I'm not sure of cost or anything, maybe a generic.

A) Counter spell/enchantment opponent just cast last action. (Limited, lower cost than B)
- Only works on spells or enchantments
B) Counter action opponent just did. (More like MTG, higher cost than A)
- Think the way Counterspell works in MTG

_________________
Card List

I think on the whole, we need either more anti-enchantment cards, or some of the permanent enchantments like Entangle need to wear off.

More anti-enchantment would be better, in my opinion, like a counter spell!

_________________
Card List

Ok, I've been thinking a little bit on the cost of a counterspell card. Leaving it the domain generic right now, possibly:

Counterspell
XX1
Counter last actions spell or enchantment.

Reason for two domain levels is because the counter mechanic is pretty powerful.

Then for the improvement on that...

Reverse Time
XX3
Counter last summon, spell, or enchantment played.

Summon being bringing a creature or building into play.

_________________
Card List

There is Negate.
Rolling back spells is problematic but I'm thinking of ways to get the same effect.

Well if I'm reading the game right, the last thing a player did shows on the player box.
Linking that to the actual thing cast could work possibly?

_________________
Card List

heres my rule, counterspells, are for MTG only, they don't play nice from design and play space and almost all casual players hate them. Its one thing that makes MTG different, and ever game does not have to go down the same roads, while as MTG is the first trading card game to have significant impact (there were others before it) it has set the basework, things like tapping are wonderfull design ideas that should not be ignored, and games will always have to give a nod back to magic for some founding princables of design, however games need there own idenity, just as magic was origonaly similar to D&D it quickly defined its own world, creatures, ideas.
As for counterspells this would require you keeping available resource on other players turns and timing issues i don't think the game can handle currently, nor do i think it should try to.
Those of you who wish for counterspells understand there power yet may not understand there unbalance. While a few may be okay, they were in magics beginings, having the ability to construct denial decks is demoralizing to players, resulting in them getting fed up and quitting, and also impracticale for a great deal of aspects to this game, considering you need to be able to see whats going on, they may become completely dead as your opponute just cast his or her enchantments out of your line of sight.
As it current stands there are not a lot of enchantment remove spells, and i think this is a good thing, enchantments, and im refering specificly to those on creatures. Is intrinsicly risky, if your creature should die you've LOST two cards, so the risk of playing them needs to be weight against this. Easy access to enchantment removal will diminish its existance in the game. You know what entangle is an answer to keep a creature in check, the enchantment that protects you from range attacks is a great aid against sylvan, enchantments allow you to nitch your cards better against your opponute, and properly playing them should reward you with victory, having a whole arsonal of enchantment removal simply denies. You should be equaly rewarded for the imagination to forsee your opponutes enchantments and have built in acord. Not every deck or clan should be able to handle every threat, but enchantment remove actualy SHOULD be in each clan. Now i just seemed to make my argument against enchantment remove why do i say it should exist in every clan?
Unlike MTG enchantments are a significant aspect to all the clans, and all the clans use there enchantments, my arguement is not against clans having them, its about how they go about it and how many, no clan should have a ton of them, playing more then 6 in a deck should not be particularly plausable, and i say having each clan have the ability to play one set should more then suffice. But what should each clan have for enchantment removal? Dwarves can unmake it, makes sense, dwarves are not overly fond of magic steroiotypicaly in fantasy, except there weapons and armor. But should sylvan have the same blatant destruction, no they shouldn't elves charish magic, and the woodland creatures are often magical beings themselves, dryads for example. elven magic should return it to its owners hand, not destroying it, but casting it aside and out of the way. Theres a clanless card that protects against enchantments within a range, this seems to be very sylvan to me more then clanless, although its general use makes much sense to me. The Dark Ones, how should they get rid of enchantments, maybe they shouldn't at all maybe they gain control over them instead, it would not be always usefull, gain control over black plague? not going to do you any good, but a great deal would, lets see im gonna steal your ranged attack immunity, mwahaha, that seems what dark ones would do, or maybe consume it, make an attack to break the magic, a chance to destroy it when they attack a creature or similar.

Back to a previous point, anything you design that undos another players work is unfun, to make it abundant is frustrating, we play games to go to worlds were we can make a difference, we control, we conquer, we save, we do it. Thats whats great about playing a game You can do something, facing lots of denial type effects is to real world, no one wants to be told no you can't all day. No one likes cleaning there house just to find it all a mess the next day, the same is for the game, you worked hard setting up your rolling bolder with fear and lure effects (which is so awsome btw) you don't want your plans getting casualy wipped aside, you want your opponute to work in order to beat your cleaver trick, although yes we all long to crush our opponutes effortlessly, you know that its little fun to do so repeatly, fun lies in the challange.

Well if it isn't obvious i spend a lot of time on game theory and what players enjoy, as i actualy design games myself and am an avid player of both tactics and card games such as MTG so i understand the design and play elements of the game, so don't be hasty to give yourself all the power in the world, cause theres always another player that can afford more and better cards, so in order to avoid the game devolving into a spending contest and upsetting the great deal of players, make sure things are balanced, unique and fun cause thats why were here, to have fun.

One point I see you made is countering something out of sight. Easy fix. You can only counter things within your sight.

You're saying that the counterspell mechanic in MTG makes games unfun, but I have to disagree. Always in a magic-type (not MTG-type, but actual "magic") game there's a way to counter something an opponent did. It'd be completely pointless to have all this power, when you can't even do anything once it's cast.

Another point you made is denial decks. This is more toward MTG than FW as the counterspell mechanic is on a LOT of cards in MTG. I'm saying this is only two cards at most, and with a 3 per deck, you have 3 counter spell/enchantment cards and 3 counter anything. It's an effective way to keep the balance of power. Not only do you HAVE to cast the counter spell immediately on your next turn, but if you don't have the flux to cast it you're screwed.

You also said that when you enchant a creature, you are running the risk of losing two cards. Here's my take on this situation. You enchant a creature (1 card played), I counter (1 card played). We both lose one card and some flux.

As the game is still in beta, things will change as it grows like any other game. If they decide to try it out and in the end it's a flop, they just remove it.

_________________
Card List

A lot of people find it unfun, im not saying that it isn't for some people, but on MTG countermagic is one of highest reasons for people quiting, (out of individual cards stasis is the most despised) Its also very technical in aplication, the beginning MTG doesn't know how to use it properly, much less how to get around it.

There are dozens of games with no counterspell mechanic, pokemon, dual masters, theres three or four that come to mind that havent existed in more then a decade

Yes if you disenchant an enchantment its one to one, but if you kill the creature its two for one, or with a creature 0 for 2 give or take damage.

But yes the big issue is denial decks as a whole and these are not just counterspell, a creature kill deck could be very dangerous as well here, but countermagic is the pinacle point

Pokemon didn't have "magic" it had abilities and crap like that.

I can't speak for Duel Masters, but it was basically the same as Yu-Gi-Oh! and that had counters.


I'm not asking for a slew of cards that counter stuff, I'm asking for like one or two. It's an idea that may or may not work in the long run, simple as that.

_________________
Card List