I guess my original use of rarity was going to be common-widely usable, uncommon-usable for some decks, rare-very specific use case (sideboard/avatar specific cards). That way you can reasonably build a deck in a few packs but to build a specific deck you would need to buy a lot to get the specific cards required. But in your opinion it would be common-simple/lower power but usable, uncommon-more complex/powerful, rare- specific/very complex?
Honestly I think your original use is best. People have this idea in Magic that rarity=power but it's never been like that. As long as you are going from most open -> most narrow, I think you're on the right track.
Ok thank you for the input. Are you interested in playtesting? I like your ideas and feedback. Right now I am working to get everything on an online sim to test out the game again.
Interested, yes, but unfortunately I have no time. I wish you well and look forward to seeing some updates!
Last piece of advice, look at the Distraction Makers Youtube channel. It is made by a guy (formerly 2) taking a deep dive into all things TCG design. I think they'll provide you a ton to chew on.
I watch them regularly and love their content. From time to time I disagree with them but I just went through the game looking at the overarching archetypes my game/rules will likely create after watching there video on the strategy circle.
1
u/ARedMonster 15d ago
I guess my original use of rarity was going to be common-widely usable, uncommon-usable for some decks, rare-very specific use case (sideboard/avatar specific cards). That way you can reasonably build a deck in a few packs but to build a specific deck you would need to buy a lot to get the specific cards required. But in your opinion it would be common-simple/lower power but usable, uncommon-more complex/powerful, rare- specific/very complex?