. As a basis, Dieter Ram's 10 principles of good design are also very, very good at explaining what good design is, even though it's not actually about card games. Design is universal really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The issue with this thread, and cards like it....
While it's cool and all to try and reinvent the game with a gimmick/mechanic/etc, it's often stupid because they tend to outright break everything, and just overshadow the whole design aspect of things, which is typically what it boils all down to.
You know, it's funny.... If we didn't have Exodia, Konami could try and experiment with more generic draw engines.

 

yeah but if they did that then the speed that they intend for an archtype to be couldn't be controled...........

wait did I just figure out a reason to keep exodia around again?

HA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So here is the question: should clever design be an excuse for degeneracy?

Ritual Beasts make for an excellent example. They fusion summon in the strangest way since Gladiator Beasts, and actually make DiFi maindeckable. They can perform synchro shenanigans with Debris Dragon, or just wall with a motherfucking dolphin.
The issue, is that their modus operandi violates the typical flow of a game. Targetted removal is nearly worthless against their bosses, one of which is just plain unaffected while attacking. They can gain enough life off of trash cards to skew statistics against the decks that konami wants to see winning, while searching for effectively free multiple times a turn. Oh. And necroface.

Now then: are decks like Ritual Beasts, which have a terrifying amount of potential, good for this game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So here is the question: should clever design be an excuse for degeneracy?

Ritual Beasts make for an excellent example. They fusion summon in the strangest way since Gladiator Beasts, and actually make DiFi maindeckable. They can perform synchro shenanigans with Debris Dragon, or just wall with a motherf***ing dolphin.
The issue, is that their modus operandi violates the typical flow of a game. Targetted removal is nearly worthless against their bosses, one of which is just plain unaffected while attacking. They can gain enough life off of trash cards to skew statistics against the decks that konami wants to see winning, while searching for effectively free multiple times a turn. Oh. And necroface.

Now then: are decks like Ritual Beasts, which have a terrifying amount of potential, good for this game?

 

Nothing will save them from Qlips.

Nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...