Rarity of cards

[CCGer]

Well, many people have complains about card rarity ruining a CCG. I will like to share some of my opinions on this. Feedback are always welcomed.   

Okay, firstly I have to agree with many of you guys out there where rarity of cards in a CCG can really be a pain, at least for most of us. In many CCGs, rare cards are usually expensive and are always stronger than the non-rares except for very few special cases. This usually makes the game become something where the richer person will always have better decks to play. This will make the game less fun and in the long run, some players might be force to quite because a lot of money is needed to keep up with the game.

However, in a collector point of view, rarity can be something really fun. If we can always buy single cards with cheap dollars, there will be little or no value to collect cards anymore. (at least this is how many card collectors think)
And of course, rarity in cards can obviously allow the publishing company and game designers to earn more. Now this might sound bad for some of you, but in my opinion, if a game designer can spend his heart and soul to create a good game, that person definitely deserve to earn the money, as long as it is reasonable. Think of this as a kind of reward for that person's hard work and creativity.

Now, the biggest problem is, how are we going to get the best out of two worlds? This means that the CCG players, collectors, publishing companies and game designers will get what they want or need and be happy.   

I remembered playing Duel Masters (the US version) whee all cards, wether it is common or rare are equally usefull. There are no card in that game that can be labelled as useless and of course, here are no overpowered cards as well. I remember building a Water deck full of commons and uncommons (which are cheap) and only a few rares (but not those extremely expensive "ultra-rares". I just use normal rare cards which are only a bit more costly) That deck works well, and I remembered that a similar deck actually win tournaments in my area. This means that at that time, in Duel Masters, a cheap deck can still go up against those expensive decks and perform just as well.

In that case, I suggest a CCG with rarity where all cards wether common or rare must be equally usefull or has equal potential. And I will just hire more famous artist to draw for my rare cards to make them more expensive and has collectable value to please the collectors. In other words, a card is rare for its art and not its usefullness in the game.

Another method is to make the common cards look weak while the rares still look powerfull. However, both of them actually have equal potential in the game. Another words, a rare card can catch a person"s eye easily because it looks powerfull and it has simple concepts, thus easy to use. A combo for rare crds will be very obvious. Onece you see the rare card, you will know what card to use withit easily. As for those common cards, they don't look strong at first glance. But I will make them become important pieces of many decks and give them lots of hidden potential. Their combos are not so obvious and you will actually need to use some creativiy to use them in full potential.

In other words, a rare card will seem stronger and have better art work than common cards, however they are actually EQUALLY POWERFULL and has the same potential to shine.

So, how do you guys think about this? Give your ideas on how to make a CCG with the best of both worlds too.

[Tokimo]

First off: I want to say that to maintain profitability you need to make the game expensive enough that 'rich' players have an advantage (in reality your average rich player just buys cards over going to movies or eating out).

I think the practice of printing cards that are baseline trash is silly. Runeclaw bears needs to go out of print forever, and not be replaced by another 1G 2/2 with no abilities (bring Ashcoat back ^ __ ^)

After that, commons bug me because of how many boosters you need to buy to collect a set where you're opening the booster, taking the rare out, and throwing the rest of the pack into a shoebox to never look at again because you don't need any more.

My personal favorite model eschews rarity at the cost of cards in a pack. I just find the less wastefulness appealing to my 'green' sensibilities. You can keep the whole set about as difficult to collect, or even make it so it takes fewer boosters to collect a larger set (my current goal for Mahoujo).

Still, if only one booster out of ten contains the most popular card, it's price will rocket on the singles market. Another idea I've played with is destroying the singles market by offering fixed rate singles. This is the one that I think damages the game the most from a collection standpoint (Why would I collect this game when people can just buy the singles whenever they want?). On the other hand, I really like this model because it makes sense in a world paradigm of "we don't make you throw away cards" and because if card X is going for $5 (more than  a booster on the singles market), someone is making a profit on opening boosters and splitting them up. Why shouldn't the CCG creator enjoy that profit on their own by selling singles? I'm not sure what the marginal profit on that is, I haven't looked into it (since I'm not at the printing stage yet). I can easily imagine a world where it's just more profitable to sell booster to people who sell singles. (I think I just argued myself out of this... lol)

[sneaselx]

One way to solve the balance would be to make rare and common versions of all cards. Rare cards are functionally identical, but have are different in other ways. For example, different art, slightly different card set-up, different name, etc. These more aestetically pleasing cards would appeal to collectors, because they have more material value, and not throw off the game because they are really the same card.

This could mesh with the flat rate idea. Say, 1 in every 300 card purchased would be a "rare" version. Rare versions could obviously be resold by the players for more than the flat rate, but only collectors would be interested in buying these cards.

[reelhotgames]

The model we are using with SNC:CBG (which actually will have Common, Uncommon and Rare cards - even though it is technically NOT a TCG... ahem.) is that in deck construction you may have 4-2-1 (4 of any Common, 2 of any Uncommon and 1 of any Rare) Thus balancing the power of rares with the ability to pack a deck with them, as it doesn;t work well, because rares in the game are generally hot power cards, but at a high cost factor, which makes it difficult to play in the system.

This helps balance rich boy syndrom with playability, but in essence, I always felt Rare cards should be a little more powerful per se, but also cards that are more advanced to the gameplay - for people who are really skilled, make them more complex cards, maybe one's that don't seem great at first but in the metagame are awesome.

There are many ways to balance rarity vs. ability to obtain.

[Tokimo]

Wow, I really like the 4-2-1 system. Do you mind if I emulate that mechanic?

[Howl]

one game that i know of that really doesnt share that problem entirely is Yugioh ... they reprint rares as commons all the time.and have more than three different rarity types. . soo its really well rounded.. the only problem is .. if u have that rare.. ur losing out on some money if u planne d on selling them. and plus lately yugioh has been making it increasingly easier to gather rares... such as promo packs or their participation in shonen jump magazine.  i personally beleive that magic needs a better way of advertising than just Hobby stores and magazines and a larger promo base. but those are just beliefs .. i am an active player in both games, and magic has deffinetly been the harder game to , Succeed  in due to the lack of "good enough cards" "Dual lands" $50 crucial creatures. yeah

[CCGer]

The model we are using with SNC:CBG (which actually will have Common, Uncommon and Rare cards - even though it is technically NOT a TCG... ahem.) is that in deck construction you may have 4-2-1 (4 of any Common, 2 of any Uncommon and 1 of any Rare) Thus balancing the power of rares with the ability to pack a deck with them, as it doesn;t work well, because rares in the game are generally hot power cards, but at a high cost factor, which makes it difficult to play in the system.

This helps balance rich boy syndrom with playability, but in essence, I always felt Rare cards should be a little more powerful per se, but also cards that are more advanced to the gameplay - for people who are really skilled, make them more complex cards, maybe one's that don't seem great at first but in the metagame are awesome.

There are many ways to balance rarity vs. ability to obtain.

In this case, I think the fact that rare cards are still important doesn't change even though it does balance the money issue during deck building.
I think I would prefer a game where you don't always need rares to make good decks. A good deck can be made out of just commons and uncommons.  Rare cards will still be important in the game, but it is not necessary to have them.

As for Yugioh reprinting rare cards as commons, I think it may ruin the cards collectable value.        This will be bad news for the collectors.

Another way is to just simply make the rare cards cheaper. They will still be more expensive than commons, but they are still reasonable and affordable.

[europeanmatt]

I very much like the living card game model, in which you will purchase an entire playset in a box. it will include 4 of each common, 2 of each uncommon and 1 of each rare, because the game limits your deckbuilding in that way. And then the company sells singles too via online ordering - no card ever goes out of print. No, it will never make as much money as magic, but it will also lose fewer players to wallet burn-out and the frustration of seeing your cards yo-yo in price due to the metagame.

If i ever get to publish my CCG (which is coming along real nice, just 11 days since conception!), this is the model I'd love to follow.

I think that wizards get it right when they put their more wierd cards at rare, helping ease players into the complexity. But it's a $&$%@! when it turns out that you will need a full four of those cards if you want to get anywhere outside your social thursday night group. they're just too darn powerful. and mythics? vomit.

who was it posted that link to addictive behaviour forming and how companies exploit collector/player psychology? total freakshow. mark rosewater knows all about this, but he writes about it in such a way that you think, hmm what a charming and talented designer. Him and all those R&D types, the wiliest crack pushers in the industry.

EDITED FOR PROFANITY!

[reelhotgames]

@europeanmatt - I know this is an open forum and not much rules so to speak, but all I got from your post was expletives. No offense, not trying to make you mad or flame or anything, but I know we have various age ranges here on the forum, so if you'd, with due respect, kindly curb the enthusiastic language it's appreciated.

[europeanmatt]

no problem, sorted it out. You can tell these discussions get me all fired up!

[OnyxVerde]

Fight Klub ccg, the latest offering from Decipher, has a 1-3-3 deckbuilding rule in place (i.e. only one of each Rare, 3 of each Uncommon, 3 of each Common) which attempts to replace the usual distribution paradigm. Also, instead of buying boosters you buy cards by the "kilo". A kilo has one of each card in the set, so it's a lot easier and cheaper to obtain a full playset.

The 1-3-3 rule has been very well received, but im not sure if you can say the same about the Kilo marketing strategy...

[CCGer]

I very much like the living card game model, in which you will purchase an entire playset in a box. it will include 4 of each common, 2 of each uncommon and 1 of each rare, because the game limits your deckbuilding in that way. And then the company sells singles too via online ordering - no card ever goes out of print. No, it will never make as much money as magic, but it will also lose fewer players to wallet burn-out and the frustration of seeing your cards yo-yo in price due to the metagame.

If i ever get to publish my CCG (which is coming along real nice, just 11 days since conception!), this is the model I'd love to follow.

I think that wizards get it right when they put their more wierd cards at rare, helping ease players into the complexity. But it's a $&$%@! when it turns out that you will need a full four of those cards if you want to get anywhere outside your social thursday night group. they're just too darn powerful. and mythics? vomit.

who was it posted that link to addictive behaviour forming and how companies exploit collector/player psychology? total freakshow. mark rosewater knows all about this, but he writes about it in such a way that you think, hmm what a charming and talented designer. Him and all those R&D types, the wiliest crack pushers in the industry.

EDITED FOR PROFANITY!

Well, personally, I don't think the Magic R&D is to be blamed. As far as I know, the job of the R&D is to create cards, and they do not decide how much a card will be sold later. They are given card slots when they make a new set sets, for example in a 200 card set, 100 commons, 60 uncommons, 30 rares and 10 mythic rares. The R&D will have to make cards that fit it the slots that were given to them, probaly by the marketing team or something.

Creating a psychograph to design cards is a smart move to me. You have to understand your players before you make cards and you must make sure the cards are fun to play. That is perfectly true and I think all CCG creators should have thought about something like that.

Of course, I hate the fact that rare cards are always more powerfull while commons are usually too weak or useless. I also dislike Mythic rares. I don't know whose idea is it to create Mythic rares and stronger rare cards, which I don't think it is the R&D since they just create cards to fit in the rarity slots given to them, but I really don't like those people who thought of all these "brilliant" bussiness ideas by making rare cards stronger and stuff.

Like I have mentioned in my previous posts, I think having rarity in a CCG is fine, however, those rare cards should not be the only key cards that will help you win tournaments. Commons and uncommons, if used right, should also help a player to win tournaments as well.
And for those rare cards, the price should also be reasonable so that it is affordable by most players.

Personally, I don't think that the only way to make profit out of a CCG is to make the cards expensive so that it becomes a richman's game. I think if a CCG is fun to play and cheap, there will be more people who are willing to take it up. Since the CCG is much more affordable, that game will have a bigger fan base. And when more people starts buying your cards, you will surely get enough profit. In fact, a cheap CCG can also encourage those richer people to spend more money to collect every card in a set. Another words, your game will appeal to both the richer players and poorer players and since there are rareity of cards, collectors will have some good time too. (Even though cheaper CCG might have less collection value compared to those expensive ones, but I think the problem can be reduced by the amazing artworks on the cards that will give collectors the urge to own them.)

Well, I think it is wether you want to try earning a lot of money one shot by selling an expensive CCG, or earn little by little with a cheap CCG and when the game becomes popular, you start to earn more. I will obviously choose the second choice because I want all kinds of people to be able to afford and have fun playing my CCG.

[Cyrus]

but I think the problem can be reduced by the amazing artworks on the cards that will give collectors the urge to own them.

that is assuming the creator can afford amazing art, being that they won't be making nearly as much money on their ccg, so getting top artists will probably be way out of the budget

[CCGer]

Top artists arent always needed. There are aspiring artists that can make great art too.
We can also make the picture of the cards more shiny like a rare holo in Pokemon!     
Just make sure that those shinny cards won't be too annoying or affect the cards text.

[Monox D. I-Fly]

Another method is to make the common cards look weak while the rares still look powerfull. However, both of them actually have equal potential in the game. Another words, a rare card can catch a person"s eye easily because it looks powerfull and it has simple concepts, thus easy to use. A combo for rare crds will be very obvious. Onece you see the rare card, you will know what card to use withit easily. As for those common cards, they don't look strong at first glance. But I will make them become important pieces of many decks and give them lots of hidden potential. Their combos are not so obvious and you will actually need to use some creativiy to use them in full potential.

I read on TV Tropes that it is the opposite in Magic: The Gathering. The rarer a card,the more complex it is.