As much as I hate to admit it, One Piece does incremental resources the best. 2 a turn allows for quicker games. Leader determining your colors means things dont get out of hand. Battle Spirits is a better incremental system imo, but One Pices simplicity makes it more widely accepted.
@ThatmoyucuberАй бұрын
I need help my quick start guide is in a bad order
@jasonking271Ай бұрын
Bro it looks like we share same the Brain cells my boi 😅😅
@silasw3 ай бұрын
The Duel Masters system (play any card as a resource) has a big drawback that you didn't bring up. It forces tough decisions on the player starting from the very first turn. Every time you play a resource, you have to think ahead several turns to decide which card you think you won't need in the future. (It also comes with potential feel bads when you have to throw away a card you really like for a resource.)
@Naguzoro13 ай бұрын
I feel like pokemon was originally made to maximize randomness. Which was probably a foolish attempt to mirror mtg land system as a variation.
@Thestar17x4 ай бұрын
You forgot battle spirits
@Zetact_4 ай бұрын
While it's not entirely the same, a lot of Japanese TCGs are what I'd call "Avatar games" which typically have evolution. Games like Vanguard, Wixoss or Buddyfight, where you have one specific "avatar" card that remains in play through the entire game since it can't be removed from the field, and steadily levels up as the game state progresses, usually using a separate deck to store its upgraded forms. This doesn't inherently go one to one with the Pokemon-style concept but it is a way to include a sort of "card that steadily powers up." Couple flaws are that 1. It can make games feel samey to always get the same stage at the same fixed interval, and 2. It requires fundamentally making an avatar game which you may not want to do. I think a lot of the avatar style games are derived in part from recognizing benefits that Yu-Gi-Oh had with its Extra Deck. Though Yu-Gi-Oh not really knowing what to do with the Extra Deck for a while and speeding up the game have made it also feel less special. Shooting Star Dragon as the big boss monster of the Synchron deck [during the 5D's era, not the modern version] is an example - you'd probably make a Stardust because it was a good card and let it fight it out on the field. If you had the opportunity to make a level 2 Synchro, you'd go into a Formula Synchron and go up to Shooting Star Dragon. You wouldn't see Shooting Star Dragon or even Stardust in every duel, but it was consistent enough that if you needed to, you could make it happen. I might be biased since that's a game and an era I like a lot, but it probably was one of the better ways that a non-avatar style game has been able to implement "monster evolution."
@DeadDecks5 ай бұрын
Richard loves rulebooks. He will be your friend.
@tapntcg5 ай бұрын
Great video🎉🎉
@Pine_Hill_Prophit5 ай бұрын
Lmao kohdok this fool is not... Though he did repaet everything that dudes said in the past with like nothing new added... Good content 👍🏻😂😂😂😂
@MoreBeesThanNecessary5 ай бұрын
Thanks for the notes dude, you and ankylojoe have been my saving grace for making my game. Would it be okay if i can ask you a few questions to help with the creation of mine?
@GrievelornTCG5 ай бұрын
Sure, feel free to drop em here. I'm also really active in the HTCG discord server which you can find here discord.com/invite/eM57TfqGKz
@pyroke39496 ай бұрын
Very cool unfortunately as a tcg player I can't read
@sy-py6 ай бұрын
While this guide is more directed towards TCG design, it is absolutely important for broader board game design.
@ActualDes6 ай бұрын
Well made video, bud. Glad to see you're stilling doing it <3
@JervisGermane6 ай бұрын
This was an emotional viewing for me. I've played Magic, but not any of these other games. In designing my own card game, I cycled through all these other options without knowing other games were already using them. So every entry I kept saying "Hey, I tried that!" If you're interested or want to implement this yourself, I eventually settled on a hybrid situation, which I'm happy with. In Magic language, at the start of each player's untap step, that player receives four resource counters. They may spend one resource counter to pay any non-X mana portion of any cost. They still have to pay any other costs (tapping, life, etc.) and still must spend mana on X mana costs. Players may only spend mana, cast spells, attack, or activate abilities as long as they have at least one resource counter. The following actions also consume a resource counter: Playing a land; casting a 0 mana spell or casting a spell without paying mana for it (i.e. Pact of Negation, or by way of Omniscience or Dream Halls); activating a 0 mana activated ability (i.e. Lightning Greaves); and attacking with a creature power 7 or greater (one RC apiece). Note that attacking with any number of creatures power 6 or lower does not consume any resource counters, but you can't attack with anything unless you have at least one unspent.
@zilladuelist42676 ай бұрын
Another banger 🔥 very happy that you’ve broken down the different types of rulebooks too. Seems like most early devs tend to think every rulebook needs to be comprehensive and not enough look towards quick guides. Wish this vid was out when I started my journey
@CardGameCrypt6 ай бұрын
Instructions unclear, cards stuck in ceiling fan.
@GrievelornTCG6 ай бұрын
Huh, that's never happened in my game before. Will add to the rules.
@Kohzeh6 ай бұрын
<3
@KMF-1396 ай бұрын
Great video
@GarlyleWilds6 ай бұрын
Somewhere between Digimon and Pokemon is Fire Emblem Cipher. It also did the "You can just play this character straight up, or get a discount if you already have that named unit on the field that you're upgrading", with a couple key things worth considering: 1. Any time you promote (as opposed to deploying anew), you get to draw a card. This helps significantly reduce the "2-for-1'd" inherent in Evolution systems. 2. While you can only promote a character with cards of the same character, you can do so pretty freely, instead of in a predefined order. You can class change to a 'lower' version if you really want that version's effect, or even class change into that exact card again if you want to cycle and get a new card. (And there are some cards that 'count' the cards in their stack to trigger effects) 3. While you can only have one of each name of character on the field, if you _don't_ want to promote them with new copies you've drawn, extra copies of the card can be discarded in combat for benefits (or sometimes for special effects). At high level play you still usually only run with the specific intent of promoting your Main Character (who is permanent but always has to start as a 1 cost weenie), or promoting if there's some big bonus a character can access by pulling off that combo level up. However, when it lines up that a low level and high level card synergize well with your gameplan anyway, it's a benefit to run them as a team. And because the high cost variants are statted and costed according to their hard play rather than their discounted versions, it's still fine if you don't.
@GrievelornTCG6 ай бұрын
This is a game I've been meaning to dig more into, thanks for sharing! That's an interesting pivot to the system. It seems like you make still end up with some amount of dead cards but partial digi is still better than no digi.
@ankyloinc.6 ай бұрын
OMG this is great, thank you! Ive been trying to find good rule book videos , and thet either dont have good info, or sound awful. GREAT WORK!
@fatalfactions6 ай бұрын
Awesome video, thank you Grie!
@mutologyxcg6 ай бұрын
Taking notes!
@OrderoftheWarlocks6 ай бұрын
Great information as always!
@rlwarner7776 ай бұрын
The Yu-gi-oh rulebook can't be as bad as the Gundam TCG rulebook.
@GrievelornTCG6 ай бұрын
Gundam really suffers from poor translation. Yugioh suffers from not explaining cards and how they interact
@scallyshell6 ай бұрын
Great video!
@tsumgye53706 ай бұрын
you little tease
@guilty_neco6 ай бұрын
EXCEPT YU-GI-OH
@finaltime62566 ай бұрын
Thank you, I got a more in depth understanding of things
@MagicApocalypseTCG6 ай бұрын
I am brainstorming a resource system in my mind, coins and mana, artifacts are your recourse and cards that help you play the game.
@danholomy58526 ай бұрын
Screw or flood can be irritating, but it’s the great equalizer. It’s the reason why love Magic so much - that a player who just started playing the game can beat a veteran with crazy expensive deck because he got screwed. Without a resource system that you need to randomly draw from your deck it would be just about who has the best and most optimized cards and who is more skilled.
@cantrip76 ай бұрын
I wish more games used main action and side action from Ashes. That game also has finite resources in a round, so it wouldn't fix YGO style games instantly or anything... But it creates an interesting opportunity cost economy between main action cards, side action cards, and the generic actions available from either. The game focusing on tempo over escalating costs or constant negation was sooo refreshing.
@cantrip76 ай бұрын
To add: it might be interesting to cover "draw up to maximum hand size" in games. Maybe that's too broad a camp, but I see it more and more (Keyforge, YGO Rush Duel)
@GrievelornTCG6 ай бұрын
I agree! I think that's totally something worth covering. Refill does interesting things to card evaluation and usage. Good suggestion!
@vorsadelta77527 ай бұрын
highly suggest looking into the Memory system from the Digimon TCG. Absolutely fascinating system to both study and play.
@GrievelornTCG7 ай бұрын
Yup, will explore it in non-land resource system video.
@SpicyNuggs5627 ай бұрын
Honestly, with proxies, and the London mulligan, most of the problems with lands in MTG are minimized. I love Magic, but I also love Hearthstone. I think they're both great in their own ways. Cheers!
@goncaloferreira64297 ай бұрын
i like that you went full in depth with this one, actually comparing and contrasting different games. While people like to give a hard time to the older games( mtg and pokemon) there is no doubt of their influence. regarding pokemon: once more we see that a good first idea on paper may turn out not as expected when the game is actually player. we touch on the idea of consistence and i would add the importance of competitive play in the development of games. some players can just push the game in a completely different direction that developers might want. Like mtg pokemon has worked out many of its initial problems and is a sucessfull if simple game to this day. its core ideas limited the game concerning development of more variety and i often wish they had the courage to try new things. Also friendly reminder that pokemon today is not just one thing. there are many ways to play the game and that is great. in some of them the evolution idea is more sucessful than others. dual monsters later solved pokemon´s prize system, making it more logical and a comeback/balancing mechanic.
@goncaloferreira64297 ай бұрын
1- i like the idea of levers as safeguards and design space. 2-with thay said, and focusing on yugioh here, i cant agree with much of what you said. having levers did not help the game to avoid fast power creep 3- games are a balance between enforcing rules and breaking them. yugioh main security system, balancing tool and pace control, the normal summon, quickly revealed itself insuficient. 4- in theory yugioh had a good set of base rules but the way the game evolved shows otherwise. 5- card and game design ultimately define a game over the base rules.
@RarecuisineSaucegod-ig8bc17 күн бұрын
great comment. i always find myself thinking about how would yugioh look if it came out today instead of 25 years ago.
@goncaloferreira64297 ай бұрын
cool video, well explained but no new point to had to existing knowledge ong the matter. you covered digital games, something that is rarely done but missied bynot going further in the exploration of the topic. the importance and historical relevance of some games like naruto (mixed resourses) and bleach as well as the more recent legends of runeterra( spell mana) and digimon. 12:44 both hearthstone and LOR, the best examples of the incremental system, dont have the problem pointed out here( they use a class and region system to avoid this.)
@StripedJacket7 ай бұрын
What do you think about Fab’s resource and pitching mechanic?
@GrievelornTCG7 ай бұрын
I think it's a very interesting pivot on a non-linear in-deck system. I think it has a lot of potential. Unfortunately, I don't really like how it's ended up with having 2 copies of a card that are usually situationally worthless, and 1 copy that is almost always worthless (yellow pitch, outside of something like Prism or Boltyn. Or M's that are only Yellow pitch). Due to the balancing matrix that FaB has, you have to hit certain thresholds to make a card playable. And the resource system is a big part of it. It led to a lot of dead/useless cards in a set, especially with generics and underpowered cards. But I 100% plan on talking about it in a non-linear resource system video along with some other games.
@edde24297 ай бұрын
Flesh and blood doas resources in a really cool way. You get new cards every turn and you use some of tge cards from your hand to pay for other cards. Lorcana is also interesting when you can make your cards into "lands" instead of playing them, however, not all cards have the ability to do so which makes some cards stronger but harder to include in your deck.
@revimfadli46666 ай бұрын
And basically every Japanese TCG does that (other than Vanguard and YGO)
@iskabin7 ай бұрын
To me MTG's system is the beast out there, and it's flaws could be solved by making lands do more than just add resources, and non-lands be able to generate resources. Of course the game already has this kind of cards but they simply suck most of the times, and are strongly related to green or artifact synergies.
@MakeVarahHappen7 ай бұрын
I disagree with the cost problems because that's not really the resource systems fault it's the fault of the game. No one needs to shell out $300 for One Piece's resources, magic just chooses it to be a pressure point in the secondary market. In fact if you make sure that your resources aren't that expensive you drop down the cost of your deck significantly because up to a third is cards everyone owns.
@mutologyxcg7 ай бұрын
i especially like the complimentary blue/orange gradient. oh and the informative content!
@mve7537 ай бұрын
One thing you touched on but in my opinion is the biggest advantage of having resources in deck like mtg is the deckbuilding implications. It does make it more complicated but also makes it more interesting. You can't just jam all the best cards in and often have to balance putting on cards that help you actively win vs making your deck more consistent (card draw, land cyclers, dual faced cards, etc...)
@goncaloferreira64297 ай бұрын
i share your opinion but it is hard to pass the idea of the importance of deckbuilding skills when netdecking is the norm.
@kylefreeburg93537 ай бұрын
.One TCG that i think did resources so well its ridiculous is Zenonzard. Instead of lands and creatures, the game has Base Minions and Field Minions. On this games version of the upkeep step, you get a "movement phase." Where you can turn one base minion into a field minion or vice versa. This gives a lot of strategy around if you want to ramp more or output more manpower on the board. In addition, if you dont have a base minion to play, you can instead play one neutral mana that cant be moved, essentially giving the player a wastes for free. This helps avoud screw, but since its colorless it still requires you to play base minions. It was very elegant for a game with a lot of consistency
@lunafrost37057 ай бұрын
I really like the Digimon card game's resource system. You can choose to play the high cost card and give your opponent more resources, or you can play the safer option that does less but is cheaper to limit the amount of resources your opponent has access to
@GrievelornTCG7 ай бұрын
It's a very interesting back and forth, definitely going to be in a video at some point.
@T4N77 ай бұрын
Y did u say at the end that lands r the oldest resource system “behind Pokémon’s Energies” MtG came out in 93 n Pokémon tcg came out in 96, MtG is older. U also mentioned “beloved” in there too which is more subjective but r u arguing that people like Energy better? Cuz I can’t think of any decks in Pokémon that r 80% Energy cards but MtG has Legacy Lands which is a deck that plays almost no spells. So I can’t say which people would like more but me personally I prefer Lands cuz they r more powerful n more versatile.
@GrievelornTCG7 ай бұрын
I just mean that mtg was before mtg. I was ranking them in an ascending order which would put MTG behind Pokemon going top down for in deck resources. Lands are 100% beloved. It's subjective, but people do love lands. The expression and potential for customizing is basically unmatched to any other game. Mainly due to time and card count, but still. I wasn't saying they were liked more than pokemon's energy. But there is something to say about mtg gating all actions behind the lands, whereas pokemon only gates attacking behind them. Pros and Cons.
@Kohzeh7 ай бұрын
Great info! You earned my like and subscribe. Looking forward to more videos from Grie Velorn!
@OrderoftheWarlocks7 ай бұрын
Big up to this creator. Better sub now cuz he's about to blow up!
@catalanoyuri15807 ай бұрын
The Jak ost in the background is a touch of “magic” to the video
@EnRandomSten7 ай бұрын
One Idea I've been toying around with is a finite resource system. You'd have some way to consistently generate one resource per turn but the game would be heavily structured around ways of generating more resource each turn. Resources are kept between turns and removed from the pool when spent. For mtg people, think of it like playing with tressures instead of lands.
@GrievelornTCG7 ай бұрын
There's been a couple systems I've seen that work similar to your idea. The typical issue they need to overcome is players having to overspend once they fall behind. The basic dilemma was once a person gains the lead in the game, they have to spend less resources to stay that way. Whereas the person who is behind will need to overspend to get into parity, and even more to get into the lead. But now they have a resource deficit compared to the person who was in the lead. But if you can find a solution to that I think there is a lot of potential for that system!
Пікірлер
As much as I hate to admit it, One Piece does incremental resources the best. 2 a turn allows for quicker games. Leader determining your colors means things dont get out of hand. Battle Spirits is a better incremental system imo, but One Pices simplicity makes it more widely accepted.
I need help my quick start guide is in a bad order
Bro it looks like we share same the Brain cells my boi 😅😅
The Duel Masters system (play any card as a resource) has a big drawback that you didn't bring up. It forces tough decisions on the player starting from the very first turn. Every time you play a resource, you have to think ahead several turns to decide which card you think you won't need in the future. (It also comes with potential feel bads when you have to throw away a card you really like for a resource.)
I feel like pokemon was originally made to maximize randomness. Which was probably a foolish attempt to mirror mtg land system as a variation.
You forgot battle spirits
While it's not entirely the same, a lot of Japanese TCGs are what I'd call "Avatar games" which typically have evolution. Games like Vanguard, Wixoss or Buddyfight, where you have one specific "avatar" card that remains in play through the entire game since it can't be removed from the field, and steadily levels up as the game state progresses, usually using a separate deck to store its upgraded forms. This doesn't inherently go one to one with the Pokemon-style concept but it is a way to include a sort of "card that steadily powers up." Couple flaws are that 1. It can make games feel samey to always get the same stage at the same fixed interval, and 2. It requires fundamentally making an avatar game which you may not want to do. I think a lot of the avatar style games are derived in part from recognizing benefits that Yu-Gi-Oh had with its Extra Deck. Though Yu-Gi-Oh not really knowing what to do with the Extra Deck for a while and speeding up the game have made it also feel less special. Shooting Star Dragon as the big boss monster of the Synchron deck [during the 5D's era, not the modern version] is an example - you'd probably make a Stardust because it was a good card and let it fight it out on the field. If you had the opportunity to make a level 2 Synchro, you'd go into a Formula Synchron and go up to Shooting Star Dragon. You wouldn't see Shooting Star Dragon or even Stardust in every duel, but it was consistent enough that if you needed to, you could make it happen. I might be biased since that's a game and an era I like a lot, but it probably was one of the better ways that a non-avatar style game has been able to implement "monster evolution."
Richard loves rulebooks. He will be your friend.
Great video🎉🎉
Lmao kohdok this fool is not... Though he did repaet everything that dudes said in the past with like nothing new added... Good content 👍🏻😂😂😂😂
Thanks for the notes dude, you and ankylojoe have been my saving grace for making my game. Would it be okay if i can ask you a few questions to help with the creation of mine?
Sure, feel free to drop em here. I'm also really active in the HTCG discord server which you can find here discord.com/invite/eM57TfqGKz
Very cool unfortunately as a tcg player I can't read
While this guide is more directed towards TCG design, it is absolutely important for broader board game design.
Well made video, bud. Glad to see you're stilling doing it <3
This was an emotional viewing for me. I've played Magic, but not any of these other games. In designing my own card game, I cycled through all these other options without knowing other games were already using them. So every entry I kept saying "Hey, I tried that!" If you're interested or want to implement this yourself, I eventually settled on a hybrid situation, which I'm happy with. In Magic language, at the start of each player's untap step, that player receives four resource counters. They may spend one resource counter to pay any non-X mana portion of any cost. They still have to pay any other costs (tapping, life, etc.) and still must spend mana on X mana costs. Players may only spend mana, cast spells, attack, or activate abilities as long as they have at least one resource counter. The following actions also consume a resource counter: Playing a land; casting a 0 mana spell or casting a spell without paying mana for it (i.e. Pact of Negation, or by way of Omniscience or Dream Halls); activating a 0 mana activated ability (i.e. Lightning Greaves); and attacking with a creature power 7 or greater (one RC apiece). Note that attacking with any number of creatures power 6 or lower does not consume any resource counters, but you can't attack with anything unless you have at least one unspent.
Another banger 🔥 very happy that you’ve broken down the different types of rulebooks too. Seems like most early devs tend to think every rulebook needs to be comprehensive and not enough look towards quick guides. Wish this vid was out when I started my journey
Instructions unclear, cards stuck in ceiling fan.
Huh, that's never happened in my game before. Will add to the rules.
<3
Great video
Somewhere between Digimon and Pokemon is Fire Emblem Cipher. It also did the "You can just play this character straight up, or get a discount if you already have that named unit on the field that you're upgrading", with a couple key things worth considering: 1. Any time you promote (as opposed to deploying anew), you get to draw a card. This helps significantly reduce the "2-for-1'd" inherent in Evolution systems. 2. While you can only promote a character with cards of the same character, you can do so pretty freely, instead of in a predefined order. You can class change to a 'lower' version if you really want that version's effect, or even class change into that exact card again if you want to cycle and get a new card. (And there are some cards that 'count' the cards in their stack to trigger effects) 3. While you can only have one of each name of character on the field, if you _don't_ want to promote them with new copies you've drawn, extra copies of the card can be discarded in combat for benefits (or sometimes for special effects). At high level play you still usually only run with the specific intent of promoting your Main Character (who is permanent but always has to start as a 1 cost weenie), or promoting if there's some big bonus a character can access by pulling off that combo level up. However, when it lines up that a low level and high level card synergize well with your gameplan anyway, it's a benefit to run them as a team. And because the high cost variants are statted and costed according to their hard play rather than their discounted versions, it's still fine if you don't.
This is a game I've been meaning to dig more into, thanks for sharing! That's an interesting pivot to the system. It seems like you make still end up with some amount of dead cards but partial digi is still better than no digi.
OMG this is great, thank you! Ive been trying to find good rule book videos , and thet either dont have good info, or sound awful. GREAT WORK!
Awesome video, thank you Grie!
Taking notes!
Great information as always!
The Yu-gi-oh rulebook can't be as bad as the Gundam TCG rulebook.
Gundam really suffers from poor translation. Yugioh suffers from not explaining cards and how they interact
Great video!
you little tease
EXCEPT YU-GI-OH
Thank you, I got a more in depth understanding of things
I am brainstorming a resource system in my mind, coins and mana, artifacts are your recourse and cards that help you play the game.
Screw or flood can be irritating, but it’s the great equalizer. It’s the reason why love Magic so much - that a player who just started playing the game can beat a veteran with crazy expensive deck because he got screwed. Without a resource system that you need to randomly draw from your deck it would be just about who has the best and most optimized cards and who is more skilled.
I wish more games used main action and side action from Ashes. That game also has finite resources in a round, so it wouldn't fix YGO style games instantly or anything... But it creates an interesting opportunity cost economy between main action cards, side action cards, and the generic actions available from either. The game focusing on tempo over escalating costs or constant negation was sooo refreshing.
To add: it might be interesting to cover "draw up to maximum hand size" in games. Maybe that's too broad a camp, but I see it more and more (Keyforge, YGO Rush Duel)
I agree! I think that's totally something worth covering. Refill does interesting things to card evaluation and usage. Good suggestion!
highly suggest looking into the Memory system from the Digimon TCG. Absolutely fascinating system to both study and play.
Yup, will explore it in non-land resource system video.
Honestly, with proxies, and the London mulligan, most of the problems with lands in MTG are minimized. I love Magic, but I also love Hearthstone. I think they're both great in their own ways. Cheers!
i like that you went full in depth with this one, actually comparing and contrasting different games. While people like to give a hard time to the older games( mtg and pokemon) there is no doubt of their influence. regarding pokemon: once more we see that a good first idea on paper may turn out not as expected when the game is actually player. we touch on the idea of consistence and i would add the importance of competitive play in the development of games. some players can just push the game in a completely different direction that developers might want. Like mtg pokemon has worked out many of its initial problems and is a sucessfull if simple game to this day. its core ideas limited the game concerning development of more variety and i often wish they had the courage to try new things. Also friendly reminder that pokemon today is not just one thing. there are many ways to play the game and that is great. in some of them the evolution idea is more sucessful than others. dual monsters later solved pokemon´s prize system, making it more logical and a comeback/balancing mechanic.
1- i like the idea of levers as safeguards and design space. 2-with thay said, and focusing on yugioh here, i cant agree with much of what you said. having levers did not help the game to avoid fast power creep 3- games are a balance between enforcing rules and breaking them. yugioh main security system, balancing tool and pace control, the normal summon, quickly revealed itself insuficient. 4- in theory yugioh had a good set of base rules but the way the game evolved shows otherwise. 5- card and game design ultimately define a game over the base rules.
great comment. i always find myself thinking about how would yugioh look if it came out today instead of 25 years ago.
cool video, well explained but no new point to had to existing knowledge ong the matter. you covered digital games, something that is rarely done but missied bynot going further in the exploration of the topic. the importance and historical relevance of some games like naruto (mixed resourses) and bleach as well as the more recent legends of runeterra( spell mana) and digimon. 12:44 both hearthstone and LOR, the best examples of the incremental system, dont have the problem pointed out here( they use a class and region system to avoid this.)
What do you think about Fab’s resource and pitching mechanic?
I think it's a very interesting pivot on a non-linear in-deck system. I think it has a lot of potential. Unfortunately, I don't really like how it's ended up with having 2 copies of a card that are usually situationally worthless, and 1 copy that is almost always worthless (yellow pitch, outside of something like Prism or Boltyn. Or M's that are only Yellow pitch). Due to the balancing matrix that FaB has, you have to hit certain thresholds to make a card playable. And the resource system is a big part of it. It led to a lot of dead/useless cards in a set, especially with generics and underpowered cards. But I 100% plan on talking about it in a non-linear resource system video along with some other games.
Flesh and blood doas resources in a really cool way. You get new cards every turn and you use some of tge cards from your hand to pay for other cards. Lorcana is also interesting when you can make your cards into "lands" instead of playing them, however, not all cards have the ability to do so which makes some cards stronger but harder to include in your deck.
And basically every Japanese TCG does that (other than Vanguard and YGO)
To me MTG's system is the beast out there, and it's flaws could be solved by making lands do more than just add resources, and non-lands be able to generate resources. Of course the game already has this kind of cards but they simply suck most of the times, and are strongly related to green or artifact synergies.
I disagree with the cost problems because that's not really the resource systems fault it's the fault of the game. No one needs to shell out $300 for One Piece's resources, magic just chooses it to be a pressure point in the secondary market. In fact if you make sure that your resources aren't that expensive you drop down the cost of your deck significantly because up to a third is cards everyone owns.
i especially like the complimentary blue/orange gradient. oh and the informative content!
One thing you touched on but in my opinion is the biggest advantage of having resources in deck like mtg is the deckbuilding implications. It does make it more complicated but also makes it more interesting. You can't just jam all the best cards in and often have to balance putting on cards that help you actively win vs making your deck more consistent (card draw, land cyclers, dual faced cards, etc...)
i share your opinion but it is hard to pass the idea of the importance of deckbuilding skills when netdecking is the norm.
.One TCG that i think did resources so well its ridiculous is Zenonzard. Instead of lands and creatures, the game has Base Minions and Field Minions. On this games version of the upkeep step, you get a "movement phase." Where you can turn one base minion into a field minion or vice versa. This gives a lot of strategy around if you want to ramp more or output more manpower on the board. In addition, if you dont have a base minion to play, you can instead play one neutral mana that cant be moved, essentially giving the player a wastes for free. This helps avoud screw, but since its colorless it still requires you to play base minions. It was very elegant for a game with a lot of consistency
I really like the Digimon card game's resource system. You can choose to play the high cost card and give your opponent more resources, or you can play the safer option that does less but is cheaper to limit the amount of resources your opponent has access to
It's a very interesting back and forth, definitely going to be in a video at some point.
Y did u say at the end that lands r the oldest resource system “behind Pokémon’s Energies” MtG came out in 93 n Pokémon tcg came out in 96, MtG is older. U also mentioned “beloved” in there too which is more subjective but r u arguing that people like Energy better? Cuz I can’t think of any decks in Pokémon that r 80% Energy cards but MtG has Legacy Lands which is a deck that plays almost no spells. So I can’t say which people would like more but me personally I prefer Lands cuz they r more powerful n more versatile.
I just mean that mtg was before mtg. I was ranking them in an ascending order which would put MTG behind Pokemon going top down for in deck resources. Lands are 100% beloved. It's subjective, but people do love lands. The expression and potential for customizing is basically unmatched to any other game. Mainly due to time and card count, but still. I wasn't saying they were liked more than pokemon's energy. But there is something to say about mtg gating all actions behind the lands, whereas pokemon only gates attacking behind them. Pros and Cons.
Great info! You earned my like and subscribe. Looking forward to more videos from Grie Velorn!
Big up to this creator. Better sub now cuz he's about to blow up!
The Jak ost in the background is a touch of “magic” to the video
One Idea I've been toying around with is a finite resource system. You'd have some way to consistently generate one resource per turn but the game would be heavily structured around ways of generating more resource each turn. Resources are kept between turns and removed from the pool when spent. For mtg people, think of it like playing with tressures instead of lands.
There's been a couple systems I've seen that work similar to your idea. The typical issue they need to overcome is players having to overspend once they fall behind. The basic dilemma was once a person gains the lead in the game, they have to spend less resources to stay that way. Whereas the person who is behind will need to overspend to get into parity, and even more to get into the lead. But now they have a resource deficit compared to the person who was in the lead. But if you can find a solution to that I think there is a lot of potential for that system!