On card design

[-Griffin]

Giving a +1 doesn't break player-player. Nothing you mentioned there is even related to it, unless it's so powerful that it's an almost certain win.

[Toffee.]

[quote name='-Griffin' timestamp='1305402136' post='5208286']
Giving a +1 doesn't break player-player. Nothing you mentioned there is even related to it, unless it's so powerful that it's an almost certain win.
[/quote]
+1s are usually fine among there own archetype. It just matters about where you get your cards from, and how splashable said +1 card is, in conjunction with it's Archetype.
Thats kinda' like how D-Draw is @1, since Destiny Heros are all about Graveyard shenanigans.

[-Griffin]

That's getting into balance, mostly, I don't feel it's a matter of card design. A 100% splashable +1 is usually broken, which is linked partially to card design, but that has its own discussion, and I'd rather keep this to design terms, so can we drop the "+1" topic unless someone has a game-design related aspect of it? o.o

[Darkest Hour]

One thing to point out is "self interaction" for most cards, such as Summoners or Battle Lockers. While I had hellish trouble with having two Marauding Captains or two Command Knights face-up on the field and thought that it was absolutely impossible to beat a long time ago, eventually I learned that most self-interaction is not too bad depending on how restrictive it becomes. If it can Special summon other copies of itself at will (Destiny Hero Malicious, Zombie Master and Lumina Lightsworn Sorceress), it's generally worse than just working well with another copy on the field.

Most problems with self interaction cards is that they make stable loops that can't be broken if they have enough resources to pay costs to fulfill their effects, and can lead to OTK/FTK combinations. Generally if being able to Special Summon itself at will (in other words, Once per turn, do y to summon x and it's variants) is possible, it should have exclusionary limits or different targets other than itself. Zombie Master summoning Zombie Master to summon Plaguespreader is generally an okay thing to me, but Zombie Master to Summon Zombie Master to tribute for Cannon Soldier to Summon Zombie Master to Summon Zombie Master etc. might be a problem.

[Giga Hand]

Cyber Dragon promotes bad play? That is idiotic indeed. It's like saying Dark Worlds promote bad play by letting you throw Fine into the deck and it not sucking.

I have a question. Is there a way to make a turtle strategy good from a design perspective? Usually they're just annoying. I was thinking that having powerful defensive plays balanced by giving the opponent advantage would be nice.

[-Griffin]

The thing about turtle strats is that 'you have to wait before you can attack me' is pretty much annoying by default. Generally, the most acceptable turtling is making them have to attack more, such as by some level of LP gain, or battle reversal by Honest-like cards. Outright stopping attacking or negating destruction by battle is just really notfun.

[Giga Hand]

[quote name='-Griffin' timestamp='1306007832' post='5223428']
The thing about turtle strats is that 'you have to wait before you can attack me' is pretty much annoying by default. Generally, the most acceptable turtling is making them have to attack more, such as by some level of LP gain, or battle reversal by Honest-like cards. Outright stopping attacking or negating destruction by battle is just really notfun.
[/quote]

I get it now. I know of a turtle card that not just not boring, but fun to deal with.
[img]http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20091027193456/yugioh/images/thumb/c/cf/KrebonsTU01-EN-SR-UE.jpg/300px-KrebonsTU01-EN-SR-UE.jpg[/img]

I love playing "Let's beat up Krebons"!

[Giga Hand]

[quote name='-Griffin' timestamp='1292074868' post='4844054']
[u][b]Slippery Slope:[/b][/u]
Slippery Slope is a term in game design which means that when one player gains an advantage, it becomes easier to gain more advantage. An extreme of this in Yugioh would be that every time you destroy an opponent's card or deal damage to their Life Points, you draw a card and gain 1000 Life Points. That means that the first player to get a head start very quickly can put their opponent in a situation without as many options and where fighting back is very difficult. Generally, a Slippery Slope is a bad thing since it can very easily lead to a Lame Duck. To minimise Slippery Slope, try not to have cards that require you to be winning for them to work, that work much better if you're winning, or that punish a player with few cards/LPs.
On the other slide, be careful about removing Slippery Slope all together. Sid Meier is oft-quoted as saying 'A game is a series of interesting decisions'. While this might not apply to all games, I feel it very much does apply to Yugioh. If you reset the entire game except LP, like Fiber Jar had been flipped, every time a direct attack was made (to stop a player 'taking control' of the match) then the game would just be a disconnected series of mini-events and wouldn't feel like a single duel. Generally, the fact a losing player in Yugioh generally has less cards to fight back with is more than enough of a Slippery Slope to avoid this, but it's worth saying.
[/quote]
I feel that I should mention the old card game (that I believe isn't sold outside japan anymore) Duel Masters. IIRC, some people wanted to make a cartoon about Magic (because there's one about their rival), WotC said no, so they made their own card game and made a cartoon about it.

It was pretty similar to Magic, creatures couldn't attack until a turn without a certain effect, it had mana, colors, tapping, etc. What I want to mention is the innovative life point system.

It didn't have a number. Instead, players started the game by placing 5 cards from their deck into the shield zone, face down. When a creature attacks a player, they take one of the shields and add it to their hand. Some creatures had a "double-breaker" ability, meaning they broke 2 shields simultaneously. And some cards had effects that trigger when they are a shield, and subsequently "broken". I lost once because I broke a shield when I shouldn't have.

This takes any sort of slippery slope and beats it up. It has psychological effects on the player (should I sacrifice card advantage to get life advantage?), and gives losing players a fighting chance.

[Tempest of Reach]

[color="#0000FF"]I remember Duel Masters! I once saw the cartoon for it... admittedly, only a small part off it.

BTW, is it me does the current Meta game rather come under quite a few off those categories? Especially if its Meta Game Deck Vs Non-Meta Game Deck[/color]

[Giga Hand]

I'd like to point out that the current level 12 synchro monsters are pretty much - and I know this is an oxymoron - walking lame ducks.

And the thing about identical games not necessarily being bad, I don't think this applies to trading card games. The reason being is games like chess and go are affected hugely by decisions made while the game is going on. Dominion is the same, to a lesser extent. Trading card games are affected by decisions made outside the game, i.e. when building your deck. When the actual game is happening, optimal play isn't difficult unless you have a crapton of search cards. Dominion, too, is similar, which is why I like it - it has a splash of both.

And I frigging hate how many generic and powerful traps there are in the game. Bottomless, Solemn, the OTHER Solemn, DP, I feel this creates a Nash Equilibrium. If a couple of these weren't generic or less powerful I wouldn't mind, Solemn Warning should be a psychic support...

Also, I think that there should be a play in any deck that [i]might potentially[/i] make a turnaround when all you have is the card you just drew. My Fabled deck can topdeck Krus, discard it with Kushano and summon Unicore/Gallabas/Grimro, then summon Kushano, make BRD and nuke everything. Or just roll with Unicore. HEROes have Bubbleman, and while I think his effect was a bit overpowered in the anime he got too much of a nerf. He's not worth putting in a deck now, which is a shame because his effect was, design-wise, awesome.

[-Griffin]

There's been quite a few points brought up, but this is the one I most feel like addressing:


[quote name='Giga Hand' timestamp='1306945178' post='5246525']
And the thing about identical games not necessarily being bad, I don't think this applies to trading card games. The reason being is games like chess and go are affected hugely by decisions made while the game is going on. Dominion is the same, to a lesser extent. Trading card games are affected by decisions made outside the game, i.e. when building your deck. When the actual game is happening, optimal play isn't difficult unless you have a crapton of search cards. Dominion, too, is similar, which is why I like it - it has a splash of both.
[/quote]

I'd recommend playing some games of Yomi by David Sirlin. There's 10 Decks (not editable) in the first wave of Decks, and mirror matches are perfectly fun. Even with just one Deck, I feel it'd be a fantastic game.

[Giga Hand]

To clarify, the main draw to trading card games for me is the ability to customize my deck. I have nothing against mirror matches. I might check out Yomi anyway, thanks for the suggestion.

And another thing about Mirror Matches, TCG wise, one cool thing about them is you don't have to bother balancing them. In fact, it might just be better if they aren't balanced. Both players have access to the same resources, so if one player uses a card which has the same effect on both players but usually only benifits themselves, both players benifit, and since the opponent has that card too, it makes things a clash of massively overpowered decks and you don't even have to worry about them breaking the game.

I also like the concept of cards that are made just in case you run into a mirror match. While Omni Heroes can run Super Polymerization in their main deck, Gem-Knights can side it in case they run into another Gem-Knight user, using their Gem-Knights as fusion material for your monsters. And don't get me started on [url="http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Final_Fusion"]Final Fusion[/url], though that's likely bad for other reasons, namely that it makes the game end too quickly.

So, just so everyone knows we're on-topic, don't worry if your cards are more effective in a mirror match. It's probably even better if they are, IMO.

[-Griffin]

[quote name='Giga Hand' timestamp='1307371860' post='5260688']
And another thing about Mirror Matches, TCG wise, one cool thing about them is you don't have to bother balancing them.
[/quote]

Even in a mirror match, cards that are too good make a player feel the game is too luck-based, depending on who draws the too-powerful card.

[Chaos Dralcax]

[quote name='-Griffin' timestamp='1292074868' post='4844054']
[u][b]Lame Ducks:[/b][/u]
A Lame Duck is a game design term that means a game can reach a point where only one player is at all likely to win (90%+ sorta chance) but the game can still go on for a while. In Yugioh, this can very easily happen. If you draw a terrible hand, and your opponent draws a great hand, then the entire duel might be completely pointless since both players could tell the outcome before any cards hit the field. Lame Ducks are, at the risk of redundancy, lame. No-one likes playing Lame Duck games as the loser, and often it's not even very fun as the winner, since you don't get any Player-Player Interaction - the opponent just can't do anything. To avoid Lame Ducks ruining the game or format, avoid inconsistent cards that can give dead hands, and avoid lockdowns that make playing pointless.
[/quote]

This happens a lot with those 5ds starter structure decks. The entire deck revolves around Synchro summoning, which, requires Tuner monsters, which are easily destroyed by battle or not drawn at all. It's sort of like playing a deck that relies on Fusion Summoning, but not drawing Polymerization. Not many kids live in my neighborhood who are big fans of Yu-Gi-Oh, so I always have to duel Decks that are put together out of the spare cards in my collection (but all of the good cards are in the deck I normally use) or Structure Decks (which are only good after modification with big changes to the Spell and Trap cards used) and those really lame starter decks that can only beat other structure decks or those "pile of random" decks. So that happens a lot. I might want to put together another good deck sometime. I'm considering Dragunity, Water, Warrior, or Dragon themes. Just so I actually have a challenge.

[quote name='Giga Hand' timestamp='1306071738' post='5224865']
I get it now. I know of a turtle card that not just not boring, but fun to deal with.
[img]http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20091027193456/yugioh/images/thumb/c/cf/KrebonsTU01-EN-SR-UE.jpg/300px-KrebonsTU01-EN-SR-UE.jpg[/img]

I love playing "Let's beat up Krebons"!
[/quote]

For me, it's Gravekeeper's Visionary.
[img]http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100311152238/yugioh/images/2/2e/Gravekeeper%27sVisionaryABPF-EN-SR-1E.png[/img]
But Krebons is funnier.

[lightswornGENEX]

[quote name='-Griffin' timestamp='1292074868' post='4844054']
Joshy said that guides on design should go into AoC, but I really feel WC is a better place. People here are actually interested in being competitive and playable. Since we have two CCGs in here now, I feel it's appropriate to have a topic here on a few aspects of game design that I feel everyone should be aware of to make CCGs enjoyable to play. This topic isn't premeditated, just my own meandering thoughts.

[b]Foreword:[/b] Like the English language, I'm sure all rules to game and card design have exceptions. These are mostly guidelines of design, not laws. If you disagree with any particular statement, feel free to say so, but you don't have to go off on a rant about it.

[u][b]Player-Player Interaction:[/b][/u]
Why do you think Soltaire is not played at parties? If you have four people sitting around a table with four decks of playing cards, it's unusual that they decide to play Soltaire. Generally, when you're with another person and playing games, it's more enjoyable to play a game where you're interacting with them. This also means that it's generally not as fun in Yugioh to play a game where the opponent's actions don't influence you at all.
Exodia is an example of breaking this game design guideline in the extreme. When playing an Exodia Deck (based around drawing, not stalling) you might as well be playing with yourself - very rarely does your opponent interact with your Deck at all. It's just "who gets out a win first" rather than "who gets out a win WHILE PREVENTING an opponent's win". This is also generally the reason OTKs and FTKs are bad for the game - they're one-player things. Chances are that most players wouldn't say a game was 'bad' if it ended on the first turn, but they were somehow able to play half their Deck through various card effects and there was plenty of back-and-forth.

[u][b]Lame Ducks:[/b][/u]
A Lame Duck is a game design term that means a game can reach a point where only one player is at all likely to win (90%+ sorta chance) but the game can still go on for a while. In Yugioh, this can very easily happen. If you draw a terrible hand, and your opponent draws a great hand, then the entire duel might be completely pointless since both players could tell the outcome before any cards hit the field. Lame Ducks are, at the risk of redundancy, lame. No-one likes playing Lame Duck games as the loser, and often it's not even very fun as the winner, since you don't get any Player-Player Interaction - the opponent just can't do anything. To avoid Lame Ducks ruining the game or format, avoid inconsistent cards that can give dead hands, and avoid lockdowns that make playing pointless.

[u][b]Slippery Slope:[/b][/u]
Slippery Slope is a term in game design which means that when one player gains an advantage, it becomes easier to gain more advantage. An extreme of this in Yugioh would be that every time you destroy an opponent's card or deal damage to their Life Points, you draw a card and gain 1000 Life Points. That means that the first player to get a head start very quickly can put their opponent in a situation without as many options and where fighting back is very difficult. Generally, a Slippery Slope is a bad thing since it can very easily lead to a Lame Duck. To minimise Slippery Slope, try not to have cards that require you to be winning for them to work, that work much better if you're winning, or that punish a player with few cards/LPs.
On the other slide, be careful about removing Slippery Slope all together. Sid Meier is oft-quoted as saying 'A game is a series of interesting decisions'. While this might not apply to all games, I feel it very much does apply to Yugioh. If you reset the entire game except LP, like Fiber Jar had been flipped, every time a direct attack was made (to stop a player 'taking control' of the match) then the game would just be a disconnected series of mini-events and wouldn't feel like a single duel. Generally, the fact a losing player in Yugioh generally has less cards to fight back with is more than enough of a Slippery Slope to avoid this, but it's worth saying.

[u][b]Starting Conditions:[/b][/u]
My favourite writer on game design and one of my favourite game developers, Sirlin (whose [url="http://www.sirlin.net/article-archive/"]articles[/url] you should read if you find this interesting), spends a lot of time during development making sure that all his game's match-ups are fair, and often stresses the importance of in-match and out-of-match decisions. The rule here is that when you start a match in a fighting game, both players should have as close to a 50% win chance (if equal skill) as possible.
It's important to note how this does [b]and does not[/b] translate to Yugioh. In Yugioh, I believe there might as well be more theoretically constructable Decks than there are atoms in the universe. I am not proposing that you balance all of those against every other one. People should be able to make losing Decks. Where this [b]does[/b] apply is when two [b]good[/b] Decks are matched up with each other. This means that if both players are equally good and have equally good Decks, a match shouldn't start as a lame Duck.
That means that Zombies and Macro shouldn't both exist in the same game - zombies are playing a Lame Duck game from turn 1 a lot of the time. That doesn't mean you can't have Graveyard effects and RFG effects in the same game - but no archtype should have every monster RFGing stuff from the opponent's Graveyard in the same format that the Graveyard is useful. In the TCG, Macro vs Zombies isn't much of a problem because Zombies won't face Macro that often and it can often be blown away with MST or something. The time this is a serious problem, though, is anti-cards. Yes, Chimeratech is the worst offender here. If someone has a Cyber Dragon in their Main Deck and Chimeratech Fortress Dragon in their Extra Deck when the game starts, a Machine-using opponent can start at an unfair disadvantage. Avoid anything like this that puts players at too much of a disadvantage from turn 1. It's unaviodable sometimes, but do your best.

[u][b]Representation:[/b][/u]
While writing this, I stumbled upon an article that does this section better than I would.
[url="http://blog.ihobo.com/2010/08/slaying-the-first-colossus.html"]http://blog.ihobo.co...t-colossus.html[/url]
Basically, Cloudians would be a lot less fun to play if their names were "Archtype 12 Monster 1" "Archtype 12 Monster 2" [...ect] and their types were all "Type 4" with "Attribute 2". They would be exactly the same game-design wise, but they wouldn't be as fun because there's simply no visualisation of what they are. In Written Cards, we can easily fall into the trap of having a good, fair, game without any story, image, or anything of the sort. Preceding sets and archtype with a few paragraphs of flavor text, or adding it to the end of a card, can make a world of difference in making a card come alive to the player. It might seem trivial to some people that want nothing but balance, but it makes a world of difference to having an enjoyable set and format.

More to come when thoughts wonder into my head. This is just ideas jotted down, but I doubt I'll ever find time to tidy it up.
[/quote]
[quote name='-Griffin' timestamp='1292166842' post='4846551']
Something more specific to Yugioh:

[b][u]"Generic Card X should be banned because it's OP'd" is a fallacy:[/u][/b]
Fact: No generic card should be banned because it's OP'd.
To most people, even people who are very good at card design, this might seem absurd or just outright wrong. Some might think I'm trolling. I'm being entirely serious.
The only valid reason to ban a [b]generic[/b] card is that it's bad for the game. OP'd cards are often bad for the game, but they are not bad for the game by definition. Before anything, let's look at some cards and weigh up if they're OP'd, and if they're bad for the game:

|Ultimate Power|
|Normal Spell|
|You win the duel.|

If you cannot tell this is OP'd, please stop reading.
But is it [b]bad for the game[/b]?
Yes. Why? It makes the game "who can draw Ultimate Power first?" and destroys [b]Player-Player Interaction[/b] (see first post). Therefore, it should be banned.

What about real Yugioh Cards?:

[url="http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Victory_Dragon"]http://yugioh.wikia..../Victory_Dragon[/url]

Is this OP'd?
No, not really. It's a fairly standard card that can only do anything if you tribute 3 monsters for it's Normal Summon and it does the final damage - not to mention it's got no self-protection.
Is it [b]bad for the game[/b]?
Yes. It interferes with something outside of the current duel - which shouldn't ever happen.
(Note: This example is not generic, but examples don't need to be to argue the difference between the two points)

[url="http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Dark_Hole"]http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Dark_Hole[/url]

Is this OP'd?
I'd say yes. It can wipe the field for no cost and it's not hard to imagine getting a +2 in advantage from this, and you can then declare a direct attack?
Is it [b]bad for the game[/b]?
This might be hard to convince some people, but my stance on this is [b]NO[/b]. I believe that Dark Hole is [b]good for the game[/b]. It discourages people from putting too many monsters on the field when Dark Hole could be played. It adds a layer of psychology to the game which highly encourages [b]Player-Player Interaction[/b] and makes players have to [b]think[/b] about the best number of monsters to put on the field. If [i]all[/i] monster removal is +0 monster removal, then there is no need to [b]think[/b], which makes the game less interesting. There is no denying that Dark Hole has some influence on the way a good player plays the game [b]and I believe it is in a positive way[/b].

Even if you don't agree that Dark Hole is a good example, please understand the last sentence there. If a generic card that any Deck can use (like Dark Hole) affects the way a player plays the game positively, it shouldn't be banned for being too powerful.


Some notes on 'bad for the game':
Defining what cards are bad for the game is a matter of some debate, here's a list of some possible reasons a card is bad for the game:[list]
[*]It discourages Player-Player Interaction (cards that cause OTKs/FTKs fit here)
[*]It causes Slippery Slope and Lame Duck situations
[*]It causes too much luck. "Too much" is subjective, but the reason that too much luck is bad is that it makes the game "you vs luck", breaking down Player-Player Interaction
[*]It interferes with something outside the current duel
[*]It interferes with the way a good player plays [b]negatively[/b] (e.g. makes players not attack for a long time out of fear, so duels take too long)
[*]It makes Starting Conditions uneven too much, by making some Decks unplayable (a 'super-macro' would do this by killing all Graveyard Decks)
[/list]
So should a format be nothing but good-for-the-game generic cards where all Decks are identical because other cards are obsolete?
It can be, and it's not definitely bad. If you haven't noticed, people don't usually auto-quit mirror matches because "the same Decks fighting is boring" and some games, Poker, Uno, Yomi, Dominion and others, can be perfectly good and successful without different Decks for different players. Identical starting conditions isn't a big problem. I heard Chess had been around for a while, and that wasn't dropped by the public for 'being too darn identical'. When adding or removing staples, you're moving a slider between 'customised Decks' and 'identical Decks' [b]neither end is bad[/b]. Most Yugioh players like customized Decks, but it's stupid to make 20 different Dark Holes so that every Deck can have the good-for-the-game card that is Dark Hole. Staples can be good for the game, but most Yugioh players enjoy the game being NOT all-staples, so strike a balance.

To end this random thought, let's look at why Pot of Greed & one other card is banned, you all know the effect, I hope.

It's OP'd, yes, but we know that doesn't matter now.
Does it hit the first bullet-point, discouraging player-player interaction?
One could definitely argue so. OTKs are faster with it, and so are lockdowns (which often discourage Player-Player Interaction, although not as much). This point alone could ban it. Does it hit other points?
It doesn't cause Lame Duck or Slippery Slope. Quite the opposite, it gives the losing player a better chance if drawn! Sure, it can push a winner into winning more, but the ratio of winners cards:losers cards is going to be affected more in the loser's favour most of the time.
Does it cause luck? Yes! The player who draws Pot of Greed is very lucky. The +1 to a lucky player is quite useful, but it might not be enough to ban it if it has enough reasons it's [b]good for the game[/b].
Does it interfere with something outside of the duel? Nope. Simple to tell this one most of the time.
Does it make people play in a negative way? I don't think so - most good players aren't going to take stupid risks because "I might draw Greed"
Does it change starting conditions? Slightly, Spell Counter Decks get more than Dark Scorpion Decks, but nothing worth mentioning.

So Pot of Greed is banned mostly for the first reason, and slightly for the third.

Let's look at one last card:
Black Luster Soldier - Envoy Of The Beginning.
It's not generic, this doesn't apply. Remember this is generic cards only.
[/quote]
i read all of that....so then fenghuang, photon wyvern, and junk destroyer would be bad?
what about chaos sorceror and junk archer?

so shouldn't brionic be banned then?

[Agro]

[quote name='lightswornGENEX' timestamp='1328204216' post='5795449']
i read all of that....so then fenghuang, photon wyvern, and junk destroyer would be bad?
what about chaos sorceror and junk archer?

so shouldn't brionic be banned then?
[/quote]Wow this topic is old. Nice convo to get into.

1. Yes, those 3 you named are bad. Junk archer is too. Chaos sorcerer is good, but not necessarily bad for the game.

2. YES Brio should be banned. And it probably WILL be this next format. And hopefully we'll get Goyo back (no promises though)

[Sander]

[quote name='Wraith' timestamp='1328207786' post='5795500']
2. YES Brio should be banned. And it probably WILL be this next format. And hopefully we'll get Goyo back (no promises though)
[/quote]

Goyo back would be worse than having Brionac @1. :I

[Agro]

[quote name='Zanda Panda' timestamp='1328213618' post='5795613']


Goyo back would be worse than having Brionac @1. :I
[/quote]It honestly wouldn't.

[Sander]

[quote name='Wraith' timestamp='1328214617' post='5795637']
It honestly wouldn't.
[/quote]

Yeah, because a 2800 Level 6 Synchro monster that can steal opponents monsters would make the meta so much more balanced, right?

[Agro]

[quote name='Zanda Panda' timestamp='1328216536' post='5795678']


Yeah, because a 2800 Level 6 Synchro monster that can steal opponents monsters would make the meta so much more balanced, right?
[/quote]At least it isn't made to OTK.

[Sander]

[quote name='Wraith' timestamp='1328217088' post='5795685']
At least it isn't made to OTK.
[/quote]

So it doesn't OTK, big deal. It's still broken and should never come back. :I

[Agro]

[quote name='Zanda Panda' timestamp='1328226127' post='5796002']
So it doesn't OTK, big deal. It's still broken and should never come back. :I
[/quote]It's still not as bad as Brio. That's my point.

[Black Temple Gaurdian]

I feel that Ancient Sacred Wyvern should be listed as a prime example of a slippery slope, for both sides.

[-Griffin]

Oh wow, this topic still exists, talk about a fossil.

I've learned a lot about game design as a whole since I made this. Would anyone be interested in me making a new/updated thread?

[Bringerofcake]

MADRE DE DIOS

GRIFFIN IS BACK

On topic: Go for it. There's been a lot of talk (specifically in TCG) about what is "good" and "bad" for the game, and more educated opinions never hurt.