I stand corrected. Thanks.
To be honest, that’s almost the way Magic works too. Most successful games, specifically Magic and L5R (and I guess Shadowfist), have adopted the paradigm that rarity corresponds to level of complexity rather than power. Of course, in a given Magic set the average rare is probably a bit better than the average common, but each rarity level has a continuum of good to suck. An excellent explanation of the design philosophy that goes into creating that continuum can be found here. However, for the most part the days of giving a rare bigger numbers per cost are over. Of course, I haven’t really looked at Magic much in the last two years so the philosophy may have changed, but I doubt that.
To be blunt, it doesn’t sounds like you played CCGs very much.
- Rarity of power cards does sell cards, as most gamers happily spend money for better cards rather than attempt to compete with weak cards. This is a strong financial incentive to make power rares.
- Having all cards printed at equal rarity doesn’t mean the game devolves into a few decks containing only the best cards – this happens in Magic because of its power disparity between cards. You can see this in sharp contrast by comparing Magic to more balanced games (e.g Shadowfist and Vampire) that actually tend to have the common/uncommon cards be the more powerful than rares.
- Rarity does not force people to compensate by “developing strategies using common and uncommon cards”. Far from it in my experience, except amongst the absolute most casual of players – who are not the primary customers, and even they tend to borrow decks from others who have flat boxes of cards.
snip.
However, for the most part the days of giving a rare bigger numbers per cost are over. Of course, I haven’t really looked at Magic much in the last two years so the philosophy may have changed, but I doubt that.
Notice how you have to qualify that with “almost the way Magic works” and “for the most part”?
Magic toned down the power rares (especially as compared to the original set), and diminished the rate of never-useful commons, but every Magic set I’ve looked at since the beginning has had obvious power rares, which generally shows up clearly in the relative paucity of actually competitive tournament decks. This is in sharp contrast to Vampire and Shadowfist, amongst others; I challenge you to find a power rare in Shadowfist, as opposed to one that just lets you build a funky deck.
Magic is not a well balanced game, despite being better balanced than in days of yore.
Jasper, could you please define what you mean by balanced? In the context of competitive games balance usually refers to whether or not the game has degenerate or useless design elements. You don’t seem to be talking about that (since the rarity of a given card has no impact on playing the actual game of Magic) but I can’t really tell.
I have to say, I am pretty skeptical that Shadowfist and Vampire feature an amazing failure rate of zero in terms of power management and balance. I have a hunch that power disparity isn’t so obvious in SF or Vampire because they lack Magic’s obsessive community devoted to exploiting and breaking every card in every combination, ever, often with large cash prizes at stake. Wizards isn’t perfect, but Magic is a damn good game, and it generally agreed (by Magic people, at any rate) that the game has never been healthier than it is now.
Also: there has been a revolving door cast of tournament decks lately.
Regarding balance, there are at least four highly competetive formats that change at least three times a year with set rotations and the fickle nature of the metagame. The last time there was a truly degenerate and unbalanced format was in 2003 with the Affinity deck - you either played it or dedicated a chunk of your deck to beat it. In the end, it didn’t even win its block Pro Tour. Even the “eternal” formats - which include ancient mistakes such as Mana Drain and the moxes - tend to change within a year. Yes, you need the moxes to win those tournaments, but WOTC doesn’t support them more than the low-stakes “Vintage Championships”, and most Vintage tournaments are non-sanctioned and allow the use of proxies. Even “niche” designs are pushed by R&D to the point where they can become viable for a while; see the Poison Counter decks at the San Diego Pro Tour.
I consider this a fluke rather than the result of a concerted effort on the part of R&D to push poison, mostly because I believe poison is the dumbest mechanic ever. Kudos to Lachmann and Van Lunen for breaking the format, though.
Not really related, but one of the World Champions (Zak or Zack something, maybe 1994?) lived in my frat house one summer. A little creepy, but not so much so that people disliked him. I did manage to beat him once (pretty near the World Championship), but that was mostly good luck on my part and bad luck on his.
Great post (the stuff I deleted was great as well).
The thing you noted, however, is the copyright violation. There really is not concept of “counterfeiting” if there is not a copyright law or other law preventing the creation of duplicates. That was my point, really. Without copyright law or comparable IP protection law, unless you have a trade secret or similar process that people can not figure out, I do not see how you really could have a rarity system like you do in Magic.
shrug That’s what the magic players who’ve never tried them always say – how could anything possibly be better than Magic? Why not base your opinion about other games on something other than blind assumption?
The games I mentioned seem better balanced because they are better balanced, with the same sorts of obsessive power-gamers looking for loopholes playing them. You have this implicit assumption that the people who play other games haven’t also played magic, or that they were bad at it. In my experience, the opposite is in fact true: The better (tournament winning) card game players I’ve met tend to prefer to not play magic, with it’s power rares and fairly small set of tournament viable decks, and have a much broader experience in trying different games.
Fraud isn’t a crime of creation, it’s about selling to someone as if it was the real thing when it isn’t.
Lots of viable decks, no really dominant cards, a relatively low percentage of cards that are useless, relative lack of a need to ban or errata cards, a willingness to errata cards when they’re found to be too effective. The variety of effective decks is really the key determinant for me.
The rarity of a card in Magic does have (at every point I checked) an impact on playing – they tend to be better. This trend has diminished, but even magic advocates admit it hasn’t disappeared. IMHO those making magic know exactly what they are doing, and intentionally make a few power rares every set. I believe this because the power rares I’ve seen have been so obvious, and I know that those making the game are strong players.
Magic players are also a self selecting field. Those who don’t like the imbalance don’t play anymore, and the remaining players have a very high tolerance for imbalanced cards, e.g. I’ve often heard “oh, but there’s a counter – how can it be broken?”.
Yes, I know. Anything to be contrary however. Good work.
As opposed to: everything makes my point, even when it doesn’t.
Nice job.
As mentioned before, if you have nothing to add, get out. This has been an interesting thread, with good discussion (though it deviated from what I was originally curious about, I have found what was discussed interesting).
You’ve added nothing of value, and your attempt to pick a fight because you don’t like me is pathetic.
You don’t own this thread, and you decided to deal with my counterpoint as an attack.
If you want have a discussion about your point fine. But in P&R you may have to defend your assertions. Sorry. Life is a bitch.
Also, I don’t have much of an opinion about you, but it’s definitely going down. Your perceived victim-hood is truly pathetic.
Feel free to control the thread. Discussion with you is pointless.
Why you’ve decided I have become your enemy all of a sudden, I have no idea…
This kind of paranoid behavior normally leads to a total freakout followed by a gentle touching. Should be fun to watch.
As does repeatedly attempting to play forum moderator by suggesting a “gentle touching.”
http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showpost.php?p=954258&postcount=29
Your masturbatory fixation on people being banned (and your outright lies about your agenda) make me sick.
As stated, I know what type of person you are, and discussion is pointless. I’m done.