PDA

View Full Version : New AOP (ACTION of POWER) Concept Cards



Deck Dont Matter
03-12-2015, 09:22 PM
Well I was given the idea to take a shot at designing concept for a new cycle of "_ of Power" recently. All of the cards were given Idioms for cards names. The 4/4 difficulty/control idea came from some initial feedback given. Let me know what you think. I do enjoy the feed back.

One for All
4/4 Action +3L
All
This card does not count toward progressive difficulty.
F: Draw 2 cards. Add one card from your hand to the top of your deck.
--------------------------------------
Necessary Evil
4/4 Action +3M
Evil
R: After your opponent makes a control check to play an attack (not as a block), it gets -3. Failing this control check does not end the combat phase.
---------------------------------------
Order through Tyranny
4/4 Action +3 H
Order
F Discard x Momentum: Both players discard X characters cards attached to their starting character. For each character card discarded each player takes 1 damage.

Modification from feedback--
Order Through Tyranny
4/4 Action +3 H
Order
F Discard 1 Momentum: Both players discard their entire momentum and lose 1 vitality for each momentum they discarded.
----------------------------------------
Desire of the Void
4/4 Action +2M
Void
F Destroy 1 foundation: Your opponent reveals their hand. Choose 1 card from your opponent's hand with difficulty X or less and discard it from their hand. X equals the difficulty of the destroyed foundation.
-------------------------------------------
Hell and High Water
4/4 Action +3M
Water
R: After your opponent plays an ability, if they have played that ability at least three times this turn, whether printed on the same card or another with the same name, commit their character and one of their foundations or assets.
-------------------------------------------
Wiped off the Face of the Earth
4/4 Action +3L
Earth
E: This attack gets +X damage and -X speed. X equals its printed damage. This attack gains the Throw and you may not play anymore enhances this enhance step.
-----------------------------------------------------
Fire in your Belly
4/4 +3H
Fire
E Flip 4 foundations: Your attack gets +4 speed and +4 damage
----------------------------------------------------
Such is Life
4/4 +2L
Life
E: The next attack you play this turn gets -X difficulty, +X damage and +X speed. X equals your attack's printed difficulty. Discard your attack from the card pool.
--------------------------------------------------
For the Greater Good
4/4
Good
R, discard 1 momentum: Before you take damage from an attack, reduce the damage taken by 5.
--------------------------------------------------------
Cry Havoc! And Let Slip the Dogs of War
4/4 Action +2M
Chaos
F Flip 2 foundations: Add the top two cards from your discard pile to your momentum. You may Flip 2 foundations to discard this card from your card pool.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Death and Taxes
4/4 Action +2H
Death
F [Flip X foundations]: Destroy target asset of difficulty X or less.
Edit from feedback--
Death and Taxes
4/4 Action +2H
Death
F [Flip X foundations or commit your character]: Destroy target asset or foundation of difficulty X or less. If your character is committed in cost, destroy any asset or foundation.

--------------------------------------------------------------
Vanish into thin Air
4/4 Action
Air
R(+6): After your opponent blocks an attack, cancel that block and discard it from your opponent's card pool. Your opponent may attempt to block that attack again with another card. Only 1 copy of this card can be played per turn.

Tagrineth
03-13-2015, 07:59 AM
One for All is amazing and eclipses most of the rest. I'm gonna be honest there are a few of these I wouldn't even consider playing.

Order through Tyranny is super narrow in its scope. Millennium Games doesn't see much play, this wouldn't see any.

Hell and High Water would probably be sideboard at best. It's like a slightly better Moon R sure, but it doesn't have a secondary effect, making the deck space hard to justify.

For the Greater Good is just kinda... it's more or less Back Flip with a momentum cost. Eh.

Death and Taxes is very mediocre and again would be difficult to justify deckspace wise.

Contrast with One for All which is crazy good, Vanish into Thin Air, Such is Life, and Wiped Off which are all basically auto-includes, the only question becomes how many.

Deck Dont Matter
03-13-2015, 08:50 AM
@Tag
You got to take into account Not every Asset of Power, Attack of Power and Foundation of Power saw play. The constant I found with all of these is to have 4 auto playable (would play between 2-4 maindeck). 4 sideboard playable(1 main deck slot or 2 Sideboard slots), and 4 that fall into play style value(fringe play) where there could be a deck that could best use said card between main and side. Also remember comparing these to format defining cards such as Moon or function versions of old cards like Backflip you are thinking in a different design point that those cards don't exist currently or soon will not exist in the meta. I really think original back flip could be too good today, but that is my two cents.

wafflecopter
03-13-2015, 09:51 AM
I like a lot of these - the Life "food chain" idea is fantastic, the speed/damage boost abilities mostly seem balanced. Some individual thoughts:

One for All - why does only this one get the "progressive difficulty" static? It feels like it could be a part of any or all of them, and the "draw 2, put 1 back" doesn't seem much worse than many of them

Order through Tyranny - Sean torpedoed our asset by putting this crap ability on it, why you gotta ruin my favorite symbol with it too ;~; The vitality drain part feels really tacked-on and nearly irrelevant. Like, if you knock off two Mai stackers or Skullmen, that's a beating -- who cares about 2 life at that point? Also, I think the phrasing runs into the Duo Combo problem (where, if I discard 1 character and you discard 2, we both lose 3 vitality).

Desire of the Void - sweet. Could be a huge swing when you take the Templar your opponent was going to rely on, but because it's basically impossible to take most attacks it can easily miss

Cry Havoc! - the symbol is called "Chaos". And no way does this name fit in a card title box! This feels like a build-around-me, but I'm not convinced the payoff is high enough. Would be worth testing

Death and Taxes - seems very weak, although that might be prolonged exposure to Spinning Necro Driver speaking.

Deck Dont Matter
03-13-2015, 11:04 AM
@Wafflecopter
Kevin, thank you very much for your feed back. "One for All" Seems to be getting the mix review slot. Yes I want a Brainstorm type effect in UFS. This really falls in a need where proper playtesting would be needed.
For "Order Through Tyranny" I submit to you the alternate idea that Sean gave me in the feedback.

Order Through Tyranny
4/4 Action +3 H
Order
F Discard 1 Momentum: Both players discard their entire momentum and lose 1 vitality for each momentum they discarded.

The card becomes Order's momentum hate and goes more to the control aspect I expect is needed soon enough.

"Desire for the Void" was designed to not hit attacks though. It was primarily designed to hit Templar, the deal no damage when blocked cards, and the major breaker cards. If your lucky and get a small attack though...Good job.

"Cry Havoc"-Yes an alternate title would be needed to fully fit the theme. I just really like this Idiom. I wanted to try to design a balanced power up.

For "Death and Taxes" there could be changes to the power level of this card. Alternate design was

Death and Taxes
4/4 Action +2H
Death
F [Flip X foundations or commit your character]: Destroy target asset of difficulty X or less. If your character is committed in cost, destroy any asset.

Tagrineth
03-13-2015, 11:14 AM
@Tag
You got to take into account Not every Asset of Power, Attack of Power and Foundation of Power saw play. The constant I found with all of these is to have 4 auto playable (would play between 2-4 maindeck). 4 sideboard playable(1 main deck slot or 2 Sideboard slots), and 4 that fall into play style value(fringe play) where there could be a deck that could best use said card between main and side. Also remember comparing these to format defining cards such as Moon or function versions of old cards like Backflip you are thinking in a different design point that those cards don't exist currently or soon will not exist in the meta. I really think original back flip could be too good today, but that is my two cents.

Saying that that's how they ended up and therefore that's how they were designed is... well to me that's a bit shortsighted. It's not like any of the Foundations of Power were DESIGNED to be fringe picks. In a vacuum all of them are really good and do what the symbol needs out of a 1/5. But like... the only ones that really didn't see much competitive inclusion at all were Fire and Chaos and that was more because there were just better options than anything else. (you can also make an argument for Death because it only really saw play with Kunai, because Death couldn't afford the momentum cost without it)

On the flip side, you can tell the Assets of Power were pretty much all designed to be "fringe-y" cards that were sideboard at best (with one notable and notorious exception) and NONE of those saw competitive play (except the one, obviously) despite some being on the verge of playability.

And I bet if you asked Jason, he'll probably also tell you that none of the Attacks of Power were intended to be fringe-y gimmicks nobody would really take seriously.

Taking this series and basically going in with the mindset of "some of these won't see play, might as well dictate to the players which ones those are" is not a design philosophy I can accept.

Tagrineth
03-13-2015, 11:17 AM
Why not just make Death and Taxes destroy a foundation or asset? You're already giving up 2-3 foundations to get rid of anything worth playing an action for. Would make it worth putting into decks. Notice how little play Steel's Bane and Soul Wave1 got?

Deck Dont Matter
03-13-2015, 11:25 AM
@Tag
The is strange because both Steel's Bane and Soul Wave1 were both seeing lots of play in my area.

dutpotd
03-13-2015, 12:32 PM
@Tag
The constant I found with all of these is to have 4 auto playable (would play between 2-4 maindeck). 4 sideboard playable(1 main deck slot or 2 Sideboard slots), and 4 that fall into play style value(fringe play) where there could be a deck that could best use said card between main and side.

That may or may not be a good constant to work towards with cards in a cardpool but here we are talking about attacks of power, and it stands to reason having them all be of one type would make more sense or you are willingly wishing an imbalance into the symbol landscape.

I guess I'm saying I'd be more interested to see one for each symbol that is very playable, most decks of symbol will play 1-4, one for each symbol that is sideboard fare or better in some decks than others or against some decks than others, and finally one for each symbol that is just niche, or that won't see play out of decks that have a very specific need for a type of ability (hard for any deck to be like that when it comes to action cards...).

You also have to take into account just that, these are action cards, there is some additional cost to playing blue cards in that they are by nature situational so they should have decent effects to offset the required cost.

I like the names you have arrived at, but as a self proclaimed man of action I can't say I like much else I see here :)

Deck Dont Matter
03-13-2015, 01:30 PM
@dutpotd
It is not that I'm saying everything would be designed in such a way that the 4/4/4 split in playability would happen. Yes there are some cards that will see play over others, but I feel that this design option it either gives a symbol and ability that it commonly doesn't get access to or that the card enhances the "common" abilities of the symbol. These cards are a spit ball with zero playtesting and only basic power level balancing.

dutpotd
03-13-2015, 03:04 PM
It is not that I'm saying everything would be designed in such a way that the 4/4/4 split in playability would happen. Yes there are some cards that will see play over others, but I feel that this design option it either gives a symbol and ability that it commonly doesn't get access to or that the card enhances the "common" abilities of the symbol. These cards are a spit ball with zero playtesting and only basic power level balancing.

Sure, I guess I'm saying it'd be nice to see a 12/0/0, 0/12/0, and 0/0/12 so they are comparable 'actions of power'. Currently you have:

One for All - staple
Necessary Evil - very niche
Order through Tyranny - very niche
Desire of the Void - some use/side
Hell and High Water - some use/side
Wiped off the Face of the Earth - very niche
Fire in your Belly - very niche
Such is Life - very niche
For the Greater Good - some use/side
Cry Havoc! And Let Slip the Dogs of War - some use/side
Death and Taxes - some use/side
Vanish into thin Air - haha, this is such a funny cost contrast to Harnessing, sadly even with this cost it will see niche play

I guess my point is the vast majority of these cards are not worth entertaining when building decks. And based on the All one, which is a guaranteed inclusion in a deck, it'd be interesting to see what you'd do for guaranteed inclusions for the other ones OR what you'd do for an All one that isn't a staple.

dutpotd
03-13-2015, 03:07 PM
Also, I don't seem to follow the strange fascination with Flipping X cards as a cost - blank cards are boring cards and flipping is a soft cost in that if it doesn't synergize with something else feels kind of tacked on when not an on-card cost (in which case it is a once per game, unless destroyed and replayed or turned face up or whatever).

i.e. what is the deal and why did you choose Chaos and Fire for flips?

Deck Dont Matter
03-13-2015, 03:21 PM
The Flip foundation cost is more or less a testing of the waters on if the cost even works or not. There is only so many things that can be done in this game to pay as cost so eventually this would be the logical next step. Mainly it can be used to restrict early use of the card. Like I would love to have power up back. Guess what Power Up is too good now. But what if you could get power up by Flipping two spam foundation. The symbols chosen were just the most common symbols were spams foundations are used, at least in my opinion.

dutpotd
03-13-2015, 03:38 PM
The Flip foundation cost is more or less a testing of the waters on if the cost even works or not. There is only so many things that can be done in this game to pay as cost so eventually this would be the logical next step. Mainly it can be used to restrict early use of the card. Like I would love to have power up back. Guess what Power Up is too good now. But what if you could get power up by Flipping two spam foundation. The symbols chosen were just the most common symbols were spams foundations are used, at least in my opinion.

Let's consider for a second, 2 of the AoP Fire, that is 8 cards you'd need to flip face down, that is the majority of most aggressive deck staging areas and yet the ability on the AoP Fire is very aggressive.

I have two considerations:

1. Using mass flipping as a cost is a cost that is incredibly high early game, and better suited to a late game strategy.

2. We are talking about playing very few of these cards as you'd run out of bad/spam cards to flip face down OR you'd be paying a very real all-in cost where your game goes downhill ability-wise thereafter.

We already have cards that are mini powerups, from Olexa's foundation to Give Up Yet, to Additional Knowledge. A straight gain two momentum action may not be 'too powerful' if it was costed properly, something like First F 5 diff, 4 check might be fine. Where there's Smoke is Power Up with a 1 turn delay. Etc.