Team Magic Pile

[cbs42]

Regarding 4-player games, we quickly discovered the wisdom of transferring all cards in your magic pile to your teammate at the end of your turn, then having your teammate do the same for you. This effectively gives you one shared pool of magic to work with which helps prevent magic shortages from hurting your team. Here's the interesting part though ... the tactic is much safer near the end-game for the team that takes the first turn than it is for the second team.

Picture two teams, with player A and B on the first-turn team and players Y and Z on the second-turn team. So the setup is like this:



A B
------
| |
| |
------
Y Z


The turn order is A-Y-B-Z (repeating).

Generally speaking, A and Y will be fighting each other, and B and Z will be fighting each other. Yes, some partner support happens, but the majority of conflict is between opponents directly across from each other.

First-play team: At the end of player A's turn, he passes all magic pile cards to player B. Then Y goes (generally fighting against player A), then player B goes, with the advantage of a fatter magic stack. When B is done, he passes his entire magic pile to player A. Then player Z goes (generally fighting against player B). Then the cycle repeats with player A.

Second-play team: At the end of player Y's turn, he passes all magic pile cards to player Z. Then B goes (generally fighting against player Z), then player Z goes. When Z is done, he passes his entire magic pile to player Y. Then player A goes (generally fighting against player Y). Then the cycle repeats.

There's a subtle but important difference between the two teams.

In the first scenario, the player holding the team's magic stack will get to go BEFORE the opponent across from him, and will pass the stack away before he is in danger of getting attacked and possibly eliminated from the game. This keeps the magic stack with the "safer" player at all times.

In the second scenario, the player holding the team's magic stack must wait until AFTER the opponent across from him goes. If the player across from him eliminates him, the entire team's magic stack goes bye-bye before it can be passed, leaving the sole remaining teammate not only outnumbered 2-to-1, but also without any magic.

This presents an end-game advantage to the team who went first. If I'm on the second team, and I think my partner might not survive the round, I'm motivated to not pass him my magic, for fear of losing it all. But by denying him my magic, I'm only decreasing the survival odds of the already-endangered teammate.

I think there needs to be a solution to this issue. It doesn't seem right that a totally random dice roll before the game starts should present an end-game advantage. Our house-rule solution will likely be to have a "team magic pile" in 3 and 4 player games. The team magic pile is NOT eliminated when a summoner dies. This means that the second team enjoys the same magic pile protection advantage that the first team does.

Does this seem like a fair solution to the problem?

[Jexik]

Castle. ;)

Put walls on your teammate's half of the board, and/or move your summoner there too if your team goes second. I always prefer an in-game solution. Especially in the earlier parts of the game, a team magic pile would take away some of the strategy of what to do if one or both of your opponents have Magic Drain in their decks.

[cbs42]

I always prefer an in-game solution.
Generally I agree. If this was an issue that affected both teams I would totally agree, because it would just be a strategic/risk consideration that every player would have to account for. But this arbitrary lopsided disadvantage for the second team is something that the game system itself should handle.

This effect isn't an intentional feature of the game system, it's a side-effect. Correct me if I'm wrong, but when Colby was designing the team rules, I doubt he thought, "I need to make sure that it's riskier for the second team to share magic."

[Aldin]

Generally speaking, A and Y will be fighting each other, and B and Z will be fighting each other. Yes, some partner support happens, but the majority of conflict is between opponents directly across from each other.

<snip>

Generally I agree. If this was an issue that affected both teams I would totally agree, because it would just be a strategic/risk consideration that every player would have to account for. But this arbitrary lopsided disadvantage for the second team is something that the game system itself should handle.

To expand on what Jexik said, I think the answer to part two is right there in part one. Y and Z can take advantage by shifting their attack to "the other front". In fact, having Walls on both fronts makes life significantly more complicated for your opponents since either could be threatened at any point on either turn. Once there is no longer an artifical distinction between "my" side of the map and "my partner's" side of the map this problem disappears entirely.

[SupaGerm]

I generally agree that in-game solutions are the best, especially when you consider that if you play enough games between the teams, the luck should even out over time. Even if one team has the advantage in the first game, the other team may have the advantage in the next. Card-based games always come down to luck at some level, anyway, and the real skill is in doing your best to minimize the randomness to the best of your ability (like using walls to herd your opponents as Jexik and Aldin said).

I only see this as a potential issue during a single elimination tournament, where you don't have as much time to compensate for bad luck. In that case, what if the turn order reversed after each cycle? For example, it would start A-Y-B-Z, then continue Z-B-Y-A. Players A and Z would always take back-to-back turns, and it gives incentives to not always pass your stack.

The following example assumes that you will typically keep your magic if you are next on your team to act. In the example, B keeps his magic even though Z is going to attack him twice. If B wanted to keep his magic safe, he could pass to A, but would then have no magic on his own turn after Z's double turn.


A attacks Y (no magic), passes B
Y attacks A (no magic), passes Z
B attacks Z (magic), keeps magic
Z attacks B (magic), keeps magic
--------------------------------
Z attacks B (magic), passes Y
B attacks Z (no magic), passes A
Y attacks A (magic), keeps magic
A attacks Y (magic), keeps magic
--------------------------------
A attacks Y (magic), passes B
Y attacks A (no magic), passes Z
B attacks Z (magic), keeps magic
Z attacks B (magic), keeps magic
--------------------------------
(repeat)

In the first turn, B and Z are each attacked when they have magic (one "unsafe situation" per team).

In subsequent turns, it works out so that the players attacked while they have magic alternates between ABY and BYZ. Given an even number of turns, each team is attacked when they have magic an equal number of times. You are also more inclined to hang on to your magic, so you can use it on your next turn.

It sounds confusing at first, but if players A and Z remember to always act twice, it should be easy after a round or two. Think of them as "team leaders." Kind of a neat play dynamic as well, as it allows you to press the attack.

[Jexik]

One other thing I was thining about while driving about today:

when a summoner dies, losing that summoner is a lot more important than whatever magic he may have had in his pile.

[Truth]

We actually never discovered the pass your whole magic pile tactic until after the game was already in print. I didn't even think about the problem that cbs has presented. I think the easiest solution is just to allow any magic in a destroyed players pile to be shifted over to their remaining teammate. Obviously it is too late to write this into the rules, but perhaps I can come out with a suggested tournament guidelines and include it. Others can always include the rule in their casual games too.

[nyphot]

Great! I like this rule a lot... I think it makes it a lot easier for the remaining summoner to stay in the game...

I realize that it changes strategy somewhat, but it makes a lot of sense to me.

Thanks, truth, for being responsive as always!

[paradox22]

I think the easiest solution is just to allow any magic in a destroyed players pile to be shifted over to their remaining teammate. Obviously it is too late to write this into the rules, but perhaps I can come out with a suggested tournament guidelines and include it. Others can always include the rule in their casual games too.

Nice! I really like that ruling!

[XCoconutMonkey06x]

I don't really think this is much of an issue. I mean, in Magic, first player gets the advantage to play spells/mana first and swing first come turn 2. Same kind of goes here. first player may get that bonus magic pile move but they also suffer though in card draw and initial movement. Just my .2 cents. :p