I had this kind of thought for a while but with mechanics coming out such as Alliance type in Mumbad cycle and the mini-faction runners, I wonder what it would be like to have runners that are a ‘Dual-Faction Runner’ (i.e someone that can be from two of the three main factions via having two sides of the same ID like flip IDs but only goes towards Deckbuilding purposes and cannot be flipped due to then sticking with that one faction for the game but has the same ability for both factions he or she chooses)?
An example to explain it better is John/Jane Doe runner is both from Criminal and Shaper. Both have the same ability (gain one credit when the Corp draws a card not through a card ability). When creating a deck for that ID, he or she either choose either Criminal or Shaper as their faction in terms of deckbuilding and play. So either the deck would consist of a majority of Criminal faction cards or Shaper faction cards, having to spend influence on cards on are on their other side if they did not choose that Faction during deckbuilding.
There are some restrictions and downsides that might be added: The runner might have more influence but cannot include cards out of faction from the other major Runner faction (So John/Jane Doe of both Criminal and Shaper cannot spend influence on cards from Anarch).
Tell me what you think. And hopefully I explained the idea well for you.
I like the idea of using design space in the Identity/Deck Construction end of the game, but it suffers from a couple things:
1,) The fact that it took you two paragraphs to explain the idea, and still weren’t sure you explained it well, kind of tells the story, doesn’t it? How are you going to fit that onto a card?
2.) Once the deck is facedown and you’re starting a game, it doesn’t add to the enjoyment of the game anymore. Sure, it’s fun while you’re tinkering around with NetrunnerDB, but once you get to a legal deck and you want to play with it, it really doesn’t have any in-game ability that makes a bit of difference for you or your opponent. Right?
Don’t get me wrong, I love the flip-IDs, since it is pushing the envelope on this design space, but unless you’re bringing in decision points and/or bluffs during the game for both players it’s not adding much to the experience.
Now… give me a flippable Blue/Green runner that lets me choose a color to get a credit discount on whatever program/hardware I’m installing that turn of the faceup color? Now we’re talking! (Seriously broken though, unless deck construction is way more restrictive than just no Anarch.)
This is pretty much the same as printing another ID with the same ability, but a different name and different faction.
Would printing a 40/15 crim with 0 link and “+1 MU” be good? I don’t know. Unnecessary probably. If the game ran out of design space then maybe it’d be somewhere to go but I hope that doesn’t happen.
I guess maybe what you are interested in is the flavor of it. We can get flavor from IDs like Custom Biotics that you might enjoy, if we’re fortunate.
Guess you have a point on that. It is kind of ‘first draft’ so I apologize if it is not explained well. A simple way to explain it is this:
+Runner is Dual-Faction. In deckbuilding, he or she picks the faction he or she is running as. Those cards do not count towards influence and the other cards from the faction do count towards influence limit
+You cannot include cards from main faction not include. You can include cards from the mini-factions
Guess that would make it more clear. Would like the idea of having a flippable Blue/Green runner like you said with similar abilities. Restrictions/Weaknesses I might add is a lowered Influence limit possibly and/or an increased minimum deck size. If it is a lowered Influence limit then I say make all cards from the Dual-faction you did not declare as having -1 influence for total cost. Along with that, if it was flippable then the runner can flip it only once per turn or per game.
If it has two sides then it absolutely must be flippable in-game otherwise they might as well just print two new IDs as mentioned before. Sure, dual-sided might make for some interesting characters fluff-wise but in terms of gameplay it’s not bringing anything excepts potential balance issues.
If it’s not dual sided then you gotta go with being allowed both factions in-deck somehow, but I can’t see how that wouldn’t have serious balance (& variety) issues, even if the influence was 0.
Still, this is why other people design games and not me - they come up with way better ideas than I do, and the idea of dual factions is cool for sure so hey I’m not against it at all.
That would be a good argument against it, since it might be a convoluted mess and rather difficult to check in tournaments for legality.
Two different IDs of the same character might make more sense if not dual-sided. Perhaps keep similar abilities but have it be focused on that faction, hence the player has to work within certain limitations.
On the topic of a flippable dual-sided runner, I think that might be interesting if it stayed in one faction. Can be either the path with Biotech where the runner chooses one of three abilities but takes their own turn. Or that of SYNC where it flips with a click. The latter one I would put the limitation ‘Use only Once per Turn’ as a limitation.