Support NeoGAF

[Minsc]

Having known nothing about Hex, the conclusion I have draw from hearing both people in this thread speak is that the game is basically Magic: the Gathering, but with some minor nuances regarding resource management and 'digital-only' mechanics (many of which I have already crafted a physical if clumsy proxy for in my head). A defence of 'you can't differ too much' is only true when you're essentially a name-replacing Clone of the original game with a handful of new toys.

This is another aspect I think that is being underplayed. The resource system in Hex is pretty different, and will drastically effect multi-colored deck building.

If you have just a single green resource and 5 others in Hex, you can cast 6 1-Green cost cards.

In MtG, you can only cast a single 1-Green cost card. To me that isn't just a minor nuance.

 

[Toxi]

This is another aspect I think that is being underplayed. The resource system in Hex is pretty different, and will drastically effect multi-colored deck building.

If you have just a single green resource and 5 others in Hex, you can cast 6 1-Green cost cards.

In MtG, you can only cast a single 1-Green cost card. To me that isn't just a minor nuance.

Depends on how far Hex gets on the abusable card draw angle. Most Magic decks won't be playing six 1-Green cost creatures in one turn, but a deck like Glimpse-Elves or Storm has to keep close attention to that sort of thing.

Reminds me of how the Pokemon TCG is basically card draw: The game.

 

[ultron87]

This is another aspect I think that is being underplayed. The resource system in Hex is pretty different, and will drastically effect multi-colored deck building.

If you have just a single green resource and 5 others in Hex, you can cast 6 1-Green cost cards.

In MtG, you can only cast a single 1-Green cost card. To me that isn't just a minor nuance.

In practice does it really change deck building much?

Mana bases are typically constructed so that you can cast stuff on curve, so unless you have a really weird deck the concern isn't "can I cast 6 single green cards on turn 6" its "can I cast a double green card on turn 2". So if you have a bunch of double green stuff you need a majority of green resources to be sure you can cast it on time. Same thing if you have a bunch of green one-drops. You need green in your opening hand so you can get them going immediately. You can't just suddenly put way fewer green resources in your deck because you might be able to "double up" later if you're casting multiple spells.

 

[sega4ever]

I don't really see how changing a few words makes it "pretty different".

But really I don't think the individual card by card comparisons are that relevant. The most telling thing is the fact that you can drop nearly any Magic card into Hex, convert the mana cost to a Threshold cost and change a few words, and it works because the rules systems are so interchangeable.

That said, if they have some playtest cards marked "Genesis Wave" and "Form of the Dragon" somewhere in their office that gets brought up during discovery I'd have to imagine they'd be super screwed.

you must not be familiar with mtg, or not very good at it. a genesis wave that functions like

is "pretty different"

 

[Toxi]

you must not be familiar with mtg, or not very good at it. a genesis wave that functions like

is "pretty different"

It's "pretty different", but it's clearly heavily inspired by Genesis Wave, mana cost and all.

Spoiler

Also, functioning like Mind's Desire is not a good thing for the game's future health. I have a feeling Eye of Creation is gonna get the banhammer if Hex survives.

 

[QisTopTier]

if Ancestors Chosen doesnt get banned I'm sure that card will be fine.

 

[ultron87]

you must not be familiar with mtg, or not very good at it. a genesis wave that functions like

*Mind's Desire*

is "pretty different"

I'm quite familiar with MTG, thank you.

It is different in gameplay, sure. But in terms of card design the two cards are incredibly close.

 

[Spiritreaver]

Minor nuances among resource management? People who haven't played both games, only Magic should go take their multicolor decks out for a spin under Hex's resource system rules. It's a pretty big change. I've reiterated this many times as someone who has played both.

I only play multicolor decks in MtG. Hex's system almost eliminates the need to have things like dual lands, land card draw, and mana conversion.

If I could take all of those kinds of cards out of my decks, and then on top of it be able to play low cost cards many different ways..... my decks would play entire differently.

I really really encourage some of you to playtest it in your head, it's very different. It looks like a very minor change, I agree, but it quite a big change.

 

[Shrennin]

Um. http://imgur.com/a/nHV7g

Let's see! Instead of paying life for cards, you... pay life for cards. Instead of having creature kill effects, you have creature kill effects. Instead of Raise Dead, you have... Raise Dead Call The Grave. Instead of discard effects, you have discard effects. Instead of Corrupt, you have Corrupt Terrible Transfer.

So... I'm not sure how this statement can be true.

Let's see! A lot of those cards have pretty significant differences that, I guess, could be mistaken to be similar if one has never played Hex before. Also, to try to say that Magic created evil type flavors is laughable (which is what people are doing by saying that black = purple). Blood and black have nothing in common besides the evil nature of the types. Blood is essentially blood magic, which means you can expect evil type effects. Hex is also different in that blood magic goes well with wild magic -- the only two pure forms of magic within the world of Hex.

You're also trying to oversimplify it by picking and choosing a few cards that appear to be similar at first glance. Have you even played Hex? I would do that first before trying to make claims about it. One of those cards doesn't even describe what a Battle Hopper is. It's not a 1/1 with flying. It's a 0/1, and you would really only create battle hoppers to sacrifice them rather than normal type growth strategies.

Threshold is actually very similar to the mana system from Kaijudo, another wizards TCG.

I wouldn't be surprised if there was another TCG/CCG that had a similar mechanic but that's still irrelevant in this lawsuit -- even if the other TCG may be owned by Wizards, which is a very large company so it's no surprise there. This lawsuit is about Magic and Hex, however, not about Hex and Kaijudo.

 

[Ryuukan]

It's "pretty different", but it's clearly heavily inspired by Genesis Wave, mana cost and all.

Spoiler

Also, functioning like Mind's Desire is not a good thing for the game's future health. I have a feeling Eye of Creation is gonna get the banhammer if Hex survives.

That pic was from early on, final Eye of Creation effect is different

 

[KJ869]

Mechanics are pretty identical as you can see from the card power vocabulary http://hextcgshuffle.com/2013/10/08/vocab-keywords-for-magic-the-gathering-players/

 

[charlequin]

Make it a Hex card

The categories of cards that don't translate directly are those affected by the resource system switch, so: 1) non-basic lands and 2) cards that directly affect other players' lands, with Rishadan Port falling into both categories.

(As others pointed out, they don't have planeswalkers in Hex either, although I don't consider that particularly significant since Magic didn't have those either for most of its life.)

That's... that's almost exactly what Warchiefs do, except power/toughness in the deck don't matter except for search effects

No, it really is very different. This card is a sorcery you play once and stuff gets a permanent boost. You play it again and that bonus is increased. You can recur and play one copy of this card three times and every creature in your deck will have a permanent +6/+6. Your opponent can't get rid of it to end the effect. You can let a creature die, bring it back to your hand, and still replay it with the cheaper cost and boosted stats.

Yes, it is a card that gives creatures a stat boost and makes them cheaper, but it does so via a completely different mechanic, and plays quite differently from, the actual MTG cards.

In practice does it really change deck building much?

It's significantly easier to build a multicolor deck with basic resources in Hex, although it doesn't have an equivalent of dual lands which probably brings it back to around even again.

 

[Spiritreaver]

Star Wars still has a community, and there is a committee that makes new cards (basically, they re-ability an old card, and you put a slip over an original copy) and running organized play http://www.starwarsccg.org/

I...

This has made my day. SW:CCG was my real first foray into card games. Glad to see it's still alive. Thanks for posting this.

I also noticed there's a current Star Wars TCG and it's similarly convoluted. I approve.

 

[charlequin]

you must not be familiar with mtg

Also, have you even played Hex?

Okay, let me try to be clear here.

Knock it off.

We can all have this conversation without passive-aggressive snipes at each other's presumed level of knowledge or snark about how we each perceive the differences in play here. No reason for people to get all pushy about this.

 

[Shrennin]

Okay, let me try to be clear here.

Knock it off.

We can all have this conversation without passive-aggressive snipes at each other's presumed level of knowledge or snark about how we each perceive the differences in play here. No reason for people to get all pushy about this.

I was not trying to be passive aggressive, but I do apologize if it appeared that way. I should have left the "even" off the statement, I guess. =P

I was legitimately asking if he or she played the game though. I was trying to make the point that Hex does not explain creatures and whatnot explicitly when it creates stuff, so one could assume cards are similar when the cards in question do different things for different purposes. Magic explains everything, so you can kind of tell what a card does, but a lot of cards in Hex don't explain because they don't need to (one benefit of being all digital). One of the cards in Hex has an equipment that says "Time Bug becomes the Master of Time" but no one who hasn't played it would know what that entails. It is kind of important for a discussion on this. It's why after I asked that question I explained what a battle hopper is and what its purpose is for because a card in that link is compared to a card that creates a battle hopper but the two creatures have very different purposes. At the very least, it helps to be knowledgeable of Hex cards and things they do that aren't explicitly stated before comparing cards to other cards in Magic or any other card game. This doesn't apply for the rules between Hex and Magic because those are known, but there are a lot of nuances in Hex cards that make them play uniquely.

With that said, FieryBalrog could have very well played Hex and still believed the cards were too similar. That's what I was trying to figure out, because having played it, there's a lot of cards on that comparison list that I don't believe are (even though they appear to be).

EDIT: I actually edited that specific quote out, because I left it at that just asking him (and then if he had not, I was going to explain why I thought it important he did), but then I went on to ask him with an explanation underneath. That's what I get for being more edit prone than most. :/

 

[SupaNaab]

I guess we're about to find out if Kickstarter money really is a donation or sale?

 

[charlequin]

I guess we're about to find out if Kickstarter money really is a donation or sale?

This really has nothing whatsoever to do with Kickstarter.

 

[Toxi]

I guess we're about to find out if Kickstarter money really is a donation or sale?

???

It's a donation. Always has been.

That pic was from early on, final Eye of Creation effect is different

That's a major improvement creatively and doesn't run into the Mind's Desire problem.

 

[Spiritreaver]

So. Is there a chance this was nicely timed to hit right after Hex entered closed beta? The game was in alpha for quite a while, but beta brought monetization. Also CZE wouldn't alter card text at this point in the game (they've been very adamant about this).

Seems like a prime time to hit CZE with it. Even if they were allowed to change the mechanics of the game, it royally screws over the Hex fanbase and drastically puts Hex behind schedule for release.

 

[Brakara]

A writer who is also a lawyer did a nice break down of the case over on Quiet Speculation, a popular Magic finance site. Definitely some stuff that others have already mentioned regarding what parts of the case seem actually valid but I liked how he broke each section of the complaint down.

http://www.quietspeculation.com/2014/05/understanding-the-wizards-v-hex-lawsuit-in-plain-english/

Should be required reading for anyone in this thread.

 

[Shrennin]

So. Is there a chance this was nicely timed to hit right after Hex entered closed beta? The game was in alpha for quite a while, but beta brought monetization. Also CZE wouldn't alter card text at this point in the game (they've been very adamant about this).

Seems like a prime time to hit CZE with it. Even if they were allowed to change the mechanics of the game, it royally screws over the Hex fanbase and drastically puts Hex behind schedule for release.

I'm not sure I believe that necessarily, only because Hex is still relatively new (I think the KS is just over a year old). Legal departments can take a long time to get their act together. I still don't think this is a legitimate lawsuit, but I also believe Wizards was trying to nip this in the bud as soon as possible rather than try to time a good attack during a specific point in Hex's development cycle.

 

[Aureon]

All cards revert in magic, not so in Hex. I also don't think you can lose on poison counters in Hex. If you can I haven't come across that rule.

Poison counter workings are a keyword, not a mechanic\rule.
Revert-Upon-Bouncing is all, then. Which, being honest, is a really derivative consequence of being digital and not paper, and not much else.

One key difference in the resource system with Hex vs Magic is if you have 2 Green gems/shards and 4 red, and you have 6 cards that need one green gem in your hand, you can play all 6. In MtG, you can only play 2 of the cards. That's at least once instance of a game system a MtG player would get wrong going over to Hex without reading any rules, but I think the point is a good one, someone who knows how to play MtG, automatically knows how to play Hex, more or less.

I do agree Hearthstone and MtG have about nothing in common, just the fact Hearthstone is played in solitude without interruption from your opponent and has no set attack phase is enough to set it apart from MtG, but the differences number far more.

Differences between HS and MtG\Hex:
- No istants
- No mana colors
- 10 'colors'\classes, of which you can get only one
- No dedicated mana cards
- No noncreature permanents (Artifacts \ Enchantments_Constants)
- Damage doesn't revert after combat
- No upkeep \ dedicated phase structure
- No passing of priority
- Traps exist at custom triggers
[I did not list champion skills, for that they're a difference between HS\Hex and MtG, but not a difference between HS and Hex]
And if we want to go outside the game itself into the supporting structure:
- Draft structure is very different
- Pack structure is very different
I mean, yes. Hearthstone is pretty derivative. But it's not a complete carbon copy with two very subtle changes (Threshold instead of colored mana, and no-revert-on-bounce) and one addition (champion skills)
In addition, no-revert-on-bounce has been proposed in MtG a billion times to fix the underlying problem of auras dying on bounce, but it's unapplicable for a paper game for obvious reasons.

Now, i am not a lawyer, and do not pretend to understand the subtle workings of the legal system enough for that.
But i do question the design ability of someone ripping a whole game wholesale, even if it's a good game in an environment that craves for a well-done version of that game.
A card game lives and thrives on, well, cards. More cards, to be exact. MtG releases cards every 3 months, and for me, the biggest fun in TCGs is discovery - finding new things, making them work (or backfiring horribly).
For that to be done, and for the actual gameplay to be fun with said cards, design and development need to be very competent. Breaking things left and right (Urza's, Mirrodin) is very fun for the deckbuilders, even if it kind of sucks to play. New sets (Innistrad, Theros) are much funnier to actually play, but deckbuilding is.. meh.
If someone rips a game whole, i cannot trust their ability to provide actually good designs for whole sets when the time comes (And it will, if they go forward. We know it will)

That said, i have already fallen in the honeytrap and had given 40$ to the HEX kickstarter, because fuck MODO interface really. But still, i did not expect at the time even the card design to be THAT similar.


e: For the crowd that, like me, wanted something fresh and not a clone: try SolForge (Which, hilariously, is designed by Richard Garfield, which we all know who he is, and developed by Brian Kibler, who won a MtG Pro Tour in 2012, among others.)

 

[Minsc]

I'm not sure I believe that necessarily, only because Hex is still relatively new (I think the KS is just over a year old). Legal departments can take a long time to get their act together. I still don't think this is a legitimate lawsuit, but I also believe Wizards was trying to nip this in the bud as soon as possible rather than try to time a good attack during a specific point in Hex's development cycle.

Yeah, it could possibly be 3 years before anything happens if they don't settle and find ways to postpone it time and time again.

 

[FieryBalrog]

It's kind of odd that people claim some of these mechanics/minor rules tweaks are "radical differences" when many MTG expansions and products have done more to change the game.

By this standard EDH is not just "radically different" from regular Magic, it's practically a different game Does anyone seriously think that EDH could have been a standalone product separate from Magic, and been immune to legal challenge by changing the art assets and tweaking the card frame?

Same with um, a set like Invasion. Split cards are "radically different" by these standards, yet it would have been fine to knock-off Magic, add some sprinkes on top and call it a day? I can't imagine awesome innovation coming from "take highly complicated existing product, copy 99% of it, twist three things around, release!" People DO do that already, they're just generally Chinese knock-off companies and bargain-bin games at Gamestop.

For anyone bagging WOTC, they have made plenty of missteps but done a fantastic job shepherding the (paper) Magic game with the kind of R&D team most board games only dream about having. On top of that, Cryptozooic is rather well known for being a shitty company from the WoW TCG days, including ripping off their own fanbase that played in tournaments.

 

[sega4ever]

It's kind of odd that people claim some of these mechanics/minor rules tweaks are "radical differences" when many MTG expansions and products have done more to change the game.

By this standard EDH is not just "radically different" from regular Magic, it's practically a different game Does anyone seriously think that EDH could have been a standalone product separate from Magic, and been immune to legal challenge by changing the art assets and tweaking the card frame?

Same with um, a set like Invasion. Split cards are "radically different" by these standards, yet it would have been fine to knock-off Magic, add some sprinkes on top and call it a day? I can't imagine awesome innovation coming from "take highly complicated existing product, copy 99% of it, twist three things around, release!" People DO do that already, they're just generally Chinese knock-off companies and bargain-bin games at Gamestop.

For anyone bagging WOTC, they have made plenty of missteps but done a fantastic job shepherding the (paper) Magic game with the kind of R&D team most board games only dream about having. On top of that, Cryptozooic is rather well known for being a shitty company from the WoW TCG days, including ripping off their own fanbase that played in tournaments.

you just described what tekken did to virtua fighter

 

[charlequin]

e: For the crowd that, like me, wanted something fresh and not a clone: try SolForge (Which, hilariously, is designed by Richard Garfield, which we all know who he is, and developed by Brian Kibler, who won a MtG Pro Tour in 2012, among others.)

Given that pedigree it's honestly kind of weird to me how underwhelming SolForge actually turned out. :/

 

[Toxi]

Breaking things left and right (Urza's, Mirrodin) is very fun for the deckbuilders, even if it kind of sucks to play. New sets (Innistrad, Theros) are much funnier to actually play, but deckbuilding is.. meh.

Innistrad is full of broken stuff. Did you not see Delver tear Legacy a new asshole?

Theros sucks though.

 

[Minsc]

It's kind of odd that people claim some of these mechanics/minor rules tweaks are "radical differences" when many MTG expansions and products have done more to change the game.

By this standard EDH is not just "radically different" from regular Magic, it's practically a different game Does anyone seriously think that EDH could have been a standalone product separate from Magic, and been immune to legal challenge by changing the art assets and tweaking the card frame?

Same with um, a set like Invasion. Split cards are "radically different" by these standards, yet it would have been fine to knock-off Magic, add some sprinkes on top and call it a day? I can't imagine awesome innovation coming from "take highly complicated existing product, copy 99% of it, twist three things around, release!" People DO do that already, they're just generally Chinese knock-off companies and bargain-bin games at Gamestop.

For anyone bagging WOTC, they have made plenty of missteps but done a fantastic job shepherding the (paper) Magic game with the kind of R&D team most board games only dream about having. On top of that, Cryptozooic is rather well known for being a shitty company from the WoW TCG days, including ripping off their own fanbase that played in tournaments.

I don't know what truth there is to it, but I've read that the second set of Hex cards is more or less done (first expansion), and it has a lot more going for it than the 1st set.

I'd expect Hex to mix stuff up a whole lot more down the road being all digital, so comparing its current state to the 20-year old history of MtG is a little unfair, as 5 years from now Hex would probably be significantly further apart from MtG imo, especially when the MMO aspects are in.

I saw a funny quote with a link to an article not yet linked from the hex forums:

Games evolve. New ones take the most loved features of earlier games and add original characteristics. The creation of Magic: The Gatheringis a case in point.

Though there are about a dozen games that have directly influenced Magic in one way or another, the game's most influential ancestor is a game for which I have no end of respect: Cosmic Encounter, originally published by Eon Products.

 

[Aureon]

Given that pedigree it's honestly kind of weird to me how underwhelming SolForge actually turned out. :/

I think it's an issue not of mechanics, but rather of presentation.
I've been playing solforge non stop for six months at this point, but it's very kind of lackluster if you can't spam drafts and\or have a very, very, very solid collection for constructed.
Still, i think we're heading a bit too OT.

 

[TheSeks]

Except those aren't minor differences at all. The way Pokemon plays is completely different from how Magic plays, which is completely different from how Netrunner plays, etc.. I don't know what is gained by pretending something akin to: Magic and Bridge both use cards, therefore Magic, Bridge and Hex are all really just the same game with "minor differences in how you use the cards".

No. Because Magic vs Bridge is fundamentally different. From cards (obviously) and gameplay.

Magic vs Pokemon/Yugioh/etc. other such card games is fundamentally the same thing. "Minor" effects like win conditions change, sure. But at the core they're all the same thing:

"Collect these cards, build a 45-60 card deck to use against opponents. Summon creatures/Pokemon/etc. to damage other persons creatures/life/whatever."

"Spells are stop-time effects/etc. to change the battle to heal/damage/cancel/whatever"

You can boil ALL non-Bridge/Poker/other "Bicycle"-deck card games down to this because none of them change the effects too strongly. Sure, Pokemon "Creatures" evolve with cards and mana costs are different, but at the core they're fundamentally the same thing.

That's really where the issue comes in: You have these "Magic clones" but there's not really much of anything they can do outside of maybe radically altering the entire paradigm to not be "similar."

 

[Dark Octave]

I like how the start of the KS video pitch dude jumps in a BMW convertible to ask for money. Way to stay humble, dude.

 

[Toxi]

No. Because Magic vs Bridge is fundamentally different. From cards (obviously) and gameplay.

Magic vs Pokemon/Yugioh/etc. other such card games is fundamentally the same thing. "Minor" effects like win conditions change, sure. But at the core they're all the same thing:

"Collect these cards, build a 45-60 card deck to use against opponents. Summon creatures/Pokemon/etc. to damage other persons creatures/life/whatever."

"Spells are stop-time effects/etc. to change the battle to heal/damage/cancel/whatever"

You can boil ALL non-Bridge/Poker/other "Bicycle"-deck card games down to this because none of them change the effects too strongly. Sure, Pokemon "Creatures" evolve with cards and mana costs are different, but at the core they're fundamentally the same thing.

That's really where the issue comes in: You have these "Magic clones" but there's not really much of anything they can do outside of maybe radically altering the entire paradigm to not be "similar."

You're wrong, Bridge and Magic are fundamentally the same. You try to win the game with cards.

Warhammer and Magic are also fundamentally the same. Sure, you play with miniatures and the rules are based on positioning, but you customize a "deck" and deal damage to win the game.

Your "fundamentally the same" comparisons are silly when we're talking about a game that basically 1-to-1 converted the rules.

 

[KHarvey16]

Poison counter workings are a keyword, not a mechanic\rule.
Revert-Upon-Bouncing is all, then. Which, being honest, is a really derivative consequence of being digital and not paper, and not much else.

What? You asked for one, not all of them. And winning a game because you have 10 poison counters is certainly a rule.

 

[Aureon]

link to an article not yet linked from the hex forums:

In the end I decided that the degenerate decks were actually part of the fun.

I think we just pinpointed the exact moment in which MtG took the high road to greatness.

What? You asked for one, not all of them. And winning a game because you have 10 poison counters is certainly a rule.

Does winning a game because you have 4 Master Biomancers in game constitute a rule, too?
And 100 counters on a Helix Pinnacle?

 

[KHarvey16]

Does winning a game because you have 4 Master Biomancers in game constitute a rule, too?
And 100 counters on a Helix Pinnacle?

It's explicitly mentioned in the rules. You asked for rules.

 

[Aureon]

It's explicitly mentioned in the rules. You asked for rules.

If we want to be pedantic, every single keyword is mentioned in the rules.
Since i don't want to argue semantics any more, let's define 'rule' as strictly as possible:

Intrinsic property of the framework, not of any particular card; or:
Mechanic that could not reasonably be implemented by a card in the current framework of rules;
Exception made for binary mechanics which could be reasonably switched ( "Creature damage heals \ doesn't heal at end of turn\phase") by a card, in which case the difference in the default marks a substantial difference.

By that account, i find the listed 3 differences:
Threshold against colored mana;
Buffs last through bounces;
Champion abilities.

I'll refrain from making comments about how significant or not those differences are, but i'll simply say that i kind of expected a less derivative work.

 

[QisTopTier]

If we want to be pedantic, every single keyword is mentioned in the rules.
Since i don't want to argue semantics any more, let's define 'rule' as strictly as possible:

Intrinsic property of the framework, not of any particular card; or:
Mechanic that could not reasonably be implemented by a card in the current framework of rules;
Exception made for binary mechanics which could be reasonably switched ( "Creature damage heals \ doesn't heal at end of turn\phase") by a card, in which case the difference in the default marks a substantial difference.

By that account, i find the listed 3 differences:
Threshold against colored mana;
Buffs last through bounces;
Champion abilities.

I'll refrain from making comments about how significant or not those differences are, but i'll simply say that i kind of expected a less derivative work.

There are also Transforming cards, where the card itself transforms into a completely new card.
The game has no tokens, effects that create things are full cards.
and cards you equip gems into before adding them to your deck to play which alter the effects on cards. Basically custom cards. Which there are minor gems and major gems.

 

[The Technomancer]

If we want to be pedantic, every single keyword is mentioned in the rules.
Since i don't want to argue semantics any more, let's define 'rule' as strictly as possible:

Intrinsic property of the framework, not of any particular card; or:
Mechanic that could not reasonably be implemented by a card in the current framework of rules;
Exception made for binary mechanics which could be reasonably switched ( "Creature damage heals \ doesn't heal at end of turn\phase") by a card, in which case the difference in the default marks a substantial difference.

By that account, i find the listed 3 differences:
Threshold against colored mana;
Buffs last through bounces;
Champion abilities.

I'll refrain from making comments about how significant or not those differences are, but i'll simply say that i kind of expected a less derivative work.

I don't think anyone is contesting that Hex has added significantly new things. But aside from things that care about land and effects on lands (which we've all acknowledged is one area where Hex innovates away from Magic) you can take almost any Magic card and make a few vocabulary swaps to get a functional Hex card

You couldn't implement say

in another card game without some substantial changes to the card or modifications to the rules, but it slots right into Hex seamlessly.

 

[KHarvey16]

If we want to be pedantic, every single keyword is mentioned in the rules.
Since i don't want to argue semantics any more, let's define 'rule' as strictly as possible:

Intrinsic property of the framework, not of any particular card; or:
Mechanic that could not reasonably be implemented by a card in the current framework of rules;
Exception made for binary mechanics which could be reasonably switched ( "Creature damage heals \ doesn't heal at end of turn\phase") by a card, in which case the difference in the default marks a substantial difference.

By that account, i find the listed 3 differences:
Threshold against colored mana;
Buffs last through bounces;
Champion abilities.

I'll refrain from making comments about how significant or not those differences are, but i'll simply say that i kind of expected a less derivative work.

Equipment, sockets, cards multiplying in your deck, other cards being created in your deck, etc. And buffs can be permanent meaning in future games, not merely bounces. Even a cursory look turns up many differences.

 

[Aureon]

I don't think anyone is contesting that Hex has added significantly new things. But aside from things that care about land and effects on lands (which we've all acknowledged is one area where Hex innovates away from Magic) you can take almost any Magic card and make a few vocabulary swaps to get a functional Hex card

I agree, which is why i asked for Magic things that Hex did NOT implement, the counter of which is sitting at 2, for a cool ~98% of cards (Anything that doesn't deal in mana transforming or nonbasic lands) being importable from mtg to hex framework.

.. I'm starting to think that MtG wants to settle out of court for a straight takeover of the project, and use it as MTGO engine, with all the non-paper-viable-fluff and PvE implemented in said PvE mode!

Spoiler

I'm dreaming

Equipment, sockets, cards multiplying in your deck, other cards being created in your deck, etc. And buffs can be permanent meaning in future games, not merely bounces. Even a cursory look turns up many differences.

Out of game, out of game, doable in the framework, doable in the framework.

Future games? I'm going to need a more in-depth explanation, i didn't hit that while playing the alpha.
How would a buff carry over from a game to another? Couldn't (wouldn't, actually) i max-buff all my buffable cards before a tournament or an important match?

 

[Doomshine]

you just described what tekken did to virtua fighter

oh boy, there's one I haven't heard in a while.

 

[Totakeke]

That's really where the issue comes in: You have these "Magic clones" but there's not really much of anything they can do outside of maybe radically altering the entire paradigm to not be "similar."

That's a ridiculous statement. I'm sad if anyone really thinks this to be true when talking in the context of Hex vs. MtG. You're telling me there's nothing CCGs can do but except have the same carbon copy of the base mechanics?

Everyone, CCGs are dead, time to pack it up.

 

[Karkador]

That's a ridiculous statement. I'm sad if anyone really thinks this to be true when talking in the context of Hex vs. MtG. You're telling me there's nothing CCGs can do but except have the same carbon copy of the base mechanics?

Everyone, CCGs are dead, time to pack it up.

I know you're being sarcastic, but CCGs seem more alive than ever before (and that's because there is a pretty varied crop of them for lots of different people). So, a game copying so much from Magic wholesale looks to be phoning it in.

I guess time will tell if the modifications will be enough of an interesting twist to make Hex worthwhile, but from what you guys have said about it so far, it doesn't seem too interesting, IMO.

 

[Keru_Shiri]

Future games? I'm going to need a more in-depth explanation, i didn't hit that while playing the alpha.
How would a buff carry over from a game to another? Couldn't (wouldn't, actually) i max-buff all my buffable cards before a tournament or an important match?

Something like this?

 

[Shrennin]

Something like this?

That's unglued, right? It's more of a joke set. There's one that requires the chicken dance based on a coin toss or something equally silly.

 

[ultron87]

I played a few games and now I'm in the middle of Hex draft right now. If I had to compare it to anything I'd say it feels like a reasonably well made Magic fan theme set. There are some interesting new mechanics that really do change how it plays and then there are a bunch of rethemes of existing cards.

 

[Keru_Shiri]

That's unglued, right? It's more of a joke set. There's one that requires the chicken dance based on a coin toss or something equally silly.

Yeah that was one of the joke sets. Some of the cards do feature mechanics that were scrapped or reworked for real expansions.

 

[PsionBolt]

Huh. I learned a few things today.
Firstly, that Hex is an MtG clone. That's kind of interesting because I like MtG, but kind of unfortunate because I'll probably never play Hex since it's so ugly.
Secondly, that Wizards have a patent on some card game mechanics, including tapping. That's pretty bonkers, considering how many games do it. Even Weiss Schwarz, probably the most un-MtG-like card game that I know how to play, has creatures rotate 90 degrees after attacking and return to normal the next turn.

I don't know how to feel about this particular case because I haven't played Hex, but I do imagine that legal restrictions on things like this will get a lot tighter in the near future. I'm not inclined to think that that's a good thing.

I wish Unglued cards had Gatherer rulings. I need to know how this card interacts with Karn Liberated or Shahrazad!

 

[Toxi]

That's unglued, right? It's more of a joke set. There's one that requires the chicken dance based on a coin toss or something equally silly.

You can still play with them though, just not in tournaments.

I use them occasionally to shake up my EDH group.

Yeah that was one of the joke sets. Some of the cards do feature mechanics that were scrapped or reworked for real expansions.

 

[ZackieChan]

To a certain degree this is Any-Given-Sunday syndrome. When you have X thousand cases in a year, someone is going to rule directly in opposition to the concrete text of written law basically because they didn't feel like following it. In most cases it doesn't set a precedent or carry on to higher courts or other circuits' interpretations.

Even then, the Yeti Town case is very much a look-and-feel issue. The ruling on substantive confusion comes from the fact that the similar name and interface give it the appearance of being directly connected to Triple Town.

Yes, but those thousands of cases aren't being decided in the same exact court as the Yeti Town case like this WOTC case would be.

And copyright for things like this absolutely IS a "look and feel" issue. And the look and feel analysis here could be pretty damning, particularly if they don't get overly pedantic about the game rules and specific cards, like what's going on in this thread.

Regarding trade dress above, they would just have to show a likelihood of confusion (using the Kodak factors, IIRC). They don't even have to show that anyone is ACTUALLY confused, but it helps. And in this case, they have all of those forum posts and blogs comparing the two. Those are great evidence of the confusion.

That's the good thing about the complaint. With the three alternative infringement theories (copyright, patent, and trademark) they have three ways to show the infringement. If just one of them sticks, they have a judgment in their favor.