Today I’d like to touch on an aspect of design that’s, well, kind of hard to put your finger on. I’m talking about design aesthetics. The problem is that, while I can recognize a card or mechanic as being aesthetically pleasing (or displeasing), I have a hard time defining the criteria by which I come to that conclusion. It’s kind of an “I know it when I see it” scenario. If someone asked me to explain what I meant when I said that a card is a development constraint, I could say that the card’s existence prohibits our ability to make a certain type of card above a certain power level. For example, Longshot puts an upper limit on how good we can make a low cost army character.
Explaining design aesthetics, however, is a bit tougher. Essentially, there are certain features of a design that I find appealing. The tricky part is that while there are some universal aspects of good card design (a clear sense of purpose, for instance), in many cases, it’s all a matter of taste. That said, this is my article, so I’m going to give some examples of what I consider to be good aesthetic card designs.
Partly because it’s the most recent expansion and partly because I had very little to do with its design (and so perhaps I’m more objective than I usually would be), I’m going to use Marvel Knights to illustrate the kinds of card design I like to see. Before I start, there are a few things I should point out.
1. There are many types of design, and each one has its own aesthetic considerations. For example, when designing a team, one might want to make sure that there is an appreciable break between the particular strengths or uses of various characters at a specific cost. (Perhaps one 3-drop should be geared toward attacking, another geared toward defending, and another geared toward utility.) When designing an entire set, one might want to include cycles* of cards across teams that demonstrate each teams’ specialty. Since each type of design warrants pages and pages by itself, I’m going to keep today’s focus primarily on individual card design.
2. As I mentioned before, it’s hard to define exactly what I mean by design aesthetics. For example, does a clear and consistent template count as good design aesthetics, or is that just a component of a nice looking card? I’m not sure. What about splash value, or how exciting a card is? I don’t think that’s an aspect of individual card aesthetics, though it is related, and it certainly applies to overall set design. Moving on, I’m going to put forth that what follows are just some aspects of good aesthetics. This is in no way meant to be a comprehensive analysis or argument.
3. I’m judging these cards with an eye toward aesthetics, not playability (though the terms are not mutually exclusive). Some of these cards might not have a huge impact on the metagame, but I sure like ’em.
4. I realize that I’ve already written like 500 words and haven’t made fun of Dave Humphreys or even Andrew Yip yet. Just be patient. Relax and let it happen.
Okay, here they are in no particular order.
Consistent Numbers
Starring Daredevil, Protector of Hell’s Kitchen
I figure we’ll start off real simple. Vs. System, like most games, is heavily invested in math. But while a game like Scrabble might “hide” some of its math components (such as the probability of drawing a given tile or the geometry of board control amongst the premium spaces), Vs. has tons of numbers all over the cards—cost, ATK, DEF, resource points, endurance points, and so on. It can be a lot to take in, especially the first time you see a new card. Therefore, whenever possible, we try to “cheat” a little and sync up the numbers.
For example, when designing a plot twist that modifies a character’s ATK and/or DEF, I prefer to see it affect only the character’s ATK, affect only the character’s DEF, or affect both the character’s ATK and DEF equally. That is, I’d much rather see a modifier give a character +2 ATK and +2 DEF than one that gives +3 ATK and +1 DEF. This is primarily because while the game expects players to make a certain amount of calculations, I believe it’s much easier to track modifiers that pump equally.
Keep in mind that this is just my opinion. Some members of R&D (especially developers) don’t want to give up the potential design space of variable numbers, and occasionally we do make a card like One-Two Punch (which at least has a name that reminds players of what it’s doing . . . maybe someday we’ll do Two-One Punch).
There are other places where I like to see consistent numbers. Take Daredevil, Protector of Hell’s Kitchen for instance. Pay 2 endurance and he gets +2 ATK. Nice and simple. While I wouldn’t find it super-jarring if the cost to pump him was different than the amount he gets pumped (and we often do make powers like that), I find it extremely smooth that Daredevil’s controller gets to decide if he or she wants to spend the 2 endurance to cause 2 more points of breakthrough. Either way, the players’ relative endurance remains the same, but Daredevil’s controller has the option to “up the clock,” so to speak. On the other hand, if Daredevil’s power cost only 1 endurance, its use would be a no-brainer, and if its cost were 3 endurance, its use would be relegated to rare cases.
Old Power, New Context
Starring Yelena Belova ◊ Black Widow
As I discussed in my preview article, Yelena Belova takes the familiar Charaxes mechanic and adds to it the power of the hidden area. Putting an old power in the new context of the hidden area shines a spotlight on both. Players see how this new aspect of game play (the hidden area) forces them to go back and reevaluate what has come before.
A related issue that has more to do with set aesthetics than individual card aesthetics is redoing similar mechanics in a new format. For example, the value of a card like Stopped Cold changes greatly depending on the amount of flight in a given Sealed Pack environment.
Old Context, New Power
Starring La Nuit, Co-Starring Wake the Dead
Take a look at La Nuit. Does he remind you of anyone? No, I don’t mean his picture. I mean his mechanic, silly. C’mon, who else is 6 ATK/9 DEF and helps your entire support row? That’s right! Blob!**
While in the front row, both characters help out your support row guys. This means that they’re both good with ranged teammates and against flying opponents. It also means that they often have a big bull’s eye on their stomachs.
I really enjoy a card that takes a familiar context (helping out a support row teammate) but gives it a new power. It helps to convey that “everyone old is new again” feel that is a hallmark of expandable games.
Another example of that is Wake the Dead, a card that takes the familiar context of character search with the new criterion of checking your KO’d pile. Depending on how you look at it, this could also be an example of “old power, new context,” in that this mechanic takes on a very different power level when tied to a team that has great interactions with the KO’d pile.
Okay, it’s been like 1200 words and I still haven’t made fun of Humphreys. I’m getting there, I swear . . .
Connected Powers
Starring Punisher, Jury, Special Appearance by Ghost Rider, Johnny Blaze
There’s a tendency to pack too much stuff onto an individual card. This happens for several reasons. Sometimes it’s because a given comic character has several different superpowers, and it’s natural to try to capture all or most of them, rather than focus on one specific aspect of the character. Other times, it’s because a designer simply wants to “go wild” and fill up the card. (This is most often the case with new designers, as you can see on a majority of the homebrewed cards players come up with.)
While in general I prefer to see simple, one-dimensional powers, when the time comes to make a multi-power card, I really want the powers to be connected in some way (via synergy, flavor, or even opposition).
Punisher, Jury is a great example of a character with synergistic powers. It’s true that the synergy is one-way—usually his first power leads into his second. Nevertheless, it’s a neat, elegant card.
Ghost Rider, Johnny Blaze’s three different powers aren’t really synergistic, but they’re all connected through flavor. If your opponent is ahead in a particular aspect of the game, Ghost Rider wants vengeance.
Bad in a Normal Context
Starring Anarchist, Man of the People
Be honest. If you didn’t know anything about the X-Statix’s “One Character to Rule the All” strategy, you’d think the designers of Anarchist were nuts. I mean, it’s one thing to make it a pure drawback (that is, non-optional), such as, “When Anarchist comes into play, KO all other characters you control.” But that’s not what’s going on here. It is optional, and thus not a drawback. In fact, in the right circumstance, KO’ing the rest of your team is exactly what you want to do. I remember that at some point in development, KO’ing your team gave Anarchist a small bonus, but it was later decided that the “One Character” strategy was cool enough to give the card the simpler, more elegant, crazier-looking power.
Okay, that’s all I’ve got for today on design aesthetics. Of course, much of the above is based on opinion, and I’d love to hear what you have to say on the topic. Let me know at dmandel@metagame.com.
Tune in next week for a trip down memory lane. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention . . . Dave Humphreys is crappy.
* A cycle of cards usually includes several cards that have all but one variable “locked in.” For example, let’s say we made four different plot twists, one for each of four different teams, that give an attacker +3 ATK and flight. Now, one of the teams excels at causing endurance loss, so we add, “If the attacker has the [team name] affiliation, each of your opponents loses 3 endurance.” Another team excels at removing breakthrough, so we add to that team’s card, “If the attacker has the [team name] affiliation, defenders lose reinforcement and can’t gain reinforcement this attack.”
**Yes, of course Blob was errata’d so that his power is only turned on while he’s visible. That’s to prevent an unfair lockdown of the game. La Nuit’s power might be good when he’s hidden, but it doesn’t lock the game.