Monthly Archives: July 2013

RopeCon Preparations

Posted on by
Reply

RopeCon, the largest non-commercial gaming-related event in Europe (or something like that) begins tomorrow. I’ll be there over the weekend, as will many members of our “guild”, including Lauri.

Well, so far it sucks. I was trying to get some sort of grasp on what games I should participate in, but the problem is that the program page is missing events, such as one event I preregistered for. Gladly, I know the organizer, so I could easily get the right time, but I’m sure there are plenty of interested parties, who don’t even know about it, because you can’t find it on the page.

Also, I scanned through the RPGs at the event. Sadly, they are listed in a format with a very poor usability, with all the descriptions on their own individual pages. So, I have to load a bunch of pages to find out what these games are about. Even then, most of the descriptions are poorly written and seem to be missing plenty of information, including the game system in many cases. Also, many of the GMs seem to have gone for a short tagline, which they feel is enough. Mostly, it isn’t. They are just not descriptive enough. They are basically just stating the system in other terms.

One thing I always wonder about: Do the GMs who have “refined” or “developed” a popular system to suit their personal tastes, really think they are marketing game properly by informing us of that? I guess there are some people out there who can really make an existing system better, but even so, trying to make a system better for a con is just not a good idea. There are players out there, who know the system already. If you change it, you lose some of the advantage of using a known system. There is a learning curve to games. Why make players go through it again for some self-glorification? Especially, since we all know most of these changes are generally damaging to the game.

… but hey, I’m going to try and have some fun. I’ll try to make at least three games and I’ll report on them Monday, if not before. Although participating in the games of the guests of honor would be great, I’m not banking on that and my primary goal is to take part in a MonsterHearts game and traumatize someone permanently. There are also a Fiasco and a Dungeon World games, but scheduling everything is hard, because so many of the interesting games either overlap or are on Sunday, which means I probably don’t get to participate in pretty much anything I want to. I can’t really blame anyone… except maybe the GMs who could run more interesting games, so I wouldn’t have to try to juggle the few interesting games.

The State of Gaming Stores (from a Finnish Perspective)

Posted on by
2

Note about my expertise on the subject: I don’t really know much about this specific business, but as an entrepreneur I do know something about business in general. I don’t really know whether I’m qualified to give my opinion on the subject, but as I have said before, why would that stop me from doing so.

Last fall, a new gaming store was opened about a block away from my office. Understandably, I visit it quite often. I try to make FNMs (Friday Night Magic, for those of you not in the know) and buy all the sleaves I need. I go there for comics and to get board games. They do have some roleplaying games, but nothing that would strike my fancy, because, obviously, they are working on a very narrow part of that market, which reflects the more popular items, rather than the items that would interest me, which are pushing the media. Understandably, they can’t cater to my needs in that sense.

I just found it strange that according to all the reports from the US, the brick-and-mortar hobby shops are a dying breed. This shop, on the other hand, seems to thrive, since they have a lot of stuff they just can’t seem to keep on stock. There are always people in the store browsing for something. From what I know, there are more of these new places all over Finland. Even in the smaller towns.

So, if they can thrive (based on my perception, which I hope is accurate), why?

First, they have a very central location. You can’t get much more central in this city than they are. They are below street level, but that doesn’t seem to be a problem, because they are still very visible. Interested people will stop by, because its so accessible.

Second, they have activities. Besides the aforementioned FNM, they draft Magic on Wednesday’s and there’s some other activity for every day of the week, including Warhammer and WH40K, painting, PathFinder Society, board games and probably something else I’m forgetting. Obviously, people who see these things happening are going to be interested. Not everyone, but some. Everyone needs to find their hobbies somehow. Also, when you go there to play, or whatever, there is always going to be some downtime. What do you do with that downtime? I don’t know about others, but I browse. Comics mostly.

Third, they have a good mix of all sorts of stuff. I don’t know anyone who wouldn’t find something interesting in that place. Besides the TCG stuff, the RPGs, the comics, the board games and the miniature games, they have PC and console games, used movies, latex weaponry, movie memorabilia, nerdy books, toys and so forth. If you go in there to buy, lets say, sleaves, there’s a good chance something else will catch your eye.

Obviously, none of these things work on everyone, but they work on enough people.

The business is still probably problematic. Think about how often you can purchase something cheaper from the Internet if you just have the inclination to shop there. Getting a PDF of a roleplaying game is often much handier than the book itself. On the other hand, many people just enjoy handling the item they are going to buy. Even among the younger generations. They also enjoy the social interaction with people with same interests in an environment where everything doesn’t have to devolve into a flame war.

Zombies vs. Vampires

Posted on by
Reply

Today, its the Vorthos in me talking.

Wizards is working on each color having their own “iconic” creatures. They have two approaches: tribes and big mythics. For the big ones, dragon for red is the oldest of these, but angels for white and demons for black have been around for a very long time. Lately, blue has been getting sphinxes and apparently, green is going to be getting hydras for a while now (which is fine with Theros coming up, but I don’t like them long term, unless they find new design space for them – which they probably will, my trust in MaRo is very high). For the tribes, red has had goblins since the beginning, green has had the elves, blue has merfolk, even if they sometimes disappear for lack of water, white has humans and black has zombies.

Well, apparently, black used to have zombies. Its not definite, but vampires are moving in. Now, I don’t really mind vampires. They are cool, if done right (note: not like they have been in different media recently, in MtG, they have been generally done right), but to me, they are better if they are kept special.

In Magic 2014, there are two common zombies (Minotaur Abomination and Zombie Minotaur, creatures closely related to each other) and two common vampires (Blood Bairn and Child of Night). All in all, zombies still win (five to four), but previously vampires were only seen here and there.

For me, Vampires shouldn’t be common. They should be rare. Maybe in some sets, such as Innistrad, where vampires are rampant, you can have a bunch of common vampires, but this isn’t supposed to be a poorly thought-out version of World of Darkness. I’d much rather have just Olivia Voldaren and Falkenrath Noble to show how vampires are powerful beings, who can completely take over the game.

Zombies, on the other hand, can very well be common. They have a tendency to proliferate and once the zombie infestation gets going, they are everywhere. At least that’s how zombies are perceived now.

Of course, it is possible that Wizards had a couple of abilities they wanted on the common level for black. These abilities just happened to feel vampiric, so they just put those abilities on vampires. Child of Night has been printed three times before anyway and Blood Bairn isn’t really new ground either, although it is a new card. Black does have access to plenty of things, which definitely aren’t ‘zombie’, so I guess there’s just a need for the vampires from a creative point of view.

Playing a Cybernetic Space Gorilla Scientist

Posted on by
Reply

Last Wednesday a random group of players from our forum gathered to try out the new version of FATE. We knew it was going to be a tryout session and hoped it was going to be fun.

FATE01

As a player I am not that much into rules-heavy games (and as GM even less). So what I had heard from FATE was actually quite promising. A simple system that allowed the players to contribute to the story and events of the game by creating defining terms.

I read through the first half of the rules (for a “rules light game” it has quite a number of pages) and got quite a good grasp of them. The GM had done the same so luckily we had the combined forces of two players who had almost read the entire rules.

Our GM had prepared an adventure and characters for us beforehand. The basis for the adventure was “Forbidden planet” type of space slipstream. I got to play a gorilla scientist enhanced with cybernetic implants. And damn it was fun.

As MustaJumala said in his earlier post I too like oneshot because the offer you a chance to get crazy. My Aspects (the defining phrases that are the core of your character) were easy to play. Krakatou was deeply concerned about his appearance as an intelligent being while on the other hand he still had his animal side. So I made sure we had a proper tea time after going all [scryfall]Gorilla Berserk[/scryfall] against a hideous space monster.

Our group consisted of the crew of Attila’s Court – a spaceship owned by MustaJumala’s character Captain Attila Moon. In addition to our characters there was a fungi that was living inside a dead crew member and the first mate who was actually a killing machine robot. Your basic crew all in all.

We followed the notorious space terrorist Gorgon (“GORGON!”) to a forbidden planet in hopes of rescuing the princess he had taken captive. Naturally we crashed and had to walk through all kinds of perils to reach the ancient temple of the artificial intelligence that was the reason this planet was off-limits. We fought snailmen and a lovecraftian horror and competed for the affections of the fungi infested colleague.

Just at the brink of epic showdown we got derailed into “conversation” about gaming mechanics.

I’m first to admit that it was mainly my fault. The challenges we had faced had been so demanding and the Fate points we had gained so few that we argued for awhile of what should my character do to get some points. It almost ended up destroying the game but luckily we got it under control. GM gave us some fate points just to keep the game going and to see how much difference they did (this was a try-out session after all).

As my gorilla had an aspect telling me that I had “saving the entire crew almost cost me my life” (or something along those lines) I ended up in a mortal combat with the A.I. Entering the matrix of the planet I wrestled it long enough for my friends to escape the perilous planet.

And just as they exited the atmosphere and thought they were safe a door opened behind them. “Captain Attila MOON!” cried out the space terrorist Gorgon.

Even if we do not get back to these characters it was a marvellous adventure topped with an excellent ending.

Though hopefully next time we are more experienced with the rules…

Team Unified Standard

Posted on by
1

The World Magic Cup (WMC) is just around the corner. For those who don’t know, its an annual competition between national teams. One team member (the captain) is the player in the country with most professional points. The other members are selected through World Magic Cup Qualifiers (WMCQ).

Of course team competition in a game designed to be played one-on-one is problematic. Last year they brought in the team sealed format where the teams receives twelve booster packs to put together three decks. There the team really does matter, even if the members play the matches as individuals. This year, they are bringing in a new team format: team standard.

Team standard is a format where you make standard decks, but you can only have four copies of a card between all three decks. All in all, an interesting idea, which I personally find appealing. Then again, I play monocolored decks in standard. This is just a personal preferance and is partly a budgetary issue. The deck I currently play looks pretty much like a monogreen Innistrad Block deck with full sets of Predator Oozes, Ulvenwald Trackers, Wolfir Avengers, Strangleroot Geists and Wolfir Avengers. So, for me, this is easy. Than again, I’m not the one playing in this event and for the team, I’d probably have to forget my personal inclinations.

However, since there is a limited number of cards which are considered worthy of using as a base for your deck, there are going to be clashes. I’d especially worry about dual lands. That would mean, no two decks can share more than one color. Clinging to this, most problems can be avoided.

I haven’t done the math and I’m not very familiar with all the archtypes currently played in the format, but seems to me that in a field where three color decks rule, finding the place where three players can comfortably play decks they want is not going to be easy.

The format in the WMCQ was standard. Obviously, this is a fine format when you want people who can play standard and know the card pool. However, being able to play standard is far from being able to do the preparations necessary for the team version. Why do we have WMCQs if they are not the way to choose the right people?

Of course, testing deck design skill is very hard. You’d have to have a set of cards not available before the event itself. Netdecking rules. If I was organizing this event, I’d be afraid people would too often come to the same conclusions, because the easy approach to this is to look at a bunch of good decks and find a combination with no overlaps. Also, because of the method of forming the team, in any country larger than Finland, the team is not going to be familiar with each other, so working together might prove to be too difficult for the purposes of this event.

Of course, some countries do have real professionals, who are experienced at working with teams, as captains. They will probably have a huge advantage. Also, they probably have access to people who can solve problems like this.

Or maybe [scryfall]Burning Earth[/scryfall] just changes the face of the format completely and everyone just plays monocolored decks.

Oneshot Report

Posted on by
Reply

In case you haven’t read the first part, read this first.

Ok, that didn’t go quite as planned, but that’s fine, since we didn’t really plan it.

The situation: We had just finished a game and there were people hanging around with nothing to do. Since I was going to cook some food, and others as well, I thought it would be better to use this idea right then, so players can participate as much as they want or are able to.

With seven players, I knew it was going to devolve quickly, but as a small “side event”, it would be fine. I decided against NPC-jurors, because there was already seven people pushing things around and I was hungry.

Therefore, I asked the players the following questions (one question per player):

1. What was the crime? Apparently it was arson-rape-murder. Don’t really know what that is, but that’s not my problem. Its the players problem.

2. Where are we? Medieval times.

3. Our world? With a twist (which was apparently that there was a werewolf among the players, as well as strange edits to the Bible and strange artifacts used in the process)

4. Who’s the accused? The bastard son of the king, which was later changed to the king of Francs.

5. Who was the victim? A local barmaid / prostitute named Hulda.

6. Did the accused do it? No.

7. Why do you want the accused convicted despite his innocence? To keep the royal blood only part of the royal family.

Then I pretty much left the players on their own devices. I actually left the area where the players were. So, once in a while, I’d get all these weird tidbits like one player decided he was the actual guilty party, the player who was the king (who was for some reason on the jury), wasn’t the actual king, some characters may or may not have been brothers of the accused… you know, stuff out-of-control players come up with.

I can’t really say this experiment was successful, but I did manage to eat and everyone was occupied for about an hour. I can’t say I’d run a game quite this freeform again, but maybe close to it. I might even try the jury thing again. Probably will.

NOTE: Just noticed that one the players had already commented on the previous posting. You should probably read that too.

GMing Oneshots a’la MustaJumala

Posted on by
2

On our guild’s forum, there was a request for less MtG-content. Well, not necessarily less, but more like balancing it with other content. So, here goes.

I like oneshots. Campaigns are always difficult. Back in the day, when we were able to do it, we’d mess it up by going too long. Now that we have very limited time as most members of the group have competing commitments, which are often understandably important. Therefore, one good oneshot is great.

Think about it this way: YOLO.

Yes, I hate that too. Its just a catchphrase often used to rationalize acts of random stupidity. But think about the context. I wouldn’t drive around drunk tweeting out ‘YOLO!’ as I get closer to death, but I would play a oneshot thinking ‘YOLO!’ as my character won’t survive the game either way. He or she either dies or gets “archived” in some stack of papers somewhere. Dying in a spectacular fashion is much more interesting than surviving (although, lately I’ve been surviving a lot).

So, how do I prepare, as the GM, for a oneshot.

1. Pick the starting point.

2. Pick a system.

3. Make a list of names, so you don’t have to improvise them.

That’s it. You don’t need anything else. Often you need to switch the first and the second point, depending on whether you want to use a system or you want to play a certain scenario.

Of course, I can delve into these a little further. I might be running a game today, so this work I’m doing here can act as my preparation for that possible session. We’ll see if I can give you a report on this tomorrow.

First, let’s pick a theme. With the Zimmerman case in the news right now, I’d like to run a game with jurors. Say, like 12 Angry Men. Ok, that’s enough.

Second, we’re picking a system. We played a demoscenario of Burning Wheel last week. That had a great system for arguments, called Duel of Wits. That would be great for this. Sadly, I don’t have that particular game and can’t get them right now, with only a few hours during a work day. Therefore, I’m falling back on my default: HeroQuest. Characters can be easily improvised and the system is very easy.

The third point could differ based on games (as for example, when I ran Agon, I had a clear limit on my resources, so I had to do some planning beforehand), but generally the list of names works for me. In this case I just need a the rest of the jury. Therefore, I should have list of about 10 distinctive names, so if I need to put emphasis on them, they are not confusing. Good rule of thumb is to make a list of names with no two names starting with the same letter. First names only, because they have no reason to tell each other their last names.

Again, that’s it. no more work needed. So, I’m guessing many of you are thinking, “Aki”, if you happen to know my name, “what was the crime? Did he do it? Was all the needed evidence presented?” To which I say: At this point, I don’t care. I’ll ask the players about the crime. They’ll come up with evidence. I can have them come up with things you didn’t even think to ask like is this modern day, real world, and so forth.

There’s a good chance at least one of my players is reading this (if I get to GM), so I may have ruined the whole thing, but that remains to seen.

Sorcery Speed and Other Subtle Teaching Tools

Posted on by
Reply

For clarity: When I’m talking about discard in this context, I’m talking about effects where the target makes the selection, such as Disrupting Scepter, Raven’s Crime and such.

Ever wondered why discard is generally sorcery-speed? There are some exceptions (such as a couple of charms), but this seems to be the rule. It probably started as a safeguard back in the day, but the rule has remained.

Think about it this way: In most cases, you are better off using it on your turn, when the opponent has less choices. Assuming your opponent has four cards in hand. One of them is the worst card. If you let your opponent draw another card, that might be the worst card and he will discard that. If it’s better than the worst card, you’ve gained nothing. Only your opponent has something to gain here.

Of course, if your opponent has no cards in hand, it would be better to force him to discard during the draw phase, since that would deprive your opponent of his only card for the round, but that would be both unfun and it’s a not a common situation anyway.

I’m not saying discard effects are better at sorcery speed than they would be at instant speed. What I’m saying is that keeping these effects at sorcery speed helps newer players. Seems to me, this is not the only place where Wizards tries to help newer players.

Let’s take exalted, a mechanism most recently seen in M13. It’s not the best mechanism for this, but it encourages attacking. A problem with many less experienced players is that they will often play as defensively as possible. Perhaps they’ve seen a haste-creature once or twice and are willing to exchange doing a few points of damage to possibly evade a few points themselves. But exalted says, maybe you aren’t willing to go all out, but at least this one creature should attack. After all, most decks can’t win without being proactive. Although exalted doesn’t really change that much, it has a psychological effect which might make a difference for those who are not accustomed to thinking ahead and planning ahead to victory.

Of course, at some point, this kind of strong-arming into playing well becomes unnecessary, but I’m willing to bet most players have never thought about why using discard is better during your own turn. On the other hand, once you learn to attack, you’ll never go back (says the aggro-player in me).

ROLEplaying Games vs. Roleplaying GAMES

Posted on by
Reply

For a very long time, my approach to roleplaying games was that I tried to balance the role and the game. To me, it was the combination of having the character and making tactical decisions. However, in the last few years, my personal interests have changed.

Perhaps the major reason for this is the rise of board games. Board games used to be shit. They would sometimes have great themes, but they never delivered. You could never get the experience you wanted. They always fell flat. Then came the German or European games, whatever you want to call them. They had a completely different approach to the way games are designed. Theme was no longer the king. In fact, often the game was designed first and the theme added later.

Now, after a few years of development and evolution, board game technology has reached a point where designers no longer need to compromise theme and mechanics. Games like Lords of Waterdeep are fun as games and incorporate the theme in a great way. Often the games are easy, but deep, with enough variance to keep them interesting.

Then, last year, I rediscovered Magic: The Gathering after 13 year hiatus. I had thought the game had all but died around 2000, but apparently it is more popular then ever. The design of the game is now great. Like board games, there has been huge strides, which actually make the game much more fun and manages to steer the game back into what it was supposed to be. The top-down design is both making cards very flavorful and more interesting from a tactical perspective. With MaRos lead, Magic seems to be on the right course. Mistakes are still made, but they are fewer.

All this has taken care of my need for tactical thinking. RPGs are not the best outlet for that kind of challenge any more. At least for me. Therefore, my emphasis has changed. Now I’m thinking they are primarily ROLEplaying games. Interest in the life of the character has risen above the tactical concerns. Now when I’m looking at how I’m going to use experience points, I’m no longer looking at how to optimize the character for future challenges. Instead, I’m more interested in how I think my character would progress. How does he or she change over time? I do like the added options whenever I can get them, though.

Another reason is the evolution of RPGs. Like board games, design has moved forward. Like most arts, the mainstream has only moved a little, while the fringes are taking risks and covering new ground. Therefore games like D&D are better than they used to be, but not as much as they could be. One important change is the role of the GM. It is now better defined. In games like Agon, the GM has a clear job of presenting challenges so that the players can see who can best step up to them. In some games, such as tremulus, the GM is more like the director in a improvised story.

In any case, GMs don’t have the same kind of ownership of a game they used to. Now games seem more like a group effort. I have never enjoyed GMing in the style where players are there mostly as spectators to my grand design. I just couldn’t identify the problem before this new generation of games, where I can just let the players take a big part of the creative process. After all, I’m no more creative then they are. In fact, my bias based on my thinking probably makes me less creative regarding the material.

This emphasis on the group effort has changed how I perceive games. When the story is a group effort, I no longer feel that I have to somehow compete with the GM. I know this was always a poor way to look at things, but the secretive nature of what GM was doing, would always have me on edge and therefore not trusting of what the GM was doing. Now I’m more open to letting my character have ups, downs and often the inevitable final fall. Again, this is partly due to the aforementioned MtG and board games.

I’m still not willing to go fully freeform. Random variables make games more interesting. When you can’t decide when you fail (and of course there is the fear of players who are not willing to fail), you won’t be ready for it.

All in all, we are living in a wonderful age of discovery for games. I can’t really say how long this will last, but than again, we are now in a very good place. The change has been so radical, the roles different games play in my life has changed.

Comments on LSV’s EDH Deck

Posted on by
1

As of this writing Luis Scott-Vargas has 356 lifetime Pro Points (all-time 13th) and 43148 Planeswalker Points (all time 27th). He’s pretty much a shoe-in for the Pro Tour Hall of Fame this year, although his career is still in full swing with Platinum status. Some are predicting a 100% of the vote for him, but that is impossible, since the rules don’t allow him to vote himself. He is probably the best known of the current generation of pro players.

I have 140 lifetime Planeswalker Points.

… but this is the Internet, so I am going to criticize the deck of this legendary player.

Just to clarify: Obviously analyzing the work of someone else, who is clearly better than me, can only help my game and deck design. However, I probably do play EDH or Commander more than LSV does, so I might have (probably not) more insight into the format. Also, deck design is always impacted by meta, so anything I’m about to say might sound really stupid in some other context.

So, recently, LSV took over the Daily Decklist column on Daily MtG. His third list was his EDH deck, commanded by Dralnu, Lich Lord. You can find the full list either from the original source or my copy of the list on TappedOut for different and more interactive formatting.

I was really interested in his deck. It was the first EDH-deck from a pro-player of his stature I’d seen. Also, I really like the colors. I’m a fan of black and blue definitely holds possibilities that always intrigue me. Although I don’t really enjoy any of the “Dimir” commanders that much, with the exception of the very different Grimgrin, Dralnu is one I’ve been looking into myself lately. So, good job, Mr. Scott-Vargas. You had the full attention of at least one reader.

LSV clearly doesn’t subscribe to the idea of going big, which is often a guiding (and also often misguided) principle of EDH deck building. His deck isn’t completely devoid of big creatures, but there doesn’t seem to be those big splashy effects most EDH-players so thoroughly enjoy. He isn’t completely against drawing hate with cards like Memnarch, but even our favorite artifact wizard isn’t that fast.

Neither does he subscribe to the idea of staples. His deck does indeed include a Sol Ring, Strip Mine and a Wasteland, but that’s it for the general colorless package many players include automatically in their decks, including cards like Solemn Simulacrum, Lighning Greaves and Skullclamp.

Most puzzlingly, he uses cards, which would be deemed unplayable in EDH by most. Duress is cheap in mana, but exchanging a card for a single discard and some intelligence seems like a waste. Of course, with Dralnu, you can play it twice, thus messing with a combo. Remand seems like a strange decision. It is a great tempo card, but that kind of tempo advantage isn’t that important in EDH. At least I don’t think so. Of course, with the aforementioned Duress, you can get rid of the card, but that seems too narrow and unlikely. There might be some synergy with other cards I don’t quite see, or perhaps the low casting cost is the key. On the same note, Mana Leak seems very situational. Often opponents will have the three mana available.

On the other hand, he does have some cards in there which I wouldn’t have thought of, such as Mizzium Skin. I sort of knew the card existed, since I did a RtR-draft or two, but I didn’t really think to put it in a deck. It wasn’t even on my radar. It seems like a fine fit into a Dralnu-deck, although I don’t see that much direct damage in our meta.

There are some other cards, which must also be meta-based decisions, such as Triskelion and Ribbons of Night. They don’t seem to fit. Triskelion is a really good comboengine, but I don’t see any cards with that much synergy with it. Obviously, if the meta is such that small creatures are plentiful, these might be great cards.

Only one enchantment. This I fully endorse. In a format where plenty of players play enchantments, hating on them is also popular. Why draw the hate when you can let other players squander resources on each other?

Of course, I’m probably just overthinking the whole thing. Best clue: no Go for the Throat, which could be helpful with Dralnu, but the deck does include both Doom Blade and Terror, which can’t kill Dralnu if needed. All in all, I’m pretty sure this deck wasn’t a result of years of fine tuning. Based on what I’ve seen on some of his draft videos, he does often go for the cards he sees as fun to play. I especially remember his discussion with Ben Stark on the validity of picking Blast of Genius over pretty much anything, but he held to his guns, because Blast of Genius is entertaining and then picked it twice.

You can see LSV enjoys drawing and card selection. Who doesn’t? But again, he seems to be missing EDH-staples, such as Flow of Ideas and Recurring Insight, settling for cheaper cards with less variance. Of course this works very well with Dralnu.

That said, the deck is sorely missing High Market, Phyrexian Tower, Altar’s Reap…

In the end, I enjoy black more than blue, so my approach to Dralnu will probably be somewhat different with emphasis on cards like River Kelpie and Secrets of the Dead which give me just a little more bang for my buck with Dralnu and probably more toolboxing with plenty of tutoring.