What would be an actually skill-based alternate win condition?

[thekazu4u]

Ok, so in this one card I broke all the rules I made for myself.
1. I made a DIVINE monster.
2. I made an auto-win card.
3. I made a instant Special Summon for no cost.

However, I [i]think [/i]I got an idea. Bear with me on this one. Before I even show the card, I want you to know why I think this is better design than most other alternate win conditions: While those are based around what YOU have, this card is based around what your opponent DOESN'T have. This directly encourages interaction, while most other alternate win conditions take away from it. Also, note how this card pretty much affects both players in the exact same way. (Well, it is killable by the opponent, and it can serve as protection for the player, but at least the effect is fairly equal.) This means you have to design your deck to make better use of the win condition than your opponent.

Also, before you read it I would like to say that I am 100% sure that I did not get it right on the first try. However, I would still REALLY appreciate some help on it, in order to turn it into the balanced but epicly epic and skillful win-condition that I know it can be.

And finally, let me get into how I am going to achieve this goal. I do think this is the right STANDPOINT, but I am not sure I am going about it in the perfect way. The card is inspired by Yata-Garasu, which I consider an alternate win condition. However, yata is guilty of one thing - making a lame-duck game, and restricting the use of cards to only what a player has in his/her hand right now. So, I think, why not take away the whole "no draw" mechanic and replace it with a "give up one card of your choice" mechanic. Next, I thought I should make sure that it does not affect one player more than the other, just so it matters who plays the best not who gets the card first. So, I made both players have to give up a card of their choice. Next, I figured that since we are trying to eliminate luck, I may as well make it come from the extra deck, whenever certain conditions are met. Those conditions, I figured, were having too few cards in the hand or on the field. I picked the number 2, because it is quite small, but it does give the opponent a chance to struggle once it comes out.

[SPOILER Denastrix, Hunter of Duelists]
(Yes it is about to nom on Yugi)
[img]http://yugico.com/customcard/41397.jpg[/img]
[color=#000000][font=Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif][size=3][left]This card can be Special Summoned (from the Extra Deck) when one or more players have less than 3 cards on the field and in the hand combined and cannot be Special Summoned in other ways. If this card would be removed from the field or sent to the Graveyard: Return this card to the Extra Deck instead. There can only be 1 "Denastrix, Hunter of Duelists" on the field at a time. Any damage a player controlling this card inflicts to his opponent's Life Points is reduced to 0. This card cannot be used to satisfy cost(s). During each player's End Phase, that player's opponent must send 1 card from their hand OR field to the graveyard (other than "Denastrix, Hunter of Duelists.") If a player cannot: That player loses the Duel.[/left][/size][/font][/color]
[/spoiler]
There are really two win-conditions in this card. There is the "nobody can do anything so I am going to attack over and over" win condition, and there is the "I used bottomless on your last monster, now you have nothing to tribute" win condition. The first win condition obviously only works for the person playing this card, but the other win condition will work for either player.

What it needs improvement on:
The actual mechanics of the win condition. I know how I want it to work: it summons out when player(s) are low on cards, while it is out there, players lose at least 1 card per turn making up for their draw, so players cannot gain any of that card advantage back, when a player has 0 cards left for X amount of time that player loses. But what I need to do is make sure it does EXACTLY that, nothing that can help any other strategy, and I need to make sure it is balanced (not "if you have 2 or less cards in your field/hand you lose"). Also, I want when it is out there both people to have a chance to get the win condition. Are there any other mechanics you can think of to achieve this goal?

Once again, please don't give up on this card if it looks bad at first glance, I [i]KNOW [/i]there is something here. It will just take a few tries to get it right. And yes, I know this version is not very good, but I think the idea is, that is why I am posting it here. Thanks for reading, please reply with your input!

Oh and just for the record:
I made it DIVINE/Divine-Beast just to make sure it helps each build that can utilize card-advantage EXACTLY the same. I don't want to help a deck that can help LIGHT Dragons (or Earth Dragons etc...) more than any other, so I made it the only attribute/type combo with absolutely NO support.

[Garthfunkle Vii Backwards]

i think its okay and like the concept of directly encourages interaction but i can proably make a better verison of "skill-based alternate win condition" i have to set here and think of how to make it

[Caseywwm]

I get the idea pretty well and will even go so far to say that I like it. I'm am excited to help mold this into a good card, but a card like this is very delicate and difficult to develop into a balanced, playable one. A major issue I see with this card already is the difficulty in actually keeping it on the field [i][u]long enough for its effect to actually mean anything.[/u][/i]

The reason I say this is because of how easy this card can be removed from the field and put back into the Extra Deck, rendering it useless for another turn. Anything higher than 1000 ATK and that monster is gone again before its effect can resolve and make your opponent discard something at their End Phase. This card is currently too difficult to keep on the field for its own worth at its current state. This card in my opinion is currently under-powered in this aspect, and thus not even worth running in a deck at the moment for its intended purpose.

A first move in the correct direction might be to reduce the damage you take from battles involving that card, or better yet, reducing it to 0 altogether. I'm however hesitatant to say this, because then you can basically have a 1000 ATK and DEF treeborn frog that doesn't take battle damage on your hand. This card could easily be manipulated into devastating, never ending fodder with the right deck,because when it's tributed, it'd be sent back to the Extra Deck, and you've made no card gain. Thus, it'd be summoned next turn for re-use.

With this now in mind, another move I think would be wise to make would be to restrict ways how it can be removed from the field. By this, I mean saying that Denastrix cannot be used for a Special Summon in any way, nor a Tribute Summon.

An idea I have as well would be to move when the discarding takes place. For the turn its summoned, an effect would be that the controller of the card who summoned it had to discard at the End Phase of their turn. Afterwards, all discardings take place during the Standby Phase for both players. This way, the card number can stay as low as it needs to be on your side of the field in order to continue re-summoning it. Chances are it would probably be removed from the field every turn until you could get something like Heart of Clear Water on it, but this effect loop would at least keep it coming back long enough for it to affect both players before leaving the field.

TL;DR:

Card is way too easy to remove from field, and is weak to boot: reduce or eliminate all battle damage involving that card.

Give it a limitation preventing it from being used as Tribute/Synchro/Xyz fodder as it's a forever recurring Special Summon while there are a small amount of cards with either player.

Make its effect activate at your End Phase the turn you summon it, then during both Player's Standby Phases from then on, so it affects both players before likely leaving the field the next turn.


These ideas probably (definitely) aren't enough to perfect this card, and it will still likely have a ways to go. I however think this is a good start, and hope to see you through on this to the end until we arrive at the end product. Good luck!

[thekazu4u]

@Caseywwm (I am too lazy to quote that whole thing)
I don't really see the point of reducing all battle damage to 0. The reason being, that it seems like it would tilt the game too far in the direction of the player controlling Densastrix. I am trying to keep both players on a relatively even field here, so I don't see why we should limit damage. Also, limiting damage effectively reduces the opponent's win condition while completely pushing for your own, so that seem a tad unfair. I want the opponent to still be potentially be able to win through normal battle damage.

Ok, so now lets get on to the actual win condition and the problem of not staying on the field long enough. I see what you are saying, and don't worry I will fix it at the end of this paragraph. But before that, I would like to explain why I made it in the way I did so I can explain what I view as a better way to accomplish the same thing you are saying. You see, lets think about a situation where player A has 3 cards total and player B has two cards total. Now, player A can summon denastrix. Next turn, however, something happens. Player B uses pot of avarice so he has more cards than 2 (three now). So, I figure, Denastrix is only fair if it hurts somebody who is legitimately low on cards, and I picked that number to be 2. Now with 3, it is not really fair that Denastrix gets to hunt that duelist. So, if Player B wants to get away, he can use one of those 3 cards to kill denastrix, and it can't come back (until of course somehow player B gets below 3 cards again). Making denastrix harder to get rid of gets player Bs outs, which actually sort of LIMITS player interaction. But, at the same time, I also see how it could be UP'd. So, I just switched one tiny thing, and I think it fixes the problem.

[quote Denastrix, Hunter of Duelists][color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]This card can be Special Summoned (from the Extra Deck) when one or more players have less than 2 cards on the field and in the hand combined and cannot be Special Summoned in other ways. If this card would be removed from the field or sent to the Graveyard: Return this card to the Extra Deck instead. There can only be 1 "Denastrix, Hunter of Duelists" on the field at a time. A player controlling this card cannot declare an attack except with this card. During each player's End Phase, that playe[b]r's opponent[/b] must send 1 card from their hand OR field to the graveyard (other than "Denastrix, Hunter of Duelists.") If a player cannot: That player loses the Duel.[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3][/quote][/size][/font][/color]

[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]The more I look at this, the more I like it. It fixes some problems that I did not even anticipate when thinking up switching who discards when. It gives the player who summons it a slight advantage - because their opponent has to discard first. So the opponent can kill it as many times as he/she likes, as long as he has less than 3 cards, it is just going to keep on coming back. Next, it fixes another problem. In the previous wording, in order for the instant loss to work, the card would have to be killed in your opponent's turn - I hope you see this is a bit crazy. This wording gives you one turn to kill the last card as well, in order to make the instant loss a bigger threat. [/size][/font][/color]

[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]Your thoughts?[/size][/font][/color]


[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]EDIT:[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3][quote] [/size][/font][/color][color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]Denastrix cannot be used for a Special Summon in any way, nor a Tribute Summon. [/quote][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]What do you think would be the easiest way to accomplish this? Remember, I am trying to prevent the card text from becoming even SMALLER :S[/size][/font][/color]

[Black Temple Gaurdian]

"This card cannot be used for Summoning."?
It's a good card. I can see it being paired up with sangan and the likes to avoid accidently causing yourself to lose. The Def could be raised a bit, the player wouldn't be able to attack very well with it still but it'd be a bit harder to kill via battle.

[shelds9]

Sorry to be the bubble burster, but this win condition requires no skill at all. It is just a card that you have to build a Deck around such as Laggia and Rescue Rabbit. It is no different from any good card that you can build a Deck around.

The only way to implenment skill into a card game is really to say "Play a game of Chess. The player who lost loses the Duel."

Sorry man. I don't mean to be harsh, and it is a good idea... But for the "skill" part, it just doesn't quite fit the requirements...

[thekazu4u]

[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]"Play a game of Chess. The player who lost loses the Duel."[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]Oh god, shaharazaad. [/size][/font][/color]
[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]Sorry, I just had to say that. [/size][/font][/color]
[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]Um but in other news, you are completely wrong. The difference between Laggia and Rescue Rabbit is that they are a plug and chug deck - the moment you draw Rescue Rabbit and you have dinos remaining in your deck, you play it and win. Maybe you can say "whenever your opponent has less than 3 cards in hand you play this and win" but notice how drawing has nothing to do with it. The skill is not in using this card, but in being able TO use this card, if you see what I am saying. And I know it is not [b] completely [/b] skill, but that is impossible in a card game. That does not mean some cards require more skill than others. [/size][/font][/color]

[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3][quote] [/size][/font][/color][color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]The Def could be raised a bit, the player wouldn't be able to attack very well with it still but it'd be a bit harder to kill via battle. [/quote][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]Its not supposed to be a defensive card - if anything that is what I am trying to get rid of. The atk was raised to 1000 only to prevent a permanent "deck-out lock" of having it out there, both players discarding, nobody winning. In the new wording, I could actually probably bring it down to 0/0 again. [/size][/font][/color]

Also, how about:
"This card cannot be used to pay a cost" ... I don't know, it is a bit less ambiguous than "this card cannot be used for summoning." I hate coming up with new wordings...

Maybe: "This card cannot be used to satisfy cost(s)."

EDIT: Just because I felt like it, I made it YCSW-EN005. Because maybe sometimes prize cards should be somewhat, you know, useful? Blood Mefist, you've been replaced.

[Sander]

Balanced or not, auto-win / auto-lose cards are still badly designed, and ruin the game. Other than that, the card is bad, mainly because its restrictive Summoning conditions (which in reality aren't that restrictive). But changing the summoning conditions to anything easier would break this card, so yeah, this is another example of a card that falls in the category of cards that cannot be balanced because it's either too hard to summon, and has a broken effect, or has a condition set really high with a broken effect.

[Caseywwm]

Now that I think about it, this card can be protected in so many different ways, that its ATK and DEF stat are perfectly fine the way they are. Stalls such as Level Limit - Area B, Gravity Bind, Heart of Clear Water, and Spirit Barrier. If you were to run all of those cards along with Sangan and cards that make you discard, you have the recipe for a very powerful deck using this card in its current revised state. With it not being able to be used for a tribute or to satisfy another card's conditions, this card is essentially immune to cards like Soul Exchange which would really hinder you.

What you should work on now are the kinks in the win condition. Because although I get what you're coming from, you said you wanted the card to not benefit one player over the other; a skill related win. If that's in your mind, you should have both players be affected by it before it leaves the field. If its effect at the VERY LEAST causes your opponent to discard 1 more card than you, it would be banned instantaneously because of how similar it is to Yata.

I also realize you are trying to make a Yata-esque card with a win condition centered around that very idea, but its overpowered that no matter what happens, you two will either break even, or the very likely even that only your opponent will suffer. You can keep him down to 2 cards every turn while you get even more and more cards, its just overkill. I still think it should be toned down to you two breaking even as much as possible.

This is just my opinion, though. What's your take on it?

[thekazu4u]

@Zanda Panda
No.

@Caseywwm
First paragraph: I think I am going to add in [color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]"This card cannot be used to satisfy cost(s)." You agree I should add it in?[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]Second paragraph: Yup, I do need to work on the kinks of the win condition. Your opponent IS DISCARDING FIRST, and you have the 1000 ATKER, so you will win in the case of a "tie." I like the idea of opponent having to discard first, that seems like a fair advantage to using this card in your Extra Deck as opposed to something else (the opponent could use it as well.) However, the whole thing about 1000 ATK so in 8 turns I will win seems a bit overdone. How about if I were to knock the ATK/DEF down to 0?[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]Also, I see how it will overall cause your opponent a -1, even if they can get out of it. Thus, I am thinking of making it ONLY SUMMONABLE when your OPPONENT has 2 or less cards in hand. That way, when you are low, you cant just throw it out there for a +1. Personally, a situational +1 does not seem that crazily OP'd to me, considering there are things like Inzectors that give less situational +4s. [/size][/font][/color]
[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]So, if I made this change, if it dies on your OPPONENTS turn it will result in a +1 for you, if it dies in YOUR turn it will result in a +0 for you. (I.e. your opponent discards first). You have a monster out, to defend with, but you can't attack, while your opponent can. The win condition is exactly the same for both players, except of course your opponent discarded first.[/size][/font][/color]

[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]The ONLY way I can think of making this more balanced (literally affecting both players the same) is making BOTH players have to discard during YOUR end phase. But, the wording just seems more elegant this way. [/size][/font][/color]

[color=#5A5A5A][font=tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=3]Your thoughts? [/size][/font][/color]

[.Rai]

Meh, it's fundamentally worse than other insta-win decks, fundamentally more difficult to pull off than other insta-win cards, and other stuff.

Insta-win generally shouldn't even exist, because its very nature discourages player-player interaction. You're just comparing to other insta-wins for player-player interaction. At the end of the day, a deck that works as a normal deck rather than insta-win will obviously have more player-player interaction than insta-win.

It's not OPed in the slightest. It's terrible. You could try to win with this, but it requires far too much effort anyway.

[thekazu4u]

This does not discourage player/player interaction in the slightest, at least not more than a normal win. It simply turns card advantage into Life Points. It is entirely based on your OPPONENT's position/hand, not your own. I don't see how you could possibly think that this discourages player/player interaction.

Also, I think you are greatly underestimating the power of the card. If nothing else, it is a good tech for decks that have room in the extra deck, and adds a huge 'freak factor' to any deck. It essentially says "if your opponent has 2 or less cards in his/her hand, he has a very big problem." Combine that with things that hit the hand and mass destruction, and you can make that an EXTREMELY big threat, if nothing else preventing your opponent (after the first round) from making good plays he/she otherwise would.


And... one more edit. Do you think I should reduce its ATK/DEF to 100/100 or 0/0?

[.Rai]

[quote name='thekazu4u' timestamp='1333311454' post='5897942']
This does not discourage player/player interaction in the slightest, at least not more than a normal win. It simply turns card advantage into Life Points. It is entirely based on your OPPONENT's position/hand, not your own. I don't see how you could possibly think that this discourages player/player interaction.

Also, I think you are greatly underestimating the power of the card. If nothing else, it is a good tech for decks that have room in the extra deck, and adds a huge 'freak factor' to any deck. It essentially says "if your opponent has 2 or less cards in his/her hand, he has a very big problem." Combine that with things that hit the hand and mass destruction, and you can make that an EXTREMELY big threat, if nothing else preventing your opponent (after the first round) from making good plays he/she otherwise would.


And... one more edit. Do you think I should reduce its ATK/DEF to 100/100 or 0/0?
[/quote]

Something that benefits from mass hand and field destruction that can be teched in tons of decks isn't massively amazing design. The reason this discourages player-player interaction is simply because it is an insta-win. It's either a surprise that ruins the game similarly to how Gorz is bad design, or, if your deck is revolved around it, just gets rid of any variability in the duels.

It's a nice idea in theory, but in practice, won't work properly just due to its nature.

[thekazu4u]

First off, I respect your opinion. However, I am not going to give up on this card, and I think it IS a good idea. Why?
[quote]The reason this discourages player-player interaction is simply because it is an insta-win. [/quote]
Because this card is no more "instant" than any other win. It could be said that a game is won in the "instant" where the life is reduced to 0. What separates "instant" as in Exodia from "instant" as in reducing life to 0? Exodia you don't see until the game is actually over. Thus, you don't get to interact with your opponent, because you don't know what to interact [i]with. [/i]In a normal game, you do know what to interact with - your opponents monsters, to deal damage and to stop them from dealing damage with you. The game naturally makes monsters interact well with each other. Just as with this card, you can [i]see [/i]it a fair amount of time before the game is over, and you can interact with it - as a monster, or as cards in you and your opponents hands. So, I do not fall into this category at all.

Finally, there are cards like Destiny Board which can be seen, but is completely useless in all situations except where an opponent has a terrible hand. If the opponent has a terrible hand, there is no interaction, because they have no way of killing it. If they do not have a terrible hand, then they can kill it, but the card is useless. Of course, this can be said of most cards to a degree, however. So, what I did was is I tried to capture as many cards as possible that can interact with it, while not making it useless in other situations. This means, that it should not be an "all or nothing" card. So, any card that destroys monsters interacts, but it is not useless because it did cause one discard and it threatens to come back. Any card that allows plusses in your own card advantage interacts, because it prevents it from coming back. That is an extremely large percentage of all cards in meta. So, I 99% fall out of this category - but in a sense, all cards fall in this category a slight bit.

So just because a card says "you win the game" or "x loses the game" is not bad for the game. It depends on the conditions of the card.

[thekazu4u]

So, I made a few changes to this card to better reflect what it is for. Also, I am bumping the card.
(1): I added the phrase "this card cannot be used to satisfy cost(s)."
(2): I changed "this card's controller cannot declare an attack with monsters other than this card" to "any damage this card's controller inflicts to his/her opponent's Life Points is reduced to 0." This is to prevent it from being used in burn, while allowing monster(s) to be killed by battle.
(3): Since I got some complaints that the card was UP'd, I bumped the required cards in hand to summon up to 3 (from 2).

Tell me what you think!

[thekazu4u]

Im gonna bump this thread one more time before adding this card to the final set if I get no more comments. I -do- need your help on the following question

[b]Should it discard cards from -BOTH- player's hands during YOUR end-phase?[/b]

-Pros
You are not given a free 1/2 card advantage for summoning this card.
Slightly simpler wording.

-Cons
Ties can happen
Not as 'symmetric' a mechanic.