Jump to content

Backpedal Draw [Written]


MetaSkipper

Recommended Posts

Backpedal Draw
Spell
Draw 1 card. If you took 800 or more damage since your opponent’s last turn, you can draw 2 cards instead. Then, if you drew at least 1 card with this card: Gain 800 LP; also, after that, place 1 card from your hand on top of your deck.
 

[spoiler=Previous Version(s)]

Backpedal Draw
Spell
Draw one card. If you have lost at least 800 LP since the beginning of the previous turn, draw two cards instead. If you draw at least one card due to this card, gain 800 LP and place one card from your hand on top of your deck.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct OCG if you want it:

 

Backpedal Draw

Normal - Spell
Draw 1 card. If you took 800 or more damage since your opponent’s last turn, you can draw 2 cards instead. Then, if you drew at least 1 card with this card: Gain 800 LP, and if you do, place 1 card from your hand on top of your deck.

 

This is kinda cool. It's draw power, but you can't use it on your first turn if you want to break even and you can pick the card you put on top of your Deck, which is nice. There’s also the fact you can run in 1 of your monsters if you’re winning, and then use this.

 

This card also has an interesting competitor with this card's existence:

 

Backup Squad http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Backup_Squad

Spell - Continuous

Each time you take 1000 or more damage by your opponent's card effect or their monster's attack: Draw 1 card for every 1000 damage you took.

 

This can have you drawing 7 cards in the same turn, but it's really hard to survive and you have to wait a turn, they have to not just kill you then and there, and you can't Top Deck it in losing situations.

 

I’d say it’s a solid card for what it is. I’d say this is a good example of what card draw should be, rather than just negating all of your Special Summoning and damage for the rest of the turn (cough cough Card of Demise cough). I might make the damage and LP gain 1000, but that probably doesn’t matter much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct OCG if you want it:

 

Backpedal Draw

Normal - Spell

Draw 1 card. If you took 800 or more damage since your opponent’s last turn, you can draw 2 cards instead. Then, if you drew at least 1 card with this card: Gain 800 LP, and if you do, place 1 card from your hand on top of your deck.

 

This is kinda cool. It's draw power, but you can't use it on your first turn if you want to break even and you can pick the card you put on top of your Deck, which is nice. There’s also the fact you can run in 1 of your monsters if you’re winning, and then use this.

 

...

 

I’d say it’s a solid card for what it is. I’d say this is a good example of what card draw should be, rather than just negating all of your Special Summoning and damage for the rest of the turn (cough cough Card of Demise cough). I might make the damage and LP gain 1000, but that probably doesn’t matter much.

 

 

Thanks for the feedback and OCG. One thing: the way you've worded the LP gain/put-back clause, it looks like that the LP gain and put-back go in sequence. Would there be a way to word it so that they were simultaneous? I'd like the put-back clause to go through even if the LP gain is blocked. (If you have a good balance reason why that shouldn't be, I'm open to hearing it, of course.)

 

Fun development note: Originally, the card had you put back two cards instead of one. However, I couldn't make it feel balanced without being too swingy, so I made the put-back only one card.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh. That's "also, after that," which doesn't care whether or not you gained LPs. I'll update the OCG in the previous post.

 

The way you've made it at the moment it's a utility -1 and/or a situational +0, which is fine for a draw card, especially when you can't +0 off the first turn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The LP gain shouldn't be a cost.... a regular comma would suffice, and you don't need the "also" if you already have "after that".

I don't think it needs the "if you drew a card(s) this way" bit either. If the card is successfully resolving to THAT point in the text already, it should go without saying you drew your cards except for uncommon interactions where a quick effect revives a monster that prevents you from drawing or something like that..... but IMO it's not worth it accounting for and you could just skip to the "Then, you can gain 800LP, and if you do, return 1 card from your hand to the top of your Deck".

 

- - - - - 

 

Actual thoughts about the card: The first thing that comes to mind is Diamond Dude. It'd be pretty funny to mill this card and dare your opponent to attack you. Then, there's the ability this card has to stack the top of your deck with something like a field nuke (Ojama Delta Hurricane, Des Croaking, or that Batteryman one whose name I don't remember).  

The deck then would probably need to provide some way to give you damage, but that basically translates to: We can get something nice out of Ring of Destruction.

 

I love the concept for how well it fits that deck tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The LP gain shouldn't be a cost.... a regular comma would suffice, and you don't need the "also" if you already have "after that".

I don't think it needs the "if you drew a card(s) this way" bit either. If the card is successfully resolving to THAT point in the text already, it should go without saying you drew your cards except for uncommon interactions where a quick effect revives a monster that prevents you from drawing or something like that..... but IMO it's not worth it accounting for and you could just skip to the "Then, you can gain 800LP, and if you do, return 1 card from your hand to the top of your Deck".

 

- - - - - 

 

Actual thoughts about the card: The first thing that comes to mind is Diamond Dude. It'd be pretty funny to mill this card and dare your opponent to attack you. Then, there's the ability this card has to stack the top of your deck with something like a field nuke (Ojama Delta Hurricane, Des Croaking, or that Batteryman one whose name I don't remember).  

The deck then would probably need to provide some way to give you damage, but that basically translates to: We can get something nice out of Ring of Destruction.

 

I love the concept for how well it fits that deck tbh.

 

 

So you would suggest:

Draw 1 card. If you took 800 or more damage since your opponent’s last turn, you can draw 2 cards instead. Then, you can gain 800LP, and if you do, return 1 card from your hand to the top of your Deck.

 

I would like the LP gain/put-back to be contingent on having drawn cards, even if it's only in niche cases where the flow would be interrupted. Otherwise, you may have to put back cards without having drawn cards, and it's unlikely that you would play this card primarily for the LP gain instead of primarily for the card cycling.

 

That's... a pretty cool combo with Diamond Dude. If I get around to rigorously playtesting this card, I'll have to keep that one in mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you would suggest:

Draw 1 card. If you took 800 or more damage since your opponent’s last turn, you can draw 2 cards instead. Then, you can gain 800LP, and if you do, return 1 card from your hand to the top of your Deck.

 

I would like the LP gain/put-back to be contingent on having drawn cards, even if it's only in niche cases where the flow would be interrupted. Otherwise, you may have to put back cards without having drawn cards, and it's unlikely that you would play this card primarily for the LP gain instead of primarily for the card cycling.

 

That's... a pretty cool combo with Diamond Dude. If I get around to rigorously playtesting this card, I'll have to keep that one in mind.

 

Huh... actually, I just realized the first part might be an issue. It is an Upstart Goblin without some sort of condition to it and without giving the opponent the extra LP Goblin does.... What am I thinking? xD

 

Maybe more like:

Gain 800 LP, and if you do, draw 1 card, then return 1 card from your hand to the top of the Deck. If you took 800 or more damage since your opponent's last turn, you can draw 2 cards instead.

 

^That makes it a generic +0 draw (like Upstart) that just changes your hand a bit (and gives you LP to not be an inferior Magical Mallet outright), and if you do the damage thing, you get that extra draw to make it a proper +1.

 

I actually think it maybe would be nice to return 1 card from your hand/field rather than from just your hand. It'd make a Mind Controlled monster hurt more, or recycle a used up Continuous Trap (or Swords of Revealing/Concealing Light) in a rather slow manner. 

I have to mention though, regardless of the chosen changes, I the fact it stacks your deck for some of the "guess my top card" plays like Archfiend Oath. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh... actually, I just realized the first part might be an issue. It is an Upstart Goblin without some sort of condition to it and without giving the opponent the extra LP Goblin does.... What am I thinking? xD

 

Maybe more like:

Gain 800 LP, and if you do, draw 1 card, then return 1 card from your hand to the top of the Deck. If you took 800 or more damage since your opponent's last turn, you can draw 2 cards instead.

 

^That makes it a generic +0 draw (like Upstart) that just changes your hand a bit (and gives you LP to not be an inferior Magical Mallet outright), and if you do the damage thing, you get that extra draw to make it a proper +1.

 

I actually think it maybe would be nice to return 1 card from your hand/field rather than from just your hand. It'd make a Mind Controlled monster hurt more, or recycle a used up Continuous Trap (or Swords of Revealing/Concealing Light) in a rather slow manner. 

I have to mention though, regardless of the chosen changes, I the fact it stacks your deck for some of the "guess my top card" plays like Archfiend Oath. 

 

 

One note about the wording you have given: It appears to suggest that you ​either​ gain 800 LP, draw a card, and then return a card to the deck or​ draw two cards (and that's it), depending on the trigger. Of course, this is not the intent of the card.

 

Your analysis of the value proposition relative to Upstart Golbin got me thinking. Without the trigger, it is a slightly advantageous +0 (in the sense that, if you have a dead draw or otherwise unneeded card, you can cycle it out until next turn, or set up a particular effect or card combo), and you gain 800 LP. This by itself is better than Upstart. With​ the trigger, you are at +1 and gain 800 LP. Further balancing may be in order.

 

(This analysis is mostly independent of the wording, as the card resolves much the same no matter how you order the card; the details involve mostly what happens with interruptions midway through the resolution, and the order of operations.)

 

(Can I confess something embarrassing? I had not realized until now that the "gain 800 LP" clause ​was not dependent on the "taking damage" clause​, when I think I intended it to be. Alas, perhaps I am in too deep now to revise the card. Perhaps I shall come up with another card that properly ties the loss to the gain, if you will.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One note about the wording you have given: It appears to suggest that you ​either​ gain 800 LP, draw a card, and then return a card to the deck or​ draw two cards (and that's it), depending on the trigger. Of course, this is not the intent of the card.

 

Your analysis of the value proposition relative to Upstart Golbin got me thinking. Without the trigger, it is a slightly advantageous +0 (in the sense that, if you have a dead draw or otherwise unneeded card, you can cycle it out until next turn, or set up a particular effect or card combo), and you gain 800 LP. This by itself is better than Upstart. With​ the trigger, you are at +1 and gain 800 LP. Further balancing may be in order.

 

(This analysis is mostly independent of the wording, as the card resolves much the same no matter how you order the card; the details involve mostly what happens with interruptions midway through the resolution, and the order of operations.)

 

(Can I confess something embarrassing? I had not realized until now that the "gain 800 LP" clause ​was not dependent on the "taking damage" clause​, when I think I intended it to be. Alas, perhaps I am in too deep now to revise the card. Perhaps I shall come up with another card that properly ties the loss to the gain, if you will.)

 

Huh you are right.... I need to figure out a way to word it so that you gain the LP and draw, or get your LP gain and 2 draws. 

Also, my math was off too.... Draw 1 and return 1 = -1 for losing this spell itself in the process..... Hmmm how to keep it a +0, and then a +1.

I think the +LP one is a nice bonus that could stay anywhere regardless xD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh you are right.... I need to figure out a way to word it so that you gain the LP and draw, or get your LP gain and 2 draws. 

Also, my math was off too.... Draw 1 and return 1 = -1 for losing this spell itself in the process..... Hmmm how to keep it a +0, and then a +1.

I think the +LP one is a nice bonus that could stay anywhere regardless xD

 

 

Well, I think if it turns out to be a -1 and +800 LP; or given the trigger, +0 and +800 LP, I think that actually resolves my balance concerns.

 

Since the wording will ultimately rest on the intended edge cases, let me lay out my intentions, and then you can either word around them, or show why you think it is better for balance that it resolve another way.

 

Intended Resolution

  • Check for trigger: Did the player take at least 800 damage since the opponent's last turn? If so, trigger passes. (Question: does the phrase "since the opponents last turn" check for events that happened ​during​ the opponent's turn, or only things that have happened after​ the opponent's turn is over?)
  • Draw 1 card (or 2 cards, if trigger passes). The following effects happen in sequence to this card. If this effect is negated, do not continue the resolution.
  • Gain 800 LP. This happens simultaneously with the following effect, and is not contingent on the following effect (i.e. even if this effect is blocked, the following effect resolves).
  • Place one card from your hand on top of your deck. This happens simultaneously with the previous effect, and is not contingent on the previous effect.
  • Card finishes resolving.

 

Now, the wordings you have proposed and appear to intend have a different resolution order. I shall not say it is wrong or inferior to what I intended, simply different. I am open to persuasion.

 

Intended Resolution

  • Gain 800 LP. This is simultaneous with the following effect, and is not contingent on the following effect (i.e. this will happen, even if the following events are blocked). However, the following effects are contingent​ on this effect; if this effect is blocked, stop resolution of the card.
  • Check for trigger: Did the player take at least 800 damage since the opponent's last turn? If so, trigger passes.
  • Draw 1 card (or 2 cards, if trigger passes). The following effects happen in sequence to this card. If this effect is negated, do not continue the resolution.
  • Place one card from your hand on top of your deck.
  • Card finishes resolving.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...