Comments on: A look at CCGs: selective mechanics

By: Frank Filz

Frank Filz — Tue, 03 Oct 2006 17:07:52 +0000

Yea, Cosmic Encounter was mostly random choice of powers. Players could exert choice by deciding on the set to be included in the game. I think some players would also choose powers.

In relation to some of the other notes on Magic here wrto interractions between different optional rules - as Cosmic Encounter added expansions, this interraction became a problem, especially as players started to play with 2 or even 3 powers each (and I think I’ve even seen more). In fact, the game became totally exception driven when played this way.

Some wargames did provide “point buy” options (this preceeded the use of point buy in RPGs). Some even have an economic system of some sort that allows buying new units during play.

Frank

By: Gerald Cameron

Gerald Cameron — Sat, 30 Sep 2006 18:31:29 +0000

I think the actual rules for CE involve random distribution of special powers (the expansion layer), although there’s nothing much to stop players choosing their own in some way.

Wargames almost never involve this kind of choice. Units in play are usually determined by the designer of the game and/or scenario, often based on the historical situation being modelled. Normally players have, at most,control over the initial placing of units, and even this is not universal.

By: Thomas Robertson

Thomas Robertson — Sat, 30 Sep 2006 16:30:28 +0000

Well, I’ve played Magic since the bad ol’ days, but the solution to this particular problem seems simple enough. Getting +1/+1 doesn’t make the creature itself bigger, so the white creatures are effectively 2/2.

Of course that doesn’t mean that there aren’t interactions that are confusing, so don’t feel like I’m demanding other examples. It would surprise me if you couldn’t find some :)

Thomas

By: Stefan / 1of3

Stefan / 1of3 — Sat, 30 Sep 2006 15:53:10 +0000

Is it extreme? I do not think so.

- You controll a Crusade
- I play a Humility

Now, what happens to your white creatures?

Of course by now there is a solution for problems like this in the core rules, which wasn’t necessary in first edition.

By: Thomas Robertson

Thomas Robertson — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 18:11:48 +0000

Stefan,

Perhaps it’s just nostalgia, but when I started playing Magic way back in the day, I remember being able to play using just the rules that A) came in that little book in the starter deck and B) were printed on the cards themselves. We didn’t need any clarification beyond that.

Has Magic changed? Am I misremembering?

Also, I would suggest that the level of extreme clarification that you’re talking about is only relevant in highly competative play. The average player is just going to play and have fun with things as they are written. So the dynamic of play I’m suggesting exists does seem to exist, even if it does not exist necessarily.

Thomas

By: Thomas Robertson

Thomas Robertson — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 18:08:45 +0000

Yehuda,

Good observation there. I am, unfortunately, unfamiliar with Cosmic Encounters, and my background in wargaming is pretty weak, so I’m asking you: Were these games built around the idea of letting the players select (to some degree) which of the expansion/exception rules they wanted to employ?

Thomas

By: Stefan / 1of3

Stefan / 1of3 — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 11:21:19 +0000

One thing to remember is, that many people do not even know Magic’s core rules. I frequently meet kids who do not know about the Stack or the structure of the combat phase. In fact the complete core rules of magic are like 40 A4 pages.

Furthermore cards contain all their rules only in theory. In reality you need clarifications, how rule X interacts with rule Y.

By: Yehuda Berlinger

Yehuda Berlinger — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:17:40 +0000

Magic’s “core rules”/”exceptions” design is based directly on Cosmic Encounter’s design. Cosmic’s design is likely based on war games designs, where each piece has a default range of movement and rate of fire, but each individual piece has specific exceptions to each core rule.

Yehuda