Bounce Resource

[TriAdX]

I have 2 cycles for each faction

1.
Resource
Provides 2 Threshold (of the appropriate faction)
When this resource comes into play return a resource you control to your hand.

2.
Resource
Provides 1 Threshold (of the appropriate faction)
When you attach this resource it counts as 2 resources
This resource comes into play attached to your faction.
When this resource comes into play return a resource you control to your hand.

[TriAdX]

No love on these aye?

[Bizze]

Perhaps it's too early for more duals? Remember that this is not Magic. Threshold works differently and if you add too many threshold cards, the balance could be disturbed. Even now, with the Crests, it's much easier to play e.g. Pant Swipe and Jackmove early.

I think I like the idea of "counts as two resources" better. That will accelerate the game but not break threshold. Still, it's harder to get an overview of how much an opponent can pay. At least with existing duals there are clear threshold icons.

[TriAdX]

Right.. Well I was not suggesting for the NEXT set.. just some day.


I am aware of the threshold issues that could be created if it's too easy..

I was fighting this on my 4 staple faction..
http://www.thespoils.com/spoils/showthread.php?t=8955

While I was arguing that too much thresh could be bad.. everyone else argued that it isnt...

I still think TOO much TOO early is bad.. but these also dont excell your thresh since you have to bounce a resource.

[Bizze]

I think it's a delicate game mechanics issue.

Multi-trade decks are cool and they are powerful, because they can choose the best cards from multiple trades. This is a reason to make them harder to play i.e. NOT to add more stuff that increases threshold.

I really like that it adds a dimension to start thinking three-trade or four-trade builds, but I also think it's important to keep the flavor of the trades and make it so that a dedicated Warlord deck is more aggressive than a Warlord/Banker. Multi-trade decks should be an advanced construction for the most experienced players and not something anybody puts together because it's easy and by doing that you'll get the best item destruction, the best character removal etc.

Mono should be fastest and easiest to play but with limited options (Banker cannot destroy items)

Dual should make up for one trade's flaws at the cost of higher threshold cards for one of the trades.

Multi should require more strategy when building as well as playing but will have access to a greater toolbox, making them slower but more powerful.



Hmm, I'm not sure if it's a good thing putting down this many arguments for/against imaginary cards... *sigh* ^_^;

[TriAdX]

I agree with most of what you've said and these resources are mono trade..

the 4 staple faction is very complex to play well and that is the penalty for the multi trade ability.

[Bizze]

Yeah, I just mean that for any multi-trade deck, it's always a help if you can substitute a regular resource in the deck with one that provides twice the threshold. In helping mono trade decks, you are also automatically helping multi-trade decks.

I was thinking though... Would it be possible to create resources that are better if the player is using one of the trade-specific factions?

I was thinking something along the line of:
"If your faction card is Moist Cave of the DarkPump, this resource provides [O][O]"

Could be a way of making the trade-specific factions see more play, no?

[TriAdX]

True... I do like that idea...

You could also do something where there is a required thresh amungst permanents you own?

Like Numeric Cost Thresh requirement must be at lest 10

(this would be different then actual thresh) And this idea may not work for at all for this but IS an interesting concept in general for other card mechanics... (YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST!!! lmao)

but really.. You could also say something like...

"If you control any threshold other than [O] destroy this card at the end of your turn."

"This card may not enter play if you are being provided a non-[O] threshold."

The two different wordings are interchangebale which ever works rules wise best.

"If you control any threshold other than [X]"
and
"if you are being provided a non-[X] threshold"

Ideas?

[TriAdX]

One thing I dont like about the Faction Name Specific idea is, what if they come out with another faction in the future that is also Mono Faction... that mechanic would not be forwards compatible.

[Bizze]

I like the "loyalty" mechanic you described. That way you can create cards that are best in mono decks or that prevent certain combos from happening.

I think that is something that could be pursued.