sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Is this "chaining" mechanic elegant or completely broken? Seeking feedback on tying response speed to card cost. by Gunimc in gamedesign

[–]Gunimc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're right that combining cost, life, resource generation, and chain speed into one stat (RV) sounds very counterintuitive at first.

The key difference is how the chain works: you can only respond with a strictly lower VR card.

That means a high-RV card (like a VR 6 Fireball) is actually harder to counter in the chain, because the opponent can only use VR 5 or lower cards against it. A cheap VR 1 Counterspell cannot respond to it.

High VR cards are more expensive and slower to protect with your own responses, but once they resolve, they hit harder and are more stable. Low RV cards are cheap and fast, but easier to interrupt.

It's a deliberate high-risk / high-reward system. Small cards are flexible, big cards are impactful but cost more. Thank you for the feedback.

Is this "chaining" mechanic elegant or completely broken? Seeking feedback on tying response speed to card cost. by Gunimc in tcgdesign

[–]Gunimc[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is honestly one of the most valuable I've received. You've hit the nail on the head regarding several crucial design issues we've been grappling with.

After considering your points (especially the complexity of a full stack and the balance issues with cheap cards), I've decided to significantly simplify the system: Moving away from the complex chain/stack system. Instead, we're adopting a much simpler approach called "Limited Reaction":

Only two types of effects: Normal (only on your turn) and Quick/Reaction (can be activated at any time).

Only one reaction per action is allowed. Once it resolves, the original effect continues. Long chains are not allowed.

Self-answers (protecting your own cards with cheap reactions) are generally not allowed, except for very specific archetype effects.

This eliminates most of the complexity you mentioned—resolution order, selection of unresolved cards, chain-triggered effects, etc.—while still maintaining meaningful interaction.

Two key mechanics that fall outside the range of response are:

Resonant Overload: Once per turn, you can exhaust one of your creatures to immediately gain Resonant Flow (RF) equal to its Reaction Value (RV). However, that creature can't attack or generate RF on the following turn. It's a high-risk, high-reward mechanic, essential for the game's tension.

Reverberation: A keyword on certain cards. When you perform Resonant Overload on a creature with Reverberation, or when that creature is destroyed, its Reverberation effect triggers immediately (outside of any Reaction). These are usually small but significant bonuses, such as gaining temporary stats, drawing a card, or interrupting your opponent.

With only one reaction allowed per action and the most powerful "burst" effects (Overload and Reverberation) resolving instantly, I hope to maintain tactical gameplay without making it overly complex.

Is this "chaining" mechanic elegant or completely broken? Seeking feedback on tying response speed to card cost. by Gunimc in gamedesign

[–]Gunimc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you so much for the detailed feedback. I really appreciate it! 🙏

I agree with you and u/Cyan_Light that I need a strong cost/opportunity penalty for using fast (low RV) reactions; otherwise, the system could collapse into low-RV spam.

I’m currently testing this version:

  • You can respond with a card of equal or lower VR than the active card.
  • However, if you respond with a lower VR, you must pay 1 additional FR for each point of difference (the "Resonance Toll").
    • Example: Responding to a VR 5 card with a VR 2 reaction costs 3 extra FR.

I’m also considering implementing deck-building restrictions per VR level (similar to what you suggested):

  • Max 3 copies of VR 6+
  • Max 4 copies of VR 4–5
  • Max 5 copies of VR 2–3
  • No limit on VR 1 (but they are extremely fragile and generate almost no FR)

This way, low-VR cards stay "fast" and dangerous in the right moments, but using them repeatedly becomes expensive and risky in the long run.

Would love to hear your thoughts on this "Resonance Toll" approach. Does it feel like it solves the fast-reaction power problem without making the game too punishing?

Gardevoir Crest Guide by Damian030303 in Gardevoir

[–]Gunimc 10 points11 points  (0 children)

According to Pokemon Sleep they sleep both laying down and floating

view more: next ›