Skip to Content
 

LCG: Restricting card play through cost, actions or other methods

4 replies [Last post]
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008

All LCG has a restriction system that prevents players from playing any cards all the time. For example,

- Magic the gathering has a cost on each cards and the sum of the cost cannot exceed your current mana.

- Netrunner has actions and a cost. So players can play a limited nb of cards according to the nb of actions they have and the number of money they have available.

-------------------------------------------------------

Now I have an issue in my game (that you probably have seen other post in the recent months). Both cards has a creature and a spell which each have a casting cost. The problem is that players will always try to find the optimal cost combination to play cards. For example, if you have 8 mana, you can cast spells with cost 4+4, 3+5, 3+3+2, etc.

But when each card has 2 casting cost, it starts to become overwelming to know what is the optimal pattern to use. I do like the double functions of cards even if it increase the possible permuation because It increase the possible strategy you can do with your cards. But it I could at least simplify the cost system, at least that would be one thing less to analyze.

An idea is to give each player a limited number of actions. For example, you can play 2 cards per turn. And the cost must be <= than your mana in play, but the mana is not depleted. Only compared. So if you have 7 mana, you can play 2 cards which have a cost of <=7. So the cost only "Unlocks" cards to be used rather than spending resources.

Another idea is to eliminate cost completely and make all creatures and spells even. I am not really sure about this one.

--------------------------------------------------------

I made a playtest with the rules above where players could play up to 2 creatures and/or spells <= cost and there were some interesting features.

- During a late game, low cost creatures are more likely to be used as spells than creature. SInce you cannot flood the board with small creatures anymore.
- If gives more control on the flow of cards in the game since you know how much cards goes in and goes out of the hand each turn.
- A huge amount of mana will not allow a player to empty his hand. Again more control on the card flow.

It could possibility create the following problems depending on the game.

- Run Away leader: If a player has more cards in play than his opponent, it will be harder to catch up since your opponent will always be ahead.
- Inpossibility to flood with smaller creatures giving less advantage to the player with stronger cards.

------------------------------------------------------------

Do you profer a cost based or an action bases system?

Is there other alternatives to cost based system?

Corsaire
Corsaire's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/27/2013
In cost based systems I like

In cost based systems I like to play, tactical and situational considerations determine my play decisions, not min-maxing expenditures. If my play is strictly dictated by hand-dumping versus cost, odds are it is not a game I enjoy.

Kroz1776
Offline
Joined: 10/09/2013
Ahem!

One way to get around this is to make a card that would go into the "swarm" deck that when stored as crystal (Or something like that) it allows that player to summon X amount of extra creatures costing X or less amount. Boom, this now lets a player swarm his hand with weaker creatures, while at the same time allowing that ability to be "attacked" by the enemy.

Another way of doing this is by making certain creatures whose special thing is the ability to bring in more of them. So creature Y's card would read, "When creature Y is summoned, you may summon X amount of creatures worth X amount of points or less with him.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Of course having special

Of course having special abilities to get more actions or summon more monsters could patch the problem. But it's still a patch.

Kroz1776
Offline
Joined: 10/09/2013
Not a Patch

I would argue it's not a patch. What you're doing is further defining and deepening the game. Before I could eventually start dumping my whole hand. So the game turns into a card dump. So you want to restrict this by placing costs whether it be actions costs or other. This causes problems with runaway winners. How can you beat them if you can only get two small monsters out a turn. This isn't a flaw in the mechanics in the game but in the cards themselves IMO.

The mechanics work in the sense that they now stop card dumping and make you make more strategic decisions. These can be cards that allow you to card dump essentially. You play X card as a spell allowing you to play your whole hand that turn. Or creature of some sort. Limiting it to a certain level also adds some nice little theme and balancing to it so that you'll only want that card if you want to swarm the enemy.

Another one is a spell card or ability for a monster that punishes someone for having big monsters. You can make a glass cannon monster that has a huge attack that can take on those beefy monsters but that is killed basically by just about anyone. These are all cards you can put into the game that will help that swarming player take down those big bad creatures. These cards won't feel like a crutch to players.

In the same way, this could overpower a swarming strategy so a player that plays with big creatures may need some cards that will help him take out multiple monsters in a turn, etc. In Summoner Wars, each faction's summoner has their own spells (event cards) that have different effects in the game. These spell cards have some things that may seem like patches too. The first few factions' cards really caused the other players to favor hero heavy matches. These cards are the pivotal point of the different strategies for the different factions.

Anyways, that's why I don't think it would be a crutch but a boon to your game.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut