Code Geass: Recent Activity
| Code Geass: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Introduction and General Invitation | Proxies for playtest | Design Challenge 2 | Colour-pair archetypes | Skeleton |
Recent updates to Code Geass: (Generated at 2025-06-21 21:51:43)
I like that the mechanic name here works well in the flavour of the set: such-and-such soldier can be channelling the Wary Guide she met before by using a defensive technique he taught her.
This card implies a cycle of common creatures with channel, preferably not duplicating any abilities from the cycle of Shinen. First strike is such a natural combat-trick keyword to grant that I'm going to have to be cautious where I use it, so perhaps that'd be lifelink in white.
The other colours aren't so clear. Flying and hexproof are the natural choices for blue, but granting flying and granting hexproof in the Code Geass set are likely to be technological effects, not learned techniques... I could have a ninja like Sayoko who has hexproof, perhaps, which frees up green to be trample. For black deathtouch is natural, though I do want to be cautious how much deathtouch I provide as well. Red, though, doesn't have any good options apart from haste and first strike. I could make a functional reprint of Shinen of Fury's Fire, or I could allow them to branch out into simple non-keyword abilities, something like "Whenever ~ attacks, it gets +2/+0 UEOT. Channel - Discard ~: Target [attacking] creature gets +2/+0 UEOT."
3/2 to be not strictly better than Primal Huntbeast
One way I can increase the density of combat tricks in Limited is by making creature cards also usable as combat tricks. That's effectively channel, last seen in Kamigawa as on Shinen of Stars' Light.
If I wanted the tricks to cantrip I could instead use cycling triggers like Gempalm Sorcerer. But I think I'd rather these be decent creatures with a not-very-good combat trick alternative, and cycling is always at least reasonably good unless priced prohibitively.
The Prepare mechanic is nifty because it can go on permanents of any type. The conditional lifelink is inspired by the discussion on Prepare for Ambush about making all preparations conditional on something.
use mechanic
This reminds me of Prepare from Anydria (Banish Chaos, Collapse from Within) though your implementation is slightly different.
Ooooh. Iiinteresting idea! I had indeed just been treating the "if you control" as a colour enforcement, similar to Horobi's Whisper or Snuff Out. But yes, I definitely could take it in that direction instead. That's pretty interesting.
Mmm, it addresses it from a different direction though. I expect you added the "if you control" to prevent its use completely out of colour - but it also works for "Oh, I see, I need to set up these preconditions"
I can imagine more elaborate plans - "If you control a flying creature and an artifact" or "If you control at least three mecha" with appropriately powerful payoffs (destroy target creature, cretures you control are invulnerable ueot perhaps) but still with zero casting cost.
The advantage of this compared with Plan for Ambush is obviously that it's got a lot fewer words; it doesn't use counters; and it gives you much more freedom when to cast the prepared cards.
The drawback is that last one. In giving freedom when to cast the prepared cards, it removes the need for such precise planning and prediction. It smooths gameplay but at the expense of closer ties to the feeling I was going for with the set.
An alternate version of Plan for Ambush, showing that the "Prepare" mechanic can be used to get free combat tricks too if I want to, so it looks like a good candidate for the Prediction / planning mechanic.
Wizards seem fine with this trick being free in combat, or close to it - Crowd's Favor, Hundred-Talon Strike.
I agree it's pretty different to normal equipment. I worry that it's not sufficiently different from Auras though!
Oh yes, I see what you mean :) But my first thought is that an equip cost, being able to move it between creatures, all having "totem armour", looking different, and being a large part of the set, are enough to make it different, although I don't know for sure without having played it.
Not all mecha have eject, but almost all do. I'm certainly prepared to handwave away the exceptions if need be.
I like the idea of making them equipment with a Pilot ability containing the rules for eject as well. I tried mocking up rules text for it, but it basically looked exactly like the seven lines on Guren Mk-II.
Re "fairly strong mecha with an inbuilt eject is sufficiently different to normal equipment to be interesting"... I agree it's pretty different to normal equipment. I worry that it's not sufficiently different from Auras though!
Huh. Yeah, like Vitenka, I thought your existing implementation was basically right, I hadn't noticed they technically weren't equipment. Maybe Matt should be our honorary developer :)
A tweak to the rules to bring it into line might be, make them equip, but replace the "equip" ability with a "pilot" ability that contains all the rules baggage of both equip and eject. (Assuming all mecha have eject? Or are some supposed to be destroyed with their pilot along with them?)
I think that simply designing fairly strong mecha with an inbuilt eject is sufficiently different to normal equipment to be interesting.
In fact, now I think about it, I've really rarely seen a creature with two pieces of equipment, so "piloting two mecha" may not often a problem. I think Matt's right you shouldn't require that to be forbidden, but if the flavour of mecha is sufficiently different and you do go with a different equip ability, it might fit player's expectation better if you couldn't.
I didn't realise that they weren't equipment, from your existing cards. (Reading type lines is, it seems, hard.)
Renaming totem armour to eject covers the slight difference (equipped creature vs enchanted creature), so that's fine too. Though it does hit the bushido problem; it's a useful future mechanic, but 'eject' sounds only applicable to vehicles rather than, say, a magical shield.
And, frankly, I always did like the imagery of "My soldier wields his mecha, swinging it round his head and smashing you with it." (I also like "Hiding in a barrel, which is riding a horse, which is riding a horse")
One way to be different would be to have the mecha be even more complete protection; but also hampering the pilots ability to use their abilities: "When ~ ETBs choose a creature you control. That creature is exiled while ~ is in play."
Such mecha should usually have a sac clause, I guess.
Criteria for a good mecha mechanic:
Given all that, something rather similar to equipment does seem pretty inevitable...
Matt saw mecha like the Gloucester Royal RPI-00/SC and the Guren Mk-II and said "These should just be Equipment with totem armour. Wizards' approach to this is to sacrifice realistic flavour for the same of gameplay."
I can't decide if I agree or not. On the one hand, they're very similar to Equipment. And they're not different enough in a way that leads to good gameplay, particularly. (The key difference is "leaves any other Knightmare", i.e. one creature can't pilot multiple Knightmares. Matt considers this an "Ooze in boots" problem, like when a Squadron Hawk attacks wielding three swords.)
Eject is literally a rename of totem armour with no other changes. I'm fine with that: occasionally mechanics get renamed, like chroma to devotion or fading to vanishing. So the problem isn't really with eject; I can keep it or leave it depending on what mechanic for mecha themselves I find.
What I'd most like would be to find a new, innovative approach to mecha whereby they can have interesting gameplay that's genuinely different to Equipment. But I haven't thought of anything for that yet. Some ideas were discussed over on Mecha.
Yep, that it does. Similar to... how people thought Screeching Bat worked (but it doesn't because it only works in your upkeep)... similar to how some versions of the Starcraft 2 Viking worked... Faintly similar to Frenzy Sliver, for that matter.
But anyway, yes, it does allow that, deliberately.
Wait; this allows for "Gain flying, no block? Lose flying; STOMP" doesn't it?
That's a really really nifty space to explore. Shades of ninjitsu.
was 3WW, +3/+1, "
: gain flying or first strike"
Ninjutsu spelled out on an instant. Fun!
Top-down design from the name, inspired by the wonderful Sayoko. But could work pretty well in the set, especially if I have a few more saboteur effects.
I'm not sure the set actually needs the creature to come in unblocked, but that most closely matches Magic's existing ninjas so it ought to be more easily memorable / most natural.
Reminds me of Infiltration Raid. And a little of Surprise Deployment which I'm also considering for the set.
The obvious sync up is to have the aura also put a neutralisation counter on; even if it doesn't do anything extra. (Though.. hmm, it would make the sequence "enchant A, disenchant, enchant B - now A disables again" which mifght be interesting enough for the complexity?)
Oops, I guess they do! The difference between aura and xx,T on a coloured artifact made them feel different to me, even though the effect is exactly the same.
"would be even nicer if the two could be synced up" - That's what I've currently done: both this and Gefjun Disturber are "doesn't untap and abilities can't be activated". Admittedly we were talking about changing Gefjun Disturber to have a power reduction, if I made a way to give it flash, so I should bear that in mind if I do make that change.
Having a common and a rare version seems like a really great idea, especially if (as you've done here) you can use a slightly different name to explain why they're on different cards. Then people can see the little one, and immediately be prepared for the big one when they see it.
It seems obvious to make this an artifact if you can, because the original is a device (?) Especially if it doesn't absolutely need to be blue. But blue is good too.
It would be even nicer if the abilities between the two could be synced up, so this is something like "take the effect from the small one and apply it to more/bigger creatures". But that's not necessary if it doesn't produce good mechanics.
nonland. not decided whether should just be "creature or artifact"