CCDD 080811—Goblin Bangchuckers

Cool Card Design of the Day
8/8/2011 - Today I want to talk about Goblin Bangchuckers. I do intend to write about my experience at GenCon, but I want to do it right and that means later. In short, it could have gone better but it was absolutely worth the trip.

Why is a card as bad as Goblin Bangchuckers worth discussing? Because it's not the weak play value that I dislike, it's the weak design. Let me clarify before I go on: it's okay to make a card that's bad in terms of how much it helps your deck/strategy. (In fact, it's vital to the game that there be a few bad cards to give new players their first easy lesson in card evaluation.) It is not okay to design a card that no one likes.

That's a broad claim, so I'll justify its components so you can tell me what I missed. Goblin Bangchuckers is not for Spike because it's not efficient, it doesn't reward skill (much), and it has a low expected value in terms of resource advantage. It wants to be for Timmy, providing a suspenseful moment and an exciting experience, but it falls flat because the effect is so marginal. It has some Johnny potential because untapping it infinitely will guarantee you a game win, but the same is true of a great many cards—most of which are more reliable if your combo doesn't go infinite.

Wizards cares about more audiences than just the three psychographic profiles. There's nothing here for Melvin (beyond the untap-before-resolution trick Johnny already found) but it's not a total miss for Vorthos. A lot of folks enjoy zany and/or sadomasochistic goblins and this is both. "Bangchuckers" is also pretty cute if you imagine these dumb little goblins calling their explosives 'bangs' and trying to find better ways to propel them at their enemies. That said, this shtick is drawn from the shallow end of a deeper well and isn't really awesome enough to carry the card on its lonesome.

We also need to consider the hardcore player, the casual player and the new player. Hardcore players would consider running this card in limited if there were a multi-untap card, something M12 conspicuously lacks. Casual players might think this is cute but will be turned off quickly by the downside mechanic. New players, well, they may assume the cost and/or rarity means the card is good and put it in their decks. They'll learn something when it turns out terribly, but—and this is important—it won't be a fun lesson; it will be frustrating and they may even feel betrayed by the game. (There's a column there all to itself.)

Are there players that love cards because they're terrible? Probably a few. Do we need to cater to this crowd? Nope, there will always be something bad and that's what they'll latch onto.

So, how could this card have been made different? If it cost RR, Spike would play it as an efficient body with a corner-case ability. If it dealt 5 damage instead of 2, Timmy would play it for the big boom (as well as Spikes who can get over the randomness). If it didn't require a flip and just straight-up dealt 2 damage to a target and itself, Johnny would take notice (suddenly Spirit Mantle makes this a Shock/turn instead of a shock-every-other-turn-maybe). Here's my proposal:


A few important changes here: It doesn't tap to use its ability. That removes the combo potential (which isn't great) but it also encourages combat, which is always good. More importantly, it means the 'chuckers are never just sitting around waiting to do their thing, they're proactively attacking or at least chump-blocking. It also deals the backfire to you instead of itself now. Not only is that more historically consistent (Char, Jackal Pup, Brothers of Fire, etc) and at least as resonant, it makes for a much more interesting card: After how many failures does it become more of a liability to you than it's worth?

I did waffle a bit on the exact trigger. I didn't like "Whenever ~ attacks" because you can kill any small creature before blockers are declared and it also removes the Juggler's Dilemma (see below). What I really wanted was for it to resolve before damage and after blockers but that wording is pretty wonky: "Whenever ~ blocks, becomes blocked, or attacks and isn't blocked" or "Whenever ~ attacks, after blockers are declared..." Maybe there's a better way.

The biggest problem with this version is that it's no longer a bad card (which we're assuming was a goal of this design). It's still expensive for its body, but the chance of repeated Shocks is promising. Like Fire Juggler, it doesn't read as terribly impressive, but your opponent often has to treat it as a 4/2 in combat. The fact that it can (sometimes) take out a Merfolk Looter regardless of whether the defender blocks or not is actually pretty strong. That raises the point that it's also more interactive because the opponent can block it with a Runeclaw Bear to get rid of it for sure, begging the question "how much are you willing to spend to keep it alive?"

Do you have reasons to like the printed version that I missed? Would you play this version? How would you change Goblin Bangchuckers to give it more meaning?