Talk:Mario Bros. deck

This reminds me of the Platform Game deck (which I should upload since nobody else will) Zaratustra 16:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

That doesn't really surprise me since Mario is pretty much the original platformer. Just about anything related to a platformer would also relate to Mario. MagiMaster 17:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

CashCrazed, thanks for sorting the cards. I was planning on doing that myself later. MagiMaster 15:41, 26 March 2007 (BST)

Water Levels

I have Soda Lake as an underwater location for the moment, but for the flying fish (etc.) I need an overwater level too. Does anyone know how these should be dealt with? Should Soda Lake be under or overwater? Either way, what should the other be? MagiMaster 02:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Cheese Bridge. Zaratustra 04:40, 26 March 2007 (BST)

That sounds good. I'll make that the over water level for now, and leave Soda Lake the under water level. MagiMaster 15:25, 26 March 2007 (BST)

Victory Condition

So, the only way to win is to play Princess Rescue when Bowser's Castle is in play? Zaratustra 04:40, 26 March 2007 (BST)

Yeah, on the last Level. I added a question under 'other thoughts' about whether Levels should be for the whole game or each player. MagiMaster 15:25, 26 March 2007 (BST)

I'm pretty sure neither player will play Bowser's Castle on the last level if they don't have Princess Rescue to play immediately after. Zaratustra 19:05, 26 March 2007 (BST)

Hmm... that's a good point and a very good argument for using personal Levels. A player might still play Bowser's Castle if they're on the last level, but their opponents aren't. Do you have any suggestions on this though? MagiMaster 19:35, 26 March 2007 (BST)

Global or Personal Levels?

Having everyone use their own levels but share the same locations doesn't really make sense. Then again, if everyone is on the same level, nothing really matters at all until the last level where winning becomes possible. You could play 50 levels and there wouldn't be any tension in the game until the 49th at best. CashCrazed 01:41, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Yeah but despite it not making sense, I think it's the most playable. It will also slow the game down, since three Levels for three players would be about the same as seven global Levels. MagiMaster 04:47, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Scope?

Which Mario games does this deck cover? It seems to draw most of its cards from Super Mario Bros. and Super Mario World, with a few from other oldskool Mario games. Which, if any, newer games should be allowed? Super Mario 64("Lost Cap")? New Super Mario Bros? ("Blue Shell") Paper Mario? ("Super Hammer") What about older games, such as Donkey Kong?

So far I've been using Mario 3, Super Mario World and Paper Mario: TTYD for most of the cards I've been making. Basically though, those are just the ones I'm most familiar with. The only restriction I've had in mind was that all the action should take place in the Mushroom Kingdom (as opposed to Isle Delfino or Rogueport). If yall want though, we could use those for locations too. (Actually though, I think Donkey Kong may be a bit off too since Mario wasn't the hero in that one.) Also, the super hammer and the special hats (from SM64) might make good cards. MagiMaster 16:29, 26 March 2007 (BST)

Well, I was just reading on the Mario Wiki, and it seems like Super Mario World has the best place names. Mario 3 doesn't name any of its levels (although I think fans named the desert Koopahari Desert [from the Wikipedia entry]). MagiMaster 18:00, 26 March 2007 (BST)

Grass Land, Desert Hill, Ocean Side, Big Island, The Sky, Iced Land, Pipe Maze and Castle of Koopa. Zaratustra 19:03, 26 March 2007 (BST)

Should we include Super Mario 2 or not? It supposedly takes place in a dream world. If we included it, there could be cards like Birdo, Vegetable, Phanto, etc. but it doesn't fit all that well with the rest of the series. MagiMaster 19:25, 28 March 2007 (BST)

Actually, I vote that we limit ourselves to Mushroom Planet at least. That would include Rogueport and Isle Delfino though, so we should figure out what part of Mushroom Planet (if not the whole thing) to cover. MagiMaster 19:59, 28 March 2007 (BST)

Well, you made the deck, so it's your call. If I had the choice, I would just make it all the mainstream games (No spin-offs) just because the "Mario Bros." games mean, to me, all the adventure games, none of the spin-offs. Well, that's my two cents, do with it what you want. BM 9:16, 15 April 2007 (PST)

Maybe we should have a list of which games the current cards came from. It'd be a big list though and I don't have time to work on it at the moment. MagiMaster 20:56, 15 April 2007 (BST)

Actually it wasn't very big at all. Although, I really only looked at the name unless I really wasn't sure. Super Mario Bros, Super Mario World, Super Mario Bros. 3, Mario Party, Super Mario 64, Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door, New Super Mario Bros. I probably messed up on some of the cards. If someone could run through the list one more time, that would really help. BM 8:01, 16 April 2007 (PST)

I don't like the idea of having it limited to the Mushroom Kingdom. I think that every Platformer / RPG Mario game should be included. And that's not just because I want to make a whack of Pixl cards (hint hint.) I could go and make them right now, I have the ideas for a whole bunch of non-Mushroom World cards, but I don't want to make them, only to have them shot down for being out of the "Scope." --BM 05:47, 21 April 2007 (BST)

Well, I'm fine with it I suppose. The only game that I can think of off hand that's not on Mushroom Planet is Super Paper Mario. (Mario Galaxy isn't out yet.) Even the Wario games take place on Mushroom Planet. I suppose it wouldn't make much difference then if it was everything vs Mushroom Planet. MagiMaster 06:22, 21 April 2007 (BST)

Specific Cards

Cards by Bucky

Starman

I think Starman should also incorporate the effect of the Tanuki Suit (can't be affected by enemies). Also, how long should Starman's effect last (probably either 1 turn or 3)? MagiMaster 17:52, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Mario doesn't just not get effected by enemies with it, he plows through them at high-speed, killing them on impact. Maybe you should add something like "Action: Every two turns you may destroy 3 enemies." or something. That way, it would be powerful, but not god-modding powerful. BM 9:20, 15 April 2007 (PST)

I changed it's type to Thing and added the effect of Tanooki Suit. I also added a counter so that it'll only stay in play for 3 turns. MagiMaster 18:02, 20 April 2007 (BST)

Keyhole

Should Keyhole destroy the stack of Location cards when advancing? All other methods of advancing do. MagiMaster 16:11, 26 March 2007 (BST)

I added the 'destroy the location stack' effect. MagiMaster 18:02, 20 April 2007 (BST)

Thwomp - Resolved

I checked the history and saw that you made Thwomp but left my name as the creator. I clarified the text a little (Jump Die is the number on the die before any modifiers), changed the color to Thing-blue (000033 looks too much like black, 000044 is probably closer to half-way visually) and put your name on it. (I didn't remember that I didn't make it until I took a close look :P) MagiMaster 04:59, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Minus World

I reworded the card a little. It should have the same effect most of the time, except when Warp Whistle is played. Feel free to change it back if you don't like the new wording. MagiMaster 18:02, 20 April 2007 (BST)

Cards by MagiMaster

Star Road

I don't really like how the math works out for Star Road at the moment, but I can't think of a better way to word it either. MagiMaster 06:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Bill Blaster - Resolved

If you play Bullet Bill and sacrifice it to Bill Blaster on the same turn, you can force someone to discard a card every round without much chance of anyone stopping you. Is this alright, or do I need to change something to make it easier to stop (or something)? MagiMaster 17:34, 26 March 2007 (BST)

You should probably make it so that you have to wait a turn (to symbolize the Blaster not having rapid-fire) and change the words so it says "if the card you sacrifice has Bill in the name and is not this card," incase someone makes another Bullet Bill spinoff enemy. By someone I mean me, but I'll wait until you report back. BM 15:17, 26 March 2007 (PST)

I changed this. MagiMaster 17:31, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Banzai Bill - Resolved

You got your idea from my card, methinks. Not that I mind. For the discard thing, why would someone discard their full hand when they can just discard 3 cards. Unless, you mean if their hands are less than 3 cards. Otherwise the card would have to say "Discard 3 cards to save one thing, or if more than 3 cards are in your hand, discard your entire hand to save both things. BM 15:12, 26 March 2007 (PST)

It's for when there are less than 3 cards in their hand. MagiMaster 17:31, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Thwomp - Resolved

Thwomp is labeled as an Action card, but is coloured as an enemy card, is next to the enemies, and is an enemy in the games. Which is it? BM 16:10, 26 March 2007 (PST)

Bucky actually made Thwomp, but left the wrong name on it. I fixed it up before I realized it was his. MagiMaster 17:31, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Koopahari Desert

I want one location that doesn't really have anything special about it, but should it be this one? I can't really think of anything for this to do (even though it might have more 'Play only here' cards). MagiMaster 19:25, 28 March 2007 (BST)

Super Hammer - Resolved

This card seems sort of ambiguous. Does it only combine with other cards to boost the Jump Check for another destruction? If so, it'll be really hard to play, since you have to perform two Actions on the same turn for this to work. I took it to mean "Destroy target thing if your Jump Check is 2 or higher" when I played, but I just didn't know what to go with. CashCrazed 02:39, 2 April 2007 (BST)

I clarified the text some. See if that helps. MagiMaster 07:38, 2 April 2007 (BST)

Yoshi Egg and Baby Yoshi

I can't seem to get the wording on Yoshi Egg and Baby Yoshi right. I want it so that Baby Yoshi and Yoshi can only be played permanently by using the previous card, but requiring them to all be drawn is a little unrealistic. Does anyone see a better way to write that? MagiMaster 19:34, 9 April 2007 (BST)

Here's a suggestion for Baby Yoshi, which you can adapt to the other two. It's clearer, but ends up being slightly longer.Jtwe 20:38, 18 April 2007 (BST)

When this card comes into play, destroy a Yoshi Egg you control or destroy this card. Reduce your Jump Check by 1.
Action: Destroy target enemy and add a counter to this card.
Action: If this card has at least 3 counters, you may search the deck for a Yoshi card, put it in your hand, and reshuffle. Then, you may play Yoshi.

I don't know... I'll leave it alone for now. If anyone else comments, I'll probably change it though. MagiMaster 18:02, 20 April 2007 (BST)

Cards by BM

Bullet Bill - Resolved

I'm not sure about having a player roll a Jump Check in the middle of someone else's turn. I made the Jump Check at the beginning of the turn to keep the amount of rolling down. Does anyone else have an opinion on this? MagiMaster 23:41, 25 March 2007 (BST)

I fixed it so it's the last Jump-Check. I really don't know what sounds good what shouldn't be done etc. regarding card games as I haven't played one in a while. Sorry about that. I don't usually make big contributions to things, so I'm glad you helped clarify on that. I changed it already, tell me if it needs more fine-tuning. BM 19:47, 25 March 2007 (PST)

Do you choose what they lose, or do they? I'll rewrite the card for now, but change it if you don't think I got it right. MagiMaster 15:25, 26 March 2007 (BST)

Spade Game - Resolved

So Spade Game lets you look at the cards from the opponents hand as well? 'Look at three of the opponents cards and maybe draw three cards' seems a little powerful. Maybe instead you could have 'Draw three cards. If they are all the same type, keep them, otherwise discard them.' MagiMaster 23:41, 25 March 2007 (BST)

Your idea sounds a bit better, but they should shuffle the deck after so people don't know what card the next 3 people are going to have. By The Way, I'm totally fine with you editing my cards, as long as you don't totally change what I'm doing with the card. Sorry about that. I don't usually make big contributions to things, so I'm glad you helped clarify on that. I changed it already, tell me if it needs more fine-tuning. BM 19:52, 25 March 2007 (PST)

I'll rewrite that card to be a bit clearer. Let me know if I didn't get it right. MagiMaster 15:25, 26 March 2007 (BST)

Warp Whistle

I like the idea, but I think the text needs some clarification. I don't know how what's written should be played out. MagiMaster 23:43, 25 March 2007 (BST)

Sorry about that. I don't usually make big contributions to things, so I'm glad you helped clarify on that. I changed it already, tell me if it needs more fine-tuning. BM 19:43, 25 March 2007 (PST)

The Location cards in the stack are the ones that have already been played. The other Location cards are in the draw pile. Do you mean 'Take the top three cards in the Location stack, discard two and put one back in play' or 'Draw three Location cards, discard two and put one into play'? MagiMaster 15:25, 26 March 2007 (BST)

I meant 3 location cards from the stack. I probably wasn't reading the rules clear enough, sorry. BM 7:41, 26 March 2007 (PST)

Alright. Just one more question. Why lay the stack out face-down? You can see all the cards in the stack at any time. (It's not like the draw pile.) If you follow the card text exactly, then what happens to all the other cards? Your original text read more like 'Destroy two of the top three Locations'. Sorry for all the questions, but it's hard to understand some stuff like this when it's just text. MagiMaster 16:06, 26 March 2007 (BST)

Forget the Face-down part, I'll change it. BM 15:03, 26 March 2007 (PST)

Alright, but what happens to the rest of the cards? Do they just go back under the new Location? MagiMaster 00:24, 27 March 2007 (BST)

If you mean the other cards from the Location Pile, they stay unharmed. If you mean the 2 losing candidates, the card says they are discarded. BM 16:48, 26 March 2007 (PST)

Ok, I see what it does now. It's about the same as saying 'Destroy any two Locations in the stack and move any other to the top,' right? MagiMaster 04:47, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Yeah, pretty much. BM 10:28, 14 April 2007 (PST)

Is there any particular reason for destroying two things in the Location stack? (Was there something you had in mind for that effect?) If not, would you mind if I rewrote Warp Whistle to just move a card to the top of the Location stack? MagiMaster 19:16, 18 April 2007 (BST)

I changed the text, but kept the 'destroy two Locations'. MagiMaster 18:02, 20 April 2007 (BST)

Bowser's Overkill - Resolved

What happens if you have exactly 5 enemies? MagiMaster 15:39, 26 March 2007 (BST) I'll go fix to 5 and over enemies. It was late, I missed some things. BM 7:43, 26 March 2007 (PST)

Buzzy Beetle - Resolved

I had already made a Buzzy Beetle card. Should we combine them, or do you think one works better? (BTW, you should at least add Blue Shell to the list of possible cards.) MagiMaster 04:51, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Well, there are three different effects between the two cards: 'Play only in Vanilla Dome', 'cannot be destroyed in Vanilla Dome' and 'spawns a Blue Shell'. I figure any two would be good enough, but which two? (Or do you think all three would be better?) MagiMaster 19:29, 28 March 2007 (BST)

'Play only in Vannila Dome' and 'spawns a blue shell' IMO. [User:BM|BM] 15:14, 30 March 2007 (PST)

I edited the two together now. See what you think. MagiMaster 03:47, 31 March 2007 (BST)

Blue Shell

Can you clarify what it means 'you can make your Thing cards invincible'? Is that a lasting effect, or is it just for one turn? MagiMaster 16:38, 3 April 2007 (BST)

It's lasting, but they can't attack. It's supposed to be like hiding under the shell. BM 10:30, 14 April 2007 (BST)

Right now, Blue Shell is an action with a lasting effect. This gets really confusing during play. Should this be a thing that can be destroyed to destroy an enemy? Should it be played onto what it's making invincible or should it make everything invincible? MagiMaster 19:15, 18 April 2007 (BST)

I made it a Thing and made it so that it only protects one other Thing. I think that protecting all of your stuff may be too powerful even if you can't use actions while it's out. Right now, you can still destroy the Blue Shell though. I'm not sure if that should be possible or not. MagiMaster 18:02, 20 April 2007 (BST)

Caps

Should those cards be Things? Actions with lasting effects can be very confusing. (I have trouble remembering effects that are only delayed one turn.) I think it's best to stick to the idea that you can know the whole state of the game by looking at what's currently in play. MagiMaster 03:00, 20 April 2007 (BST)

Aren't those my cards. >=*( Oh well. Anyway, I think the whole Power-Up system is confusing. We should probably make it so that Power-ups are their own card, to avoid confusion or Power-Ups/ Special Moves because I don't know what to do, because I wanted the Cap's and all the Other Power-Ups to be the same. If you made a Power-Up Type, things would be easier. Maybe "Only Playable if you have an enemy or other creature in play. --BM 14:59, 20 April 2007 (BST)

Oops. Anyway. I don't know what you mean about the Power-Up system. There isn't really such a thing as far as I can tell. Power-Ups are just cards that help you right? The deal is, both Actions and Things can be Power-Ups. The main difference is that an Action is something that happens and is done with and a Thing has lasting effects. Blue Shell and all three Caps have lasting effects, so they should be Things. Cards like Spade Game and 1-up Mushroom don't, so they're Actions. MagiMaster 15:20, 20 April 2007 (BST)

I changed the types (and colors) to Thing. I also clarified the text a bit. Hopefully I didn't change the meaning too much. Specifically, I changed "when this is discarded" to "when this is destroyed" since, to me, discarded means from your hand. Also, I removed the note in Wing Cap about flying enemies, since that isn't specified anywhere. If you want, you can mark flying enemies as such and add this back to Wing Cap. MagiMaster 18:02, 20 April 2007 (BST)

Eldstar

I hate to keep asking the same questions, but is Eldstar supposed to be an Action or a Thing? MagiMaster 17:02, 20 April 2007 (BST)

I changed it's type to Thing. MagiMaster 18:02, 20 April 2007 (BST)

Other Star Spirits

Specifically, it seems like Mamar, Skolar, Klevar and Kalmar are extremely powerful. For example, using Mamar/Klevar's ability every turn, no enemy could every do anything. Actually, you wouldn't even have to use it every turn. Skolar's ability is worse since you could just use it every turn and the opponent wouldn't ever be able to do anything. Kalmar's isn't so bad, but you can pretty much count on it wiping out all Enemy cards. MagiMaster 04:25, 21 April 2007 (BST)

I tried to fix things, but I'm not sure if it helped. I made everyone's abilities 'flip a coin' moves and made some other minuscule changes. If we continue to have trouble with these cards, I'll just delete them. Maybe their just too powerful for a card game. --BM 05:23, 21 April 2007 (BST)

Cards by CashCrazed

You Forgot the Princess! - Resolved

I don't mind a card that can take the game back a level, but it'll likely be a very long time between level ups, and this card might prevent the game from progressing at all. Can you think of any way of limiting how often it can be played, such as only during the first few rounds after a level up (or something)? MagiMaster 15:39, 26 March 2007 (BST)

Since I just changed the game to use personal Levels, this card will probably have to be reworded or, maybe, rewritten. MagiMaster 19:38, 26 March 2007 (BST)

Personal levels? In that case, nobody would want their own level to go down, so perhaps it should only affect someone else's. CashCrazed 01:22, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Okay, it only affects the leading player now (assuming personal levels). CashCrazed 21:28, 30 March 2007 (BST)

Glitch - Resolved

I like the card, but can you think of a name that better fits the theme? MagiMaster 15:39, 26 March 2007 (BST)

Chance Time, perhaps? That was the Mario Party minigame that mixed up people's stuff. CashCrazed 01:22, 27 March 2007 (BST)

That'd probably be alright then. MagiMaster 04:47, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Bonus Round - Resolved

Same question as for Glitch. Maybe it could be called 'Special Road'? That was a location in Super Mario World (at least AFAIR). MagiMaster 15:39, 26 March 2007 (BST)

As far as I know, the 1up tic-tac-toe level in Super Mario World was called the Bonus Round. But wasn't the Special Stage part of the Star Road? CashCrazed 01:22, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Huh. I don't remeber what that was called, but the Special Road/Zone/whatever is the area past Star Road. If that was a place in SMW then it'd be fine to leave the name. It feels like there should be something to prevent Bonus Round from staying in play too long, but that might just be me. MagiMaster 04:47, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Blue Shell - Resolved

CashCrazed, I was the one who referenced the Blue Shell in my card. When I made the Buzzy Beetle card, I was hoping that the Blue Shell would be more like the Blue Shell Power-up from New SMB. Could I change it to something more like 'If your Jump Check is higher than 4, you may destroy an enemy. You may make your Thing cards invinsible, but you may not make any action while your cards are invinsible.' Thanks in advance. BM 15:31, 30 March 2007 (PST)

I was going with the Mario Kart version where it damages the leader, but since you made the card that references it, you can go ahead and put in what you want. I replaced my Blue Shell with another card. CashCrazed 00:46, 31 March 2007 (BST)

Backtracking - Resolved

I took off the 'if there is one' part since Actions can't be played unless there's a Location in play. MagiMaster 03:47, 31 March 2007 (BST)

Yoshi Wings

Same question as with Key Hole. Should all 'advance to the next level' cards also destroy the Location stack? MagiMaster 15:20, 20 April 2007 (BST)

I added this. MagiMaster 18:02, 20 April 2007 (BST)

Future Cards

Pipe Maze

I think Pipe Maze should shuffle the Location stack if it's destroyed. I don't know about when another Location is played though (which would cause it to leave play, but not be destroyed). Also, I don't know what else it should do. MagiMaster 19:58, 28 March 2007 (BST)

Play Testing

The deck isn't quite ready for play testing yet, but it's getting close. These issues still need to be resolved before the deck can be used. (Feel free to expand this list if you thing of anything.)

• Blue Shell is still undefined. The card should reference the Blue Shell from New Mario Bros. (I think).

There are also several issues that will probably only be resolved by play testing.

• The victory condition is fairly rare and may slow the game down too much.
• The issue with global vs. individual Levels is unresolved.
• The balance of Actions, Things, Enemies and Locations needs to be checked.
• The balance of discard/destroy actions to draw actions needs to be checked.
• A concrete decision on the scope of the deck will probably be easier to make after playing the game a couple of times.
• Several cards have the potential to be overpowered or underpowered. This is something to watch for during the first few games.
  • These might be overpowered: You Forgot the Princess!, Bill Blaster, Bob-omb, Minus World
  • These might be underpowered: Starman, Warp Whistle, Bowser

If anyone does play test this deck, list any issues you found somewhere on this page.

I predict a shortage of cards. You only draw one card a turn, and there's so many cards that cause discards and so few that cause draws that people will probably be sitting around with empty hands most of the time. Also, there's always the online game area on this site for playtesting Dvorak games. I wouldn't mind doing it there. CashCrazed 21:34, 30 March 2007 (BST)

Do you mean the Dvorak MUSH? I can't find another online play area. MagiMaster 06:06, 31 March 2007 (BST)

Yeah, that's it. Last time I put up a time nobody showed up, but that might just be because I only gave a day's notice, or because the time zone shift made the time awful for people in Europe. But it looks like there's some days already scheduled next week, so let's try then. CashCrazed 08:34, 31 March 2007 (BST)

I'm not sure I'll be able to make it. I can try though. (Of course, I've also got to remember to do so, which is a problem for me :) MagiMaster 21:43, 31 March 2007 (BST)

Okay, I got a tiny bit of playtesting in. Yoshi is just a bit too overpowered. I got him on the first draw and was able to knock out every single thing the other guy played, well, until he had to leave. Tanooki Suit also seems overpowered to me, since a lot of the actions available come from enemies and it'll be hard to do anything to you. CashCrazed 02:36, 2 April 2007 (BST)

Any suggestions? For Yoshi, I could make it so that you had to use the Yoshi Egg to get him. As for the Tanooki Suit, I could make it so that enemy actions prevented you from performing actions. Actually, I'll go ahead and make those changes, but let me know if you have any better ideas, or if these are too much or not enough. MagiMaster 07:43, 2 April 2007 (BST)

Special Rules and Terminology

Would it be a good idea to define some special terms for common game mechanics? (For one thing, what game mechanics are common enough to warrant special terms?)

Two I've thought about are:

• HP n = This enemy comes into play with n counters on it. If it'd be destroyed, remove a counter instead. If there are no counters on it, destroy it instead.
• Armor n = This enemy cannot be destroyed by a player whose Jump Check is n or less. (There's probably a better name for this.)

Right now only Pokey has HP (although Rex and Yux probably would too if they get made), but 1 HP is basically an ordinary enemy. Lakitu, Boo and Bill Blaster have Armor already. If we wanted, we could say 0 Armor is default, but this is a little different than the normal enemy (since it's possible to get less than 1 on a Jump Check).

It'd also be possible to abbreviate this even more by making those two into corner values, but I'm not sure if I'd want to do that. MagiMaster 19:40, 18 April 2007 (BST)

Armor could be a Corner Value, but I think that the amount of enemies in Mario games with 1 HP would probably make it best to have in the card. e.g.

Some examples:

0

Goomba

Enemy

Action: Target player whose last Jump Check was less than 3 must discard a card.

0

Pokey

Enemy

Play only in Koopahari Desert. This card has 3 HP.

5

Lakitu

Enemy

Action: Create a Spiny Token. This counts as an Enemy with 4 armor.

So it's easier for people to make cards IMHO. Then again, would we really need Armor stats. I mean, Mario isn't really Final Fantasy, every hit does 9999 Super Damage, so the enemies shouldn't need an armor stat. --BM 15:12, 20 April 2007 (BST)

It's just an abbreviation for a mechanic that already exists in the game. I fixed the example cards to reflect what is already there. For example, Pokey had the text: "This card comes into play with 3 counters. If this card would be destroyed, remove a counter instead. If there are no counters on this card, destroy it." which is exactly the same as "HP: 3". Right now, Pokey is the only card with HP. Like I said though, Lakitu, Boo and Bill Blaster all have Armor ATM. (Admittedly, Armor isn't the best name for it, but I can't think of a better one.) The question is, is it worth making this change? MagiMaster 15:27, 20 April 2007 (BST)

Just a thought, but we could push this a little more towards the Mario RPG and Paper Mario style. There most enemies had HP and a few had armor. Whether this would be better than the Super Mario World style of things, I don't know. Any opinions? MagiMaster 18:12, 20 April 2007 (BST)

Well, I've played the Paper Mario games, and they really didn't have a very good view on HP. Even the Goombas had like 4/5 HP, but if we're going by Paper Mario/SMRPG it would help you with the Armor problem. Call it DEF, end of story. --BM 23:17, 20 April 2007 (BST)

I supposed DEF is a better name for it. So then, the question is, is this worth the change? In Paper Mario, Goombas may have had 4 HP, but it wasn't hard to do 4 damage in one hit. I suppose I don't really want to completely change the deck at this point without some serious playtesting though, so I'll put this idea on a back burner for now. MagiMaster 04:07, 21 April 2007 (BST)