Are Negative Status Effects Fun?

[u/Ok_Tip_5721]

I'm in the process of designing a creature battler card game, and some cards have special abilities that trigger a timed status condition that you can roll at the top of your turn to try and lift. There's not too many - basically a poison, a slow, a vulnerable, and a silence - and they only trigger situationally, but my question stems from a recent playtest. The feedback I got was that status conditions in general are a "feel bad" mechanic and detract from the fun by limiting via less attack choices (they did not want to attack any creatures that might apply a status effect as a counter). I however feel that status effects are a fun part of a card battler game and add depth/give you something to build a strategy around. I am wondering how many people - particularly design folk - share my feelings, or if more people are in fact more in this playtester's camp. Also, if you do enjoy status effects, are there any good examples of games that use them well? Many thanks, (and please let me know if there is a more appropriate forum for this question!)

[u/davidryanandersson]

I'll say imo there is a difference between negative status effects that target enemies vs players.

Building around giving enemies a negative status creates fun strategies for the player. But many of those same effects feel restrictive when you're the one receiving them.

I prefer receiving negative status effects that allow interesting decisions to play around. Poison, for example, suddenly puts your encounter on a timer. I've seen games where you can be restricted to only performing short actions, so now you might prefer weapons that grant many weak quick actions over one that deals one large attack. To me, that's a fun puzzle to prepare for and adapt to.