Edit: https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2017/10/6/legacies/

They apparently liked my idea

——

I have a practical and fun idea to use the unused character points leftover for character pairings that do not hit 30 character points. The idea originated from the agendas used in game of thrones, there are two types of cards I wants to present.

Ill call the first type "Policies" since Star Wars is essentially a governmental struggle. Policies are a new card-type, they remain in play during the whole game and add special powers.

Edit: I think only 1 policy should be able to be used at a time, regardless of the remaining points left over.

Example:

The Shroud of the Dark Side

Blue Policy

Villain

Cost: 2 character points (to pair with Palpatine)

After an opponent uses an effect that removes one of your die, you may exhaust this Policy to reroll that die instead.

Imperial Entanglements

Red Policy

Villain

Cost: 3 Character Points

After you play a Red Villain upgrade or support, you may exhaust this Policy to gain 1 Resource.

These are simple, effective, very fun, and further expand on the deckbuilding process. Hundreds of game modifying ideas could stem from this simple idea and enrich the game.

The second idea is a way to create even more powerful cards, while creating a natural cap on powercreep by only allowing a certain number of these "OP" cards to get into a deck. Basically, you have events, supports and upgrades that cost character points to put into your deck, limiting the number of OP cards you can use.

The Might of the Empire

Red Event

Villain

1 character point

2 cost

After a character activates, you may force them to choose and remove 2 of their die in the die pool.

Please feel free to comment, add ideas, or add card ideas. Thank you for reading.

I like it. Both have merit.

The OP card limit could also work as a form of the Most Wanted List in Netrunner, they can errata cards that are too powerful to take a character point.

I do like the Policies better though, seems more natural for them to be a part of the whole game, and allows something extra for those builds with extra points.

My thought is that with wave 3 (Like Armada) They will up the maximum squad points. (40 points, with deck size 40).

2 hours ago, Virtigo said:

My thought is that with wave 3 (Like Armada) They will up the maximum squad points. (40 points, with deck size 40).

I don't think so, the 30/30 is just too nice a sweet spot for points, cards and time of play.

However, I think doing these sorts of things from time to time will be great fun.

3 hours ago, Virtigo said:

My thought is that with wave 3 (Like Armada) They will up the maximum squad points. (40 points, with deck size 40).

Yea I have my doubts here. The 30 point scheme is a core mechanic, I think many of the core cards would change in balance so drastically that there would be a ton of unforeseen imbalances that would arise.

Could be wrong of course.

Just a thought, but why not use the unused points to put in extra cards? One card per point, or for 2 points you can add a third duplicate of one card.

How about just starting with an extra resource for every two points difference between the two players. So if you both came with 28 point groups then you get nothing but a 28 vs a 30 would net you an extra resource. No new game mechanics needed.

This may be a long shot but how about waiting for more than one set and the next a month away before we try changing everything. I'll leave it at that but sarcasm seems appropriate for people who are never happy and always wanting to change everything.

35 minutes ago, Amanal said:

Just a thought, but why not use the unused points to put in extra cards? One card per point, or for 2 points you can add a third duplicate of one card.

Would weaken mill substantially I think

I have to admit I'm genuinely shocked that they didn’t have a similar situation to x-wing where the person with the lowest squad points gets to choose initiative, or in the case of destiny the player with the least character points should automatically win the die roll and gets to choose the battlefield.

Currently there are so few efficient character combinations that it doesn't really matter much but in a few sets it would be interesting aspect to introduce when there are viable squad options at 28, 29 & 30 point Character builds, where by playing the (in theory) slightly weaker 28 point squad is potentially the better play if you can guarantee the battlefield choice.

I am all for the idea of upping the number to 40 as more characters are introduced

I think the idea of upping costs is kind of silly - if they wanted to do it, they'd just have launched the game that way. The game has clearly been designed so that, for example, an 18 point character is a large part of your squad, not just under half.

Anyway, yes, I expect them to implement something like the 'Policies' at some point. It's just the logical way to go.

well one reasion you go for a lower cost at the beginning is your lack of options in the first set

I would like to see each player being able to select between any ONE of the following 3 options for unused squad points at the start of each round in an event. Both must declare which option they choose before card draw or dice rolls:

1) Increase the starting resources by the number of available squad points;

2) Choose to play a single support card up from your deck to the value of the unused squad points (it starts the game exhausted);

3) Add the number of unused squad points to your roll for determining the start of the game and battlefield selection;

10 hours ago, ozmodon said:

This may be a long shot but how about waiting for more than one set and the next a month away before we try changing everything. I'll leave it at that but sarcasm seems appropriate for people who are never happy and always wanting to change everything.

I'm actually very happy with the game, I just identified a way to add more depth and wanted to share the idea.

Personally I think both of the OP's ideas are good.

The 'Policies' one is my personal favorite - because it adds that extra 'story' layer. And these 'policies' could be very flavorful, will interesting restrictions like "May only be included in a mono blue deck" or "Can only be used if all of your characters are Elite." Opens up some new design spaces. [Also - limit these so that each player can only have 1 policy in play.]

Although I think the term needs refining.
Maybe 'Protocol' or 'Strategy.' (I really like Protocol.)

The policies is à good Idea!

My idea for a while has been that you can equip upgrades and supports from your deck using the extra points. So, if you were running ePalpatine, you could play a Force Choke from your deck on him for free before the game starts. You could decide to run eKylo Ren with two First Order Stormtroopers for free, if you're a beginning player who hasn't amassed a lot of cards yet, and start with a First Order Tie Fighter deployed. Just an idea. I feel like it's pretty balanced with upgrades but might be OP with supports.

13 hours ago, KryatDragon said:

Although I think the term needs refining.
Maybe 'Protocol' or 'Strategy.' (I really like Protocol.)

For the record I like protocol more than policy haha

15 hours ago, Etaywah said:

I'm actually very happy with the game, I just identified a way to add more depth and wanted to share the idea.

It is indeed a fine idea. I would like to understand the game a bit more. I don't like how it gets so complicated because people read between the lines. I'm in hopes for a more complete rule set and faq.

1 hour ago, ozmodon said:

It is indeed a fine idea. I would like to understand the game a bit more. I don't like how it gets so complicated because people read between the lines. I'm in hopes for a more complete rule set and faq.

A more complete ruleset and FAQ isn't going to fix what you find as an issue. It's just going to confirm that the people reading between the lines are accurate in their logic. It's not going to walk back the complexity of the game.

Ask and ye shall receive.

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2017/10/6/legacies/

I cannot believe how accurate this turned out.

Either they read this thread and liked it, or predictions were spot freakin' on.

Save that instead of Policies, or Protocols, they went with Plans.