On the topic of multiplayer, although it's a 1v1 game, I really like Keyforge's racing mechanic. Basically being the first to accumulate 18 life. The fact that you can't be knocked out of the game, preventing you from just sitting around waiting for others to finish with nothing to do, is great imo.
Yeah, I feel like Keyforge's system would adapt fairly well to multiplayer. If flows really well in 1v1, but there's not any mechanics that feel like they would cause problems with more players.
I highly disagree. Its not designed for multiplayer. Multiplayer magic encourages a type of gameplay that would be considered unhealthy if they actually took it to its conclusion. Interaction is in general bad in multiplayer because you and the person you are setting back both lose resources relative to the rest of the table. So the best decks in multiplayer are combo decks that just look down at their own cards. Attacking is often bad as well because you open yourself up to being attack by up to three other players. So in multiplayer you don't attack, you don't player interruption. You play a bunch of cards that let you gather mana faster than one mana per turn and when its all said and done you hope to win off of Approach of the Second Sun or Thassa Oracle. You might as well be playing solitaire.
Fair point! The play patterns are definitely not great - I think it's only an advantage because other tcgs basically non-functional if you tried to bring a group of 4-5 decks to a table and play one big game. I really do feel like it's an open opportunity for a new tcg built around multiplayer from the start - I think a game like that would do really well, just because there's so little competition there.
@@tcgacademia Vampire of the Eternal Struggle is built for multiplayer. I think it would be very popular if they didn't bury the rules in over complex terminology and fringe rules. But its got a good skeleton for a scalable CCG
That is a valid point about MtG multiplayer as a competitive format, but what he is describing is more of a MtG as a social game for a night hanging out with friends. The kind of scenario where you'd probably dust off your Mario Party, Jenga, etc. normally. You'd have to be a total munchkin to bring out your optimized Kiki-Jiki combo deck in that scenario.
@@abyssal113 I'm fully convinced that commander exists more for people to hang out together than for the game itself. The format is probably best when people just bring a pile of card that make them smile rather than taking it seriously. I know people play cEDH, but I don't think that its a good competitive format.
Good thing I made my TCG to be played 2-as many as you like. I'm hoping to make a player vs AI for single player, or some sort of solitaire version of the game, but I'm not sure how it goes. My game kinda has a slow build up too, you place a card in your reactor and pass, up to 12 can be in there and you can only play cards with a number that is equal to the cards in the reactor or it has a number below that number, and you only need to Spark (tap) 1 card to play a card. My game has a medium card economy but if you take advantage of it you'll start getting more cards, you start with 7, then if you don't like your hand you can pick the cards you don't want and put them under the deck and draw the same number you put down, once only, and if you have 3 or below cards in your hand, the next draw phase you draw until you have 5 in your hand instead of your normal draw 1, I want players to play their cards, so I give them cards to play. And for the resource, no mana screw here unless you're playing multi colour and get unlucky, if you do you have a chance to get the cards you want but putting them under your deck and draw anew hand by the cards you put down, needles to say every card is mana. And the game is like MTG with its give up attacking to defend and give up defending to attack play, with 2 lanes dedicated to one of them.
Player vs AI is definitely something I've seen demand for, so it definitely seems like another nice thing to be able to include in the game. For giving up defenses to attack - I don't necessarily love it for single player, but it can work out fine, and it definitely can help in multiplayer. Hope the game design journey is going well!
@@tcgacademia It's going fine, still trying to find the right design for the cards, but the rules are written down, they recently changed from a level 0-8 perspective to level 1-12, the level is how much cards is needed in the reactor, it is called a Voxel, I thought just having 8 a Max just felt clusterphobic, so, I broke the ceiling and raised it to 12, a good number, sadly YuGiOh already has a level 12 system, but I wield that blade differently, that's basically my game, a melded combination of almost every game but is wielded differently and casted again into a different style. And don't worry about the giving up defence, in my game you'll learn that you'll be provided with a whole bunch of cards in late game, I want players to play their cards, and I'm sure they want to too, and with that econamy by turn 8 you'll start be doing yugioh type of stuff, or something like it, I think, that's a guess though, still need to play test again. Build on MTG, Yugioh, Inscryption hardware but uses everyone's software. That's how I would sum up my game, but with its own flavour to be original. If I had your email or if we were on Messenger I could send you the whole game's rules, I also got a whole page or so of Lore, and mabey I can tell you all 49 Keywords, and you think that's alot, you should see MTG's Great Wall Of Text, a bit tooooooooooooooo much, I'm hoping I'm just half of MTG's big wall.
I did pause a bit before I put that in, but compared to the number of actions taken by players in yugioh, or even Wixoss or Vangaurd, Magic paces out its play a lot better over multiple turns. So while the end boards can get ridiculous, they're generally built up turn by turn - it's a lot less spam-y than a lot of other tcgs.
@@tcgacademia EDH has twice the players which is one factor, and has hundreds of weird mechanics and systems across the card pool. It does have a resource system which usually limits actions, especially in the early game, but once players get a few engine/combo pieces down turns can get very long too.
I honestly don't care if it's a CCG, TCG, LCG, or any other kind of card game. I love and hate this aspect. I never found MTG to work multiplayer. Neither YuGiOh! Nor Warhammer Invasion. Magi Nation certainly doesn't work even though there are cards for this exact purpose. I generally detest multiplayer games where everyone can dogpile onto any one other player. I've been on both sides of dogpile situations, and it's not fun for me in either case. Any card board game that allows dogpiling isn't a well designed muliplayer game imo. There might be one except, but I've not tried it out. Final Fantasy has boss decks that are built stronger with limited deck modification options, and these decks exist to go up against up to two other players regular playing decks who work co-operatively. Gruff works as it is based on lanes. You can only attack specific lanes of the opposition. It doesn't fully mitigate ganging up on a player, though. Millenium Blades is all about multiplayer. Sure it drags the game out longer for each player, but the more players the more chaotic every becomes. I guess one CCG I do know of is Tomb Raider which is a game you could even solo. The die rolling mechanics for skill checks was dull for me.
It's surprisingly difficult to get to get a game that works well in 1v1 and also works well with multiplayer - often the concessions you have to make to have one work just ends up making the other side worse.
It's surprisingly difficult to make multiplayer modes for a lot of other tcgs. I think there's definitely a reason they haven't really stuck in other games, but are a big part of Magic's popularity - Magic's system just naturally works in multiplayer settings.
I’ve been doing my best to build my game around multiplayer since I want to be able to share it with friends. One interesting idea I had that rather than the player themselves having a life system it was a card that represents the player (called a MAIN) that would take damage. It wouldn’t be able to attack like other creatures but each main would have a unique ability that a player could play once per game at no cost
Player cards are some solid design, and I think it helps in multiplayer since it simplifies each player's strategy a bit. Something like in EDH, you may not know what exact cards your opponent is running, but if they use Ezuri as their commander, it's a safe bet their deck uses a lot of elves. Good luck with your game design!
Not sure if you heard but Lorcana's rules just came out, and it looks like it's made for multiplayer in mind. It uses the Keyforge mechanic, except cards generate variable amounts of points, and you have to get to 20 to win.
I've heard of Lorcana but haven't checked out the rules - that sounds more interesting than I was expecting. Feels like a really good move for a game like that to focus on multiplayer - it's a lot easier to get people who aren't obsessed with cards games and just want to play Simba in attack mode, and multiplayer is a good way to balance out the table a bit.
I think I am on a good track designing a decent multiplayer card game. 3 player vs worked well in playtests. After seeing to many 1v1 exclusives or games getting clunky with 3 or players I wanted to make something that can be played with more players.
1- not exactely the video i thought it would be. 2- still basing this series on what i still consider wrong base ideas about mtg. 3- failed at clearly showing the importance of multiplayer, namely commander, in the reality of mtg. Commander has become, for better and worse, the driving force of the game both in terms of sales and design. Furthermore, commander is just one other format that mtg players can explore and enjoy, both in it´s multiplayer and 1v1 variants. 4- 2:32 it is not about skill level but allowing players to experience the game in new and interesting ideas. Consider an example of my experience: yugioh only exists at lgs as tournament play, with fully invested players with optimized decks and newbies to get farmed and scamed. Mtg has room for casual play, new players and bad decks. 5- 3:25 magic is, if nothing else, a strong and flexible set of base rules that alows it to offers all kinds of experiences and mechanics. That is it´s greaters strengh. It is hard to think of something that newer games can present that mtg could not replicate or has already done.
I feel like magic is losing its grip on the top of the TCG totem pole and is now more filling a niche; a game with very complex mechanics for players who desire complexity. There are too many games on the market today and hardly any of them are as complex as magic yet still have many players. One piece is a good example of a simple game with many players.
While I agree that the channel is a bit too negative about magic, and that magic has strengths beyond good multiplayer, the points he brings up are valid. I think he omitted other strengths of magic and other advantages and details for the sake of making a concise, focused video. The video is not about making a value judgement about the game, but highlights one of the (now) key elements which differentiates it from most others. I guess what I am trying to say is that I agree with your points about magic, but not about the quality of the video. It would be cool if he made a video which talks about another strength you mentioned: expressing yourself through your deck, due to the massive card pool, bazilion different mechanics and possible interactions, and the commander format. This in combination with the multiplayer aspect is why I, as a casual but enfranchised player, love the game.
@@falconturtlehybrid1739 I would like to see a video about the strengths of magic compared to other games as well. We listed very good points about MTG that other games don't quite offer.
@@goncaloferreira6429 I'm saying MTG isn't THE card game anymore. It's just A card game now. There are game stores that don't even offer MTG anymore which is wild to me and shows where things are going in the TCG space. Many players means there is a large global community and not a small handful of players. Many games is good. Card games typically don't survive, and the fact that these games are still thriving instead of dying and having players return to MTG says a lot.
On the topic of multiplayer, although it's a 1v1 game, I really like Keyforge's racing mechanic. Basically being the first to accumulate 18 life. The fact that you can't be knocked out of the game, preventing you from just sitting around waiting for others to finish with nothing to do, is great imo.
Yeah, I feel like Keyforge's system would adapt fairly well to multiplayer. If flows really well in 1v1, but there's not any mechanics that feel like they would cause problems with more players.
Except keyforge is barley tcg it's more like board game with cards
I was literally just saying this. Multiplayer is what MTG has over other TCGs
I highly disagree.
Its not designed for multiplayer. Multiplayer magic encourages a type of gameplay that would be considered unhealthy if they actually took it to its conclusion.
Interaction is in general bad in multiplayer because you and the person you are setting back both lose resources relative to the rest of the table. So the best decks in multiplayer are combo decks that just look down at their own cards.
Attacking is often bad as well because you open yourself up to being attack by up to three other players.
So in multiplayer you don't attack, you don't player interruption. You play a bunch of cards that let you gather mana faster than one mana per turn and when its all said and done you hope to win off of Approach of the Second Sun or Thassa Oracle. You might as well be playing solitaire.
Fair point! The play patterns are definitely not great - I think it's only an advantage because other tcgs basically non-functional if you tried to bring a group of 4-5 decks to a table and play one big game. I really do feel like it's an open opportunity for a new tcg built around multiplayer from the start - I think a game like that would do really well, just because there's so little competition there.
@@tcgacademia Vampire of the Eternal Struggle is built for multiplayer. I think it would be very popular if they didn't bury the rules in over complex terminology and fringe rules. But its got a good skeleton for a scalable CCG
@@josephcourtright8071 I somehow keep forgetting Vampire is a thing - definitely a game I'd like to learn more about in the future.
That is a valid point about MtG multiplayer as a competitive format, but what he is describing is more of a MtG as a social game for a night hanging out with friends. The kind of scenario where you'd probably dust off your Mario Party, Jenga, etc. normally. You'd have to be a total munchkin to bring out your optimized Kiki-Jiki combo deck in that scenario.
@@abyssal113 I'm fully convinced that commander exists more for people to hang out together than for the game itself. The format is probably best when people just bring a pile of card that make them smile rather than taking it seriously.
I know people play cEDH, but I don't think that its a good competitive format.
Good thing I made my TCG to be played 2-as many as you like.
I'm hoping to make a player vs AI for single player, or some sort of solitaire version of the game, but I'm not sure how it goes.
My game kinda has a slow build up too, you place a card in your reactor and pass, up to 12 can be in there and you can only play cards with a number that is equal to the cards in the reactor or it has a number below that number, and you only need to Spark (tap) 1 card to play a card.
My game has a medium card economy but if you take advantage of it you'll start getting more cards, you start with 7, then if you don't like your hand you can pick the cards you don't want and put them under the deck and draw the same number you put down, once only, and if you have 3 or below cards in your hand, the next draw phase you draw until you have 5 in your hand instead of your normal draw 1, I want players to play their cards, so I give them cards to play.
And for the resource, no mana screw here unless you're playing multi colour and get unlucky, if you do you have a chance to get the cards you want but putting them under your deck and draw anew hand by the cards you put down, needles to say every card is mana.
And the game is like MTG with its give up attacking to defend and give up defending to attack play, with 2 lanes dedicated to one of them.
Player vs AI is definitely something I've seen demand for, so it definitely seems like another nice thing to be able to include in the game. For giving up defenses to attack - I don't necessarily love it for single player, but it can work out fine, and it definitely can help in multiplayer. Hope the game design journey is going well!
@@tcgacademia
It's going fine, still trying to find the right design for the cards, but the rules are written down, they recently changed from a level 0-8 perspective to level 1-12, the level is how much cards is needed in the reactor, it is called a Voxel, I thought just having 8 a Max just felt clusterphobic, so, I broke the ceiling and raised it to 12, a good number, sadly YuGiOh already has a level 12 system, but I wield that blade differently, that's basically my game, a melded combination of almost every game but is wielded differently and casted again into a different style.
And don't worry about the giving up defence, in my game you'll learn that you'll be provided with a whole bunch of cards in late game, I want players to play their cards, and I'm sure they want to too, and with that econamy by turn 8 you'll start be doing yugioh type of stuff, or something like it, I think, that's a guess though, still need to play test again.
Build on MTG, Yugioh, Inscryption hardware but uses everyone's software. That's how I would sum up my game, but with its own flavour to be original.
If I had your email or if we were on Messenger I could send you the whole game's rules, I also got a whole page or so of Lore, and mabey I can tell you all 49 Keywords, and you think that's alot, you should see MTG's Great Wall Of Text, a bit tooooooooooooooo much, I'm hoping I'm just half of MTG's big wall.
Manageable board states! Have you even seen EDH?
I did pause a bit before I put that in, but compared to the number of actions taken by players in yugioh, or even Wixoss or Vangaurd, Magic paces out its play a lot better over multiple turns. So while the end boards can get ridiculous, they're generally built up turn by turn - it's a lot less spam-y than a lot of other tcgs.
@@tcgacademia EDH has twice the players which is one factor, and has hundreds of weird mechanics and systems across the card pool. It does have a resource system which usually limits actions, especially in the early game, but once players get a few engine/combo pieces down turns can get very long too.
I honestly don't care if it's a CCG, TCG, LCG, or any other kind of card game. I love and hate this aspect. I never found MTG to work multiplayer. Neither YuGiOh! Nor Warhammer Invasion. Magi Nation certainly doesn't work even though there are cards for this exact purpose.
I generally detest multiplayer games where everyone can dogpile onto any one other player. I've been on both sides of dogpile situations, and it's not fun for me in either case. Any card board game that allows dogpiling isn't a well designed muliplayer game imo. There might be one except, but I've not tried it out. Final Fantasy has boss decks that are built stronger with limited deck modification options, and these decks exist to go up against up to two other players regular playing decks who work co-operatively.
Gruff works as it is based on lanes. You can only attack specific lanes of the opposition. It doesn't fully mitigate ganging up on a player, though.
Millenium Blades is all about multiplayer. Sure it drags the game out longer for each player, but the more players the more chaotic every becomes.
I guess one CCG I do know of is Tomb Raider which is a game you could even solo. The die rolling mechanics for skill checks was dull for me.
It's surprisingly difficult to get to get a game that works well in 1v1 and also works well with multiplayer - often the concessions you have to make to have one work just ends up making the other side worse.
Being the first and being the best are VERY different things. Also why can't we just make up our own 4 player game modes for games that aren't magic
It's surprisingly difficult to make multiplayer modes for a lot of other tcgs. I think there's definitely a reason they haven't really stuck in other games, but are a big part of Magic's popularity - Magic's system just naturally works in multiplayer settings.
2:30 😍manga
I’ve been doing my best to build my game around multiplayer since I want to be able to share it with friends. One interesting idea I had that rather than the player themselves having a life system it was a card that represents the player (called a MAIN) that would take damage. It wouldn’t be able to attack like other creatures but each main would have a unique ability that a player could play once per game at no cost
Player cards are some solid design, and I think it helps in multiplayer since it simplifies each player's strategy a bit. Something like in EDH, you may not know what exact cards your opponent is running, but if they use Ezuri as their commander, it's a safe bet their deck uses a lot of elves. Good luck with your game design!
Not sure if you heard but Lorcana's rules just came out, and it looks like it's made for multiplayer in mind. It uses the Keyforge mechanic, except cards generate variable amounts of points, and you have to get to 20 to win.
I've heard of Lorcana but haven't checked out the rules - that sounds more interesting than I was expecting. Feels like a really good move for a game like that to focus on multiplayer - it's a lot easier to get people who aren't obsessed with cards games and just want to play Simba in attack mode, and multiplayer is a good way to balance out the table a bit.
Points are a great way to decouple combat power from wincon-progressing power
I think I am on a good track designing a decent multiplayer card game.
3 player vs worked well in playtests.
After seeing to many 1v1 exclusives or games getting clunky with 3 or players I wanted to make something that can be played with more players.
1- not exactely the video i thought it would be.
2- still basing this series on what i still consider wrong base ideas about mtg.
3- failed at clearly showing the importance of multiplayer, namely commander, in the reality of mtg. Commander has become, for better and worse, the driving force of the game both in terms of sales and design. Furthermore, commander is just one other format that mtg players can explore and enjoy, both in it´s multiplayer and 1v1 variants.
4- 2:32 it is not about skill level but allowing players to experience the game in new and interesting ideas. Consider an example of my experience: yugioh only exists at lgs as tournament play, with fully invested players with optimized decks and newbies to get farmed and scamed. Mtg has room for casual play, new players and bad decks.
5- 3:25 magic is, if nothing else, a strong and flexible set of base rules that alows it to offers all kinds of experiences and mechanics. That is it´s greaters strengh. It is hard to think of something that newer games can present that mtg could not replicate or has already done.
I feel like magic is losing its grip on the top of the TCG totem pole and is now more filling a niche; a game with very complex mechanics for players who desire complexity. There are too many games on the market today and hardly any of them are as complex as magic yet still have many players. One piece is a good example of a simple game with many players.
While I agree that the channel is a bit too negative about magic, and that magic has strengths beyond good multiplayer, the points he brings up are valid. I think he omitted other strengths of magic and other advantages and details for the sake of making a concise, focused video. The video is not about making a value judgement about the game, but highlights one of the (now) key elements which differentiates it from most others. I guess what I am trying to say is that I agree with your points about magic, but not about the quality of the video. It would be cool if he made a video which talks about another strength you mentioned: expressing yourself through your deck, due to the massive card pool, bazilion different mechanics and possible interactions, and the commander format. This in combination with the multiplayer aspect is why I, as a casual but enfranchised player, love the game.
@@RarecuisineGaming 1- what are you trying to say here?
2- what would you call "many players"?
3- too many games? is that a good or bad thing?
@@falconturtlehybrid1739 I would like to see a video about the strengths of magic compared to other games as well. We listed very good points about MTG that other games don't quite offer.
@@goncaloferreira6429 I'm saying MTG isn't THE card game anymore. It's just A card game now. There are game stores that don't even offer MTG anymore which is wild to me and shows where things are going in the TCG space.
Many players means there is a large global community and not a small handful of players.
Many games is good. Card games typically don't survive, and the fact that these games are still thriving instead of dying and having players return to MTG says a lot.