At this point youve played with your new deck some, so you have an idea of how it works with the originals. Playtesting is the only way to test your newly constructed deck, but it can be hard to pin-point whats wrong (or not quite right) with your deck. If its boring, the deck probably doesnt have anything new to offer; if its annoying or confusing, it probably has too much new. If it seems too powerful or too weak, its probably on the right track but needs some tweaking. Even experienced designers hit speed bumps in balancing new mechanics or elements. Striking a balance between new ideas and old is the only way to find balance for your new deck with the originals. There are two main categories to look at when editing your deck: elements and mechanics.

Elements are the bones of your deck: which basic deck you use, the talent card distribution, each characters health, and similar statistics are elements of your deck. The first thing you need to determine is if there are any new elements to your deck. Technically speaking, the custom basic decks are new elements, but theyve seen enough use from the various designers that you can consider them standard. (But you should be aware even the custom basic decks are subject to change, as Aqua and Orange have at differnt times.) A new basic deck, a non-standard health value, a shield health track, more than two minor characters (or no minor character) are all examples of common new elements that you should look at first when considering changes to your deck.
Ask yourself, is the new element youve added necessary, or can it be accomplished using an element that already exists? A good example of this is the Yellow++ or Lime deck discussion: at what point is the minor differences between Yellow decks relevant enough to warrant a new color and are such minor differences even worth mentioning as separate decks?

Another good example is shields. To date there is still no commonly accepted way to represent shields in Epic Duels, so adding your own is fine, but before you do you should be aware of what came before, not only so you dont needlessly repeat someone elses mistakes, but so you can improve upon others ideas. Once youve decided your new element is necessary, do what you can to determine how well it fits with the original rules. I think we all agree, a new basic deck of all A5/D5 cards is not in balance with the original decks, but a red deck for minor characters is quite reasonable, as long as it fits the aesthetic. Likewise, the of the original characters, 20 health is the most any character has, but if you were to design a deck where the main character does damage to his opponent by damaging itself, it might be reasonable to have a 25 or 30 health character. Solitary new elements (such as a new basic deck) are easier to incorporate than elements that are reliant on mechanics to balance them (as a 30 health character would be).

A mechanic is a physical process described or implied in the rules, such as comparing attack and defense values to determine damage, moving the health indicator down the health track, rolling the die, and the process of moving. Mechanics are the process of playing the game. A new mechanic is also new element, but a new element does not necessarily include a new mechanic. Adding new mechanics is hit or miss. Sometimes people will respond well to your idea, and sometimes not - it's a matter of preference you as a designer can do little about. The above example of shields is also an example of a new mechanic, because shields also requires a change or addition to the rules, whereas a high health value or new basic combat cards do not. Invisibility, interactive terrain, single-character decks, and using cards to measure area of effect are all examples of new mechanics.

When playtesting, be aware of how your new mechanic plays. How much does it get used? Whether a little or a lot is irrelevant, depending on your intent with the new mechanic, but you can judge how much its used by comparing how often a player uses, or tries to use it. If not at all, then your mechanic is surely not useful, so there is no need to include it. If the mechanic creates an advantage for one player, does the other player have a counter-mechanic, or some way to surmount their disadvantage?

The ways to balance a new mechanic is as nearly limitless as the ways to balance a new element, but it is ill advised to attempt to balance a new anything with another new anything; doing so only confuses the editing process, making each new inclusion nearly impossible to test. That is not to say one deck cannot have more than one new idea, but each new idea must be isolatable, so that if removed the deck can still be used/tested. In the event that such isolation is unavoidable (you have balanced a new mechanic with another new mechanic, for instance) the new deck easily requires thrice the playtesting, to ensure youve struck a balance.

In adding new mechanics, make a note of every aspect of the game your mechanic influences, the more complex the mechanic, the more likely it will not be well received. That shouldnt be a deterrent to developing the new mechanic, if the group you play with enjoys the idea, but when such mechanics are largely unpopular it usually indicates the style of Epic Duels is not being served by your new mechanic.

Often new mechanics are tied to new talent cards, and are triggered by the effects of those talent cards. Effects are the special effects or power text of a talent card, also sometimes called secondary effects. The distinction between effect and mechanic is only important when talking about designing cards and decks; remember a talent card should never have more than 3 effects, (usually only 2), but in all a card has anywhere from 4 to 8 mechanics associated with it, for example: when you draw it, when you play it, when you resolve it, any effects it might have, and when you discard it.

When an effect does something that is not part of the core game, youve created a new mechanic. Generally speaking, a new deck can handle about two new mechanics, before people start to say, Uh thats a little strange. If the mechanic is major, one might be enough, like Invisibility. If theyre relatively minor, new mechanics can be plentiful and people will still like the deck. Scott Hagartys deck, Cyborg Grievous has three new mechanics, and one new element, but because theyre minor effects and they all fit the character, the deck is touted as one of the best custom decks around.

New elements and mechanics aside, it comes down to being able to see in your deck what causes it to perform [insert adverb describing the undesired performance]. There is little in the way of direct instruction one can give about editing your deck; you have to examine how the deck is mis-performing, which elements and mechanics of the deck may effect that performance, and which of those are most likely to have the desired change if you edit them. If the deck dominates the game, you may have too much health/defense, combined with too much damage capabilities, or a new mechanic that is unbeatable, or a new element that is too powerful, or any combination thereof. If your deck does well, but never seems to come out on top, you may need to raise an attack card by one or two points, or increase direct damage by one or two points, or increase health by one or two points, or any number of things. The point is, determine what is wrong with your deck, then determine the most likely solution, then make that change and test it again.

The last bit of advice I can give for editing your decks is to pass it around. Talk with other players in your group, online on the forum, or the yahoo group to flesh out and then solidify your ideas. Beyond playability and balance is the the true goal of making custom decks: to generate or rekindle interest in your game and the absolute best way to do that is with player input.

This is the last Design This! column with a general topic for beginning designers; next issue will start in depth discussion of topics already covered, but with a focus on improving your design skills and methods. Till then!