CHOICE & RISK! (Errata Text)

When it comes to games, those with a good back-and-forth, and a high amount of depth and enjoyment, consistency isn't always the answer...
Check out the Fable's End Kickstarter!: www.kickstarte...
Join my Patreon!: / kohdok
Follow me on Twitter!: / kohdok
#tcg #tradingcardgame #gamedev

[@chaosof99]

“Given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game”; therefore, “One of the responsibilities of designers is to protect the player from themselves.” at least according to Soren Johnson and Sid Meier of Civiliation fame.

[@RyanAtlus]

I personally don't actually see optimisation and min-maxing existing to be a bad thing. For many people that's why they like the competitive atmosphere, and in theory the people who don't like it tend to stay away from competitive events. Yugioh is a big exception there, for some reason plenty of players with a casual mindset go to play the game in a competitive setting, and then complain about exactly that.

[@gamerbear84]

@@RyanAtlus But it's a matter of degree. If Yu-Gi-Oh had no limiting rules a deck would be like made of nothing but Exodia parts and Pot of Greeds and whoever goes first wins. Because no other strategy would be as effective. Does that really sound like a good time?

[@RyanAtlus]

@@gamerbear84 But then there would be no game whatsoever. Competitive Yugioh as it is right now is thriving, even to such an extent that Konami actually tries to reduce attendance by doubling entry fees and placing hard caps. Even with the casual playerbase hating the competitive game, the competitive game is more popular than ever.

[@gamerbear84]

@@RyanAtlus Yes, without limitations used for balancing the game and keeping players from ruining it for everyone it would be crap and nobody would want to play it, thank you for agreeing with my point.

[@ethanc1121]

@@RyanAtlusyugioh with a casual, high variance format where anybody can play, like how mtg supported commander, would revolutionize the IP. There’s nothing wrong with modern yugioh being a hyper competitive format. Casual yugioh players need another format to play with their cards. Edison, goat, etc is too niche

[@PragmaticAntithesis]

One consistency boosting 'backup option' I find interesting is the Standard Projects in Terraforming Mars. They're basic actions you can use as often as you like, but they cost significantly more than a card with the same effect. They're there if you absolutely need them, but using them is costly.

[@drearydoll6305]

10:37 Wrong master peace.

[@EleggGaming]

Cimo pulling 2 master peaces in the first progression series is always never not funny.

[@pickyphysicsstudent201]

Yugioh is now at a point where stats (ATK & DEF) don't matter unless you are going in for an OTK or normal summoning your Stratos to attack over a Barrier Statue to then continue comboing in main phase 2. I think an easy fix would be to print cards that makes stats into an attribute in it's own right. Stuff like: Monarch Stats, 200 DEF Fire means something, Gizmek targets, that kind of thing. Imagine Foolish Burial for Monsters with 1600 ATK or an Icarus Attack where you need a Monster with 500 DEF. People would always be pleased to find out a Monster in their archetype has that kind of synergy.

[@DrownedLamp]

Implying Candyland has no depth, bold move. I don't have any options to dispute it so I'll let it slide.

[@redx3204]

One fun new thing I like is the new ace cards in Digimon because the whole mechanic is based on risk. Sure you can digivolve for free in response to an opponents attack and get a potentially game changing on digivolve effect, but if it leaves the field in any possible way you lose memory proportional to how powerful the Digimon was. A literal risk vs reward mechanic.

[@noahquilter]

So happy to be the first person to comment on my favourite KZbinr’s video

[@J3Puffin]

TIL parcheesi is the game that’s marketed as “Sorry!” Also, would like to hear more of your take on prize cards in a follow-up, because they don’t seem like a risk-and-choice feature nearly as much as a luck feature.

[@waltascher]

Trouble is also Parcheesi.

[@chaosof99]

Here's a topic I would find interesting for an episode of Errata Text: Card flow. The relative strength of cards within a game are often dependent on how many and how often players can draw cards, and therefore the decision in how to allow those abilities is a very fundamental building block in the design of a card game. That is for example how Pot of Greed and Ancestral Recall are ridiculous in their respective games, but in Netrunner a card like Diesel which ostensibly does exactly the same thing as Ancestral Recall is just fine. In fact, on the other side of Netrunner, card draw can be a negative and used to balance things out, such as with Null Signal Games forcing you to draw cards on Spin Doctor for you to be able to shuffle away Agendas you don't want.

[@evanbarkman5786]

In my oponion too much consistency in card games is far worse than overpowered cards. An overpowered card can be banned or counters can be created, but a game once its too consistent (unless its primarily the fault of a few cards) is very hard to come back from without serious reworking. Honestly I think most card games would be more fun if they didn't allow any duplicates of cards and players were forced to use less optimal cards to fill out their decks.

[@NeroVingian40]

If we’re talking about YGO, the simplest way to fix it would be to introduce rotation format to it, like Standard for Magic. Rotate the old cards out when a new year starts. It will force players to use previously suboptimal cards to replace the optimal ones, while also removing problematic cards from the metagame.

[@genericname3516]

Yeah, to use Yugioh as an example, Dragon Link is a deck that's existed for a while and is more or less just a pile of the best cards that all say the most popular type in the game on them.

[@Gamerdude770]

Wrong Master Peace. "Master Peace the True Dracoslaying King" is the broken one. I've never seen anyone play "the True Dracoslayer"

[@Ehibika]

This video came at a good time because I was doing research for my own TCG and was learning from magic the gathering, and in my study I discovered that apparently magic isn't in love with tutor (AKA deck searching) anymore, and while looking for their into it, the reasoning seems to be that it makes games too samey and route. As someone who began their TCG life from pokemon, this was kind of an eye-opener, and now this video comes along to help confirm and expand on that notion. And I think I can agree, there's more skill an intrigue in being able to work with imperfect conditions, and the thing I often dislike about Pokemon and other tcgs is the fact that it feels like gameplay boils down to getting your Main combo going and blasting the opponent to Kingdom come. I may be biased as someone who prefers mid-range play styles but I can see the fun in figuring out how to win the game with the pieces you have and the skill in building a deck that is not committed to a single strategy but is able to pivot when it needs to. I got to experience that when I first played MTG arena and since I've been playing lorcana.

[@wilfredfizz8164]

I think magic and Pokemon are two good examples of how to use consistency. Pokemons consistency allows you to see the few core cards in your deck almost every game. As a result most decks are built around a small core, a large number of consistency cards and a few utility cards. The skill of the game consists of deciding when and for which of your cards you require redundancy and when to forgo redundancy in favor of utility cards. Magic has much lower innate consistency, so most decks are instead built around multiple different cards that achieve similar things. In magic the skill is found much more in playing around the cards you draw and around what you opponent has. I think the difference is very visible in how individual cards impact decks. In Pokemon singular powerful cards can create powerful decks by themselves and individual utility cards can completely change the landscape of an entire format. In magic powerful cards will commonly see little play, because they don't (yet) have the support necessary to actualise a consistent gameplan and good utility cards are usually either extremely powerful when they are good or modal, so that they are useful in many situations.

[@Ehibika]

and you know, I wish pokemon was more like MTG, and in some ways resembled the core games more. like I want to play a lot of creature cards and have a team of a variety of types, but that is the absolute wrong way to go about it. you instead need to pick a single win condition monster or two, get stuff that draws cards and searches, and then play to your win condition. there's variance and skill still but after I've begun to experience games like magic and lorcana, it's really made me wish pokemon could be a little more like that,@@wilfredfizz8164

[@kindredspirit9703]

I like playing decks with combo elements, and even I don't like too much consistency. Even the best decks should have ways of playing suboptimally based on a lack of information or missequencing

[@RetroMaticGamer]

Fun Fact: Yu-Gi-Oh did NOT invent the "Extra Deck" mechanic. Decipher's Star Trek CCG did, back in 1996, with the Q Continuum set. The card "Q's Tent" let you put 13 cards underneath it before the game even started; then, by playing a copy of it from your hand during the game, you could go into that deck and choose one of those cards to add to your hand. That was a total game-changer, and basically every player had to use a mess of them to stay competitive.

[@nmr7203]

Yugioh was the thing that popularized it though, which is the main thing

[@kingdomkreep]

out of all these vids this one seemed to really strike at the undercurrent feeling I get with why I would easily get disuaded by card games and its from the mentioned "optimal/consistent plays" which my brother subjects me to a bunch with any game we play so maybe it's mostly from him but that certainly has left a bad tast in my mouth about it..

[@fabiomcmuffin]

I feel like there’s two different kind of consistency: Fun consistency: your deck can make some kind of decent play with just about any hand Unfun consistency: your deck can make the same exact powerful play with just about any hand (looking at you yugioh)

[@shelby142]

Thank you! It's honestly baffling how many people seem to overlook this distinction. It's shortsighted to want perfectly consistent decks, but it's more than reasonable to expect consistent autonomy and enjoyment from a game (assuming you aren't a sore loser and can find joy in losing). Like, I've heard a lot of defenses for MtG's land system along the lines of "the inconsistency creates for interesting game states [so it's necessary?]" or "if you don't draw enough lands, run more [because shuffling is a skill issue?]", but these arguments fundamentally miss the point. And don't get me wrong, I think MtG's land system is a marvel of game design, and other games have so consistently failed to match it that I'm not sure it's even fair to call it dated, but it _does_ make players' autonomy and enjoyment of the game a crapshoot, and that _is_ fundamentally a problem, even if it's not necessarily damning.

[@ProBAgar]

It's interesting you mention hand traps as "keeping the game together" when in the context of this video they are essentially the opposite. Sure, when they first came out, and especially when we started seeing heavier decks that needed to be stopped during their combo, they were great, however Power Creep persists, and the natural direction to go is to make decks that are RESISTANT to hand traps. So why are they still played if they can no longer reliably stop a combo? Simple: They are a perfect example of cards that were designed to be too consistent and too devoid of risk. They are ALWAYS live, they have no reliable counters in the game, and they perform a valuable role that no other card can. If a hand trap does have a restriction, such as Nibiru, or Dimension Shifter, they are SO much more powerful than almost any other card that they are still frequently problematic because again, there is no counterplay. Hand traps, while initially designed to curb the power of players that had the advantage of going first, are now ADVANTAGEOUS to the going first player because they insulate your setup against your opponent's tools to stop you, making your board nearly unbreakable, and they were not strong enough to stop your board in the first place, meaning your opponent doesn't get the same value out of them. Add on the fact that decks are essentially designed to play at least 1/3 of their deck as hand traps, and most decks getting 1, 2, or even 6 draws to increase the consistency of finding these cards even further and Konami has greatly magnified the impact of uncontrollable factors on who ends up winning. The better solution is to make decks less able to access generic tools and have lower ceilings, and then without a need for hand traps any longer they can be safely removed. Drytron for example would not require Droll to be a format staple if Alpha and Zeta only searched in archetype cards, Benten could only search Cyber Angels, and Meteonis could only summon Drytron Rituals, as you would no longer have access to the extremely busted Herald engine that caused metagame problems.

[@NeroVingian40]

That’s more of a problem of Konami basically cannibalizing their own design decisions in favor of power creep. Hand traps isn’t the problem here, the problem is power creep. Hand traps were the solutions, but now they’re creating cards that bypasses said solutions. Yes, I understand that hand traps were also a tool for the players going first as well as it did for the players going second, but having no hand traps is going to be worst than the game having it; FTK/perfect board decks will now not have any instant speed counters to them if those didn’t exists. Again, the problem comes back to power creep, where even hand traps are getting power creep’d up these days.

[@duelme1234]

I think the point on consistency also depends on the speed of the game. In a fast pace game like yugioh, I'd argue you actually want decks to be decently consistent and the game to be designed around both players being about to play engine vs engine. Obviously there can definitely be too much consistency still, but it at least allows the both sides to play (provided the format isn't garbage) and actually get into the meat and potato of the game (combo permutation and how to use that skill to interact with opponent's engine/handtraps/board breakers). For slower games where gameplans materialize slower, ya too much consistency can definitely can the game very samey as there might not be as many points of interaction through turn by turn sequencing alone.

[@andrewmcallister3529]

In the casual MTG EDH format, a 100 card singleton format, you see people actively opting out of including cards that let them pick cards out of their deck because it ruins the fun of inconsistency.

[@treetheoak8313]

"Choosing what card for your deck is unique to trading card games" Laughs in deck builders. But seriously great video as always! Love this series!

[@jothewerewolf]

I think this sort of pinpoints part of why I love playing magic with random garbage cards than with high end decks. Like literally cards I picked out of trash cans at my lgs, and then built random cubes from.

[@byeguyssry]

I think the "whining" of people realizing that their card is locked behind a prize card is a legitimate complaint; if you find that lifedecking is frustrating because players realize that they are no longer able to play with their cards, what's the difference between that and the feeling they get when realizing that their card was locked away behind their prize cards? I don't think only knowing after the game is an important factor or you could make people discard cards face-down when lifedecking

[@fennecfoxfanatic]

I think a competent player would factor that into the equation.

[@greengaleproductions]

As much as I hate having a good card locked in the Prize Cards, it's a valuable part of the game that allows games to not play the exact same every time.

[@QKlilx]

Life decking games often see players losing far more than 10% of their deck and it's also common to not be able to utilize those cards in other ways later on. In Pokemon, it's just 6 cards and you will likely see and use a few of them before the game is up.

[@greengaleproductions]

@@QKlilx It also helps that (at least to my knowledge) Most eras of the game have 1-2 cards that allow you to see your Prize Cards. Rotation Block F has Hisuian Heavy Ball, which allows you to search your Prize Cards for a pokemon and add it to your hand. You can then remember which cards are in there, and build your plays around that knowledge.

[@KnightmarePhoenix_official]

Prize cards are a huge reason why I like YGO better than the PTCG. Having my best cards locked in the prizes is incredibly frustrating.

[@FablesEnd]

Final 24 hours! Help us reach the next stretch goal!

[@andreelmatacoronavirusquin1322]

Hey so as One Piece closes their first year of release in the West being a way bigger game than when it started and still growing would you consider revisiting the game or doing any kind of video on it. I remember that you said that you gave it a year at best so i’d like to know if you changed your mind at all.

[@dogf421]

hand traps have been the only thing holding yugioh together since about 2015ish when i stopped playing because the absolutely vital for survival hand traps were like 100 dollars and thats stupid. idk if the obtainability has gotten better over time but the fact that yugioh even exists at this point proves that hand traps are at least doing their job

[@Blitz0555]

That clip you showed of the Yugioh YCS is like watching a tough guy right before he gets murdered. Jeff Lenard performed a magical action that day.

[@EleggGaming]

Btw a good yugioh deck needs at least different 2 consistency cards because of ash blossom.

[@Blitz0555]

Really just any form of interaction that can stop the combo. There's quite a lot of non-handtrap negate cards that exist and can shut you down if you don't have the resources to play through them.

[@greengaleproductions]

I'mma be real, it's always nice to see more 7DS:Errata Text. These vudeos are SUPER helpful tools when developing a Card Game (even if keeping players in mind makes development more difficult).

[@OdelyxRa]

I've watched the 7DS videos in loop repeatedly. Then I found the Errata Text and watched those in tandem with the 7DS videos this guy is legit. I'm trying to make a card game myself lol and this has helped

[@HighSchoolRamiel]

11:30 This is the reason for what most of the extra deck monsters that are or were forbidden in yugioh. For the crime of searching, summoning or sending to the graveyard we have currently forbidden: Tearlaments Kitkallos Crystron Halqifibrax Curious, the Lightsworn Dominion Guardragon Elpy Heavymetalfoes Electrumite Knightmare Mermaid Mecha Phantom Beast Auroradon Predaplant Verte Anaconda Simorgh, Bird of Sovereignty Summon Sorceress Union Carrier Chaos Ruler, the Chaotic Magical Dragon Ib the World Chalice Justiciar Lavalval Chain M-X-Saber Invoker Number95: Galaxy-Eyes Dark Matter Dragon Wind-Up Carrier Zenmaity Zoodiac Broadbull

[@munchrai6396]

I think the level of consistency should be proportional to how powerful the deck is. If you're simply trying to do some basic combos that end in a modest board it really shouldn't be a big ask for the deck to also be consistent at it. I'm a big fan of decks that make small, impactful boards that you then use other cards to protect that established board and the worst feeling is when you can't even find your starters to make those couple of threats the deck revolves around

[@greengaleproductions]

Same, I also like having a really modest board before passing to the opponent's turn; but a lot of times folks hear "More Consistency" and think about the already hyper-consistent meta strategies and not the more niche Rogue decks.

[@xolotltolox7626]

Well, in YuGiOh, Zoodiac was a deck whose turn 1 play was putting a draw and instant speed spot removal onto the board, but it did it with such insane consistency and such little investment, frequently only 1 card, that it became tier 0. In that format basicalyl everyone was playing a Zoo deck of some sort, be it paleo zoo, plant zoo, kaiju zoo, etc

[@NeroVingian40]

That’s fine, until the combo itself is separated from the deck and basically becomes an engine that other decks can latch on to, making them staple choices when deckbuilding, just because of their consistency.

[@xolotltolox7626]

@@NeroVingian40 pretty much exactly with what happened with my Zoo example Often in a 40 card deck, you could end up having at least 12 ways of getting to Ratpier, your combo enabler(3 Terrortop, 3 Tenki, 3 Barrage, 3 Rat)

[@CherryDad]

Surprised you didnt mention the various mulligan rules in Magic over the years! Still, wonderful video!

[@NikolajLepka]

parcheesi doesn't have a skill ceiling.... it doesn't have any depth...

[@Kohdok]

It has more than Chutes and Ladders. You actually have a choice in Parcheesi.

[@NikolajLepka]

@@Kohdok yes, but barely.

[@grantflippin7808]

Gigantosaurus has one major upside, it's perfect bait. My mana dork is putting in far more work but people only see the big scary 10/10 Edit: spelling

[@Kohdok]

It's actually "Gigantasaurus". "Giganotosaurus" is an actual dinosaur. Also, I like to combo it with Taunting Elf.

[@ReadingRulesDallas]

This is a doctorate thesis! Most interesting!!

[@SuperSayian3000]

So just curious and I want your honest opinion. I have been working on a game that uses Duel Masters mechanics and VS System ccg mechanics. Is this something you think is a bad option in terms of you referring to the phrase, "not another Duel Masters Clone?" I love Duel Masters and I wish I could read Japanese to play the printed game in Japan. I have some interesting ideas with it but I am worried since you make a lot of great points on the games you review. Also, do you think Redakai (as just TCG with a different universe) with some other mechanics and without the plastic cards would be a solid game?

[@twgok3162]

A lot of people don't want consistent decks where u can play cards on curve with lots of interaction, they want consistent wins where they can execute a single game plan uncontested and nothing else

[@genericname3516]

10:38 I don't think that's the right Master Peace...

[@wtfox8206]

I appreciate how all the comments are jabs at Yugioh and how poorly executed it is

[@RyanAtlus]

Yugioh just keeps growing in popularity despite the hate it getting also growing. They're definitely doing something right, I suppose.

[@duelme1234]

Personally, I find everyone that only focuses on the "poor design" (you can argue either way honestly and still have a point, just realize there is another side) to be very narrowed minded. For all of yugioh's faults, it is one of the most unique card games out there and is exploring design spaces no other card game is (for both good or bad). Yes, yugioh is probably one of the most janky card games there is and it is understandable that people make fun of the game for that. However, I find it weird that nobody ever talks about "janky"/unintended mechanics in other genres actually benefiting the game to create a more unique experience (like wave dashing in melee), and how that might/might not translates to card games. Granted unintended effects can definitely harm instead of benefiting a game, but the dog pile honestly feel so disingenuous at times. It's also hilarious to me that not long ago in the fighting game community, there was a discussion on "emergent gameplay" and a push back by some against this trend against everything being so designed and streamlined (not saying they were right, just saying the discussion existed and there is fun to be made find interactions and synergies that are not intended). Yet in the card game space, everyone makes fun of yugioh for "not being like them" and dismissing the game when "Marvel vs Capcom" (the fast pace insanity that is the equivalent to yugioh in the fighting game space) is loved by the fgc. Again, not saying that subsection of the fgc, the extent they pushed emergent gameplay, or potentially romanticizing a game that is bad shit crazy is correct (I personally think they aren't but that's just my opinion), just saying there is diversity in opinions over there. Sure the genre is different and things will change in the translation, but most don't even attempt to understand yugioh's design beyond the surface level and fail to see that appealing to people that like the insanity and deviating from the "every thing simple to learn, hard to master, slow ramp in intensity" framework is ok. Now that doesn't mean yugioh's design actually perfect and has no issues (on the contrary: card formatting, combo permutation being the focal point of the game and the skill being inaccessible to new players, length of turns, unbreakable boards/ftks on occasion, ...etc), but it at least opens the door for different inspiration and directions to experiment in. To be clear, yugioh is not my favorite card game, that would be faeria (digital card game that is slow place due to land placement and do follow the generic simple to learn hard to master framework). But I am thankful that yugioh opened my eyes to the different design possibilities in the card game space and being so unique (even if its to own detriment at times).

[@saitougin7210]

4:50 They play Shadowverse in realife? How does that even work, when you search random cards out of a certain subset of cards from your deck all the time? How would the spellbost mechanic work in real life? How do you keep track of all the spellbosted cards in your hand, that you may hold over several turns? (Some kind of judge would have to verify that you played like 20 spells while you had that Dimension Shift in your hand, so that you can now play it for free. Otherwise you would have to reveal the cards in your hand, which is not what the game wants.) I don't get it. It shouldn't be able to work.

[@ramondee2074]

1. Search just became the normal tcg search. Like maid leader searching for a follower that can evolve. 2. Spellboost became Spellchain, which activates by the number of spells in the graveyard. For Dimension shift, the physical card's cost is 12, and has an effect to make it's cost 7 instead of you banish 10 spells from the graveyard.

[@saitougin7210]

@@ramondee2074 Ooooohhh! So it is a completely different game by then, since one is changing simply all effects that wouldn't work in real life. Well ok, that explains it.

[@Arkouchie]

"Do children even play Yu-Gi-Oh any more" Yes, they're just 30 year old children

[@ShadowEclipex]

I know One Piece's art for their standard cards isn't much, but it's special alt art stuff is amazing! And how minimalist the cards are let's you enjoy more of it.

[@Wslasher]

Is this why Bushiroad doesn't want to get rid of OverTriggers in Vanguard?