TCG Archetype Design, from Terrible to Great

Of course it's necessary, I do not understand the question.

Today we are going to look over the design of several archetypes of the past few years, seeing examples of good and bad design choices, from the TCG. As a rule, we are going to be lenient with anime archetypes, as I understand that in order to raise the stakes, the directors have to create cards meant for specific scenarios and not with the general integrity of the archetype in mind (which is the reason no MC's archetypes ever have a main mechanic). The purpose of the article is to help people with their custom archetype creations by seeing what the TCG does well or not.

"Good design" translates to the archetype having a signature strong common mechanic that gives it its identity, followed by a theme. A well-designed archetype will have little need for interchangable consistency boosters that could belong to any archetype where you to just change the name listed. Good design neither includes, nor excludes meta presence. Like I have mentioned in both the Guide to Making Customs and other articles, effects other than the common mechanics should not be repeated.

Designs will be rated as: Terrible/Bad/Average/Good/Great

Just to be clear, a "Terrible" rating does not imply that the archetype didn't do "some" things, right, just like how a "Great" rating does not imply that everything is peachy. It's a general grading. I'll also not put the archetypes in a specific order, so that I can give variety to the gradings.

SHADDOLLS

Design: Great

A general rule that I use when designing is that a player should be able to pick any 2 Maindeck monsters randomly, and immediately figure out how the entire archetype works. Shaddolls do exactly that. An archetype where ALL the Maindeck monsters have 2 effects, able to choose only 1 of them per turn, a <Flip Effect> and a weaker generic <GY Sent> effect. The Fusions also ALL share the ability to recover an archetypal Spell/Trap when sent to the GY.

Flows:

• Strong common mechanic.
• A minor secondary theme of Attribute Manipulation.
• Common mechanic is shared by everything.
• Very few effects are repeated other than the main mechanics (specifically sending from Deck to GY X3 and Special from the GY X2).
• Related to the above: No need for brainless consistency boosters. Every card of the archetype gives it more versatility on what it can do.
• Excellent versatility with what can be done by tinkering with the recipe and a variety of possible winning boards while still sticking to the theme/common mechanics. (as an example of this, take the fact that Falco is a Tuner despite the archetype having no hammered in Synchros that would break its flow).

Flaws:

• The new cards mess with some of the themes of the archetype, like diviating from the DARK/Spellcaster combination for the Maindeck Monsters.
• Resh Shaddoll Incarnation repeats the effect of an already existing card.
• Purushaddoll Aeon is pretty underpowered, making it not worth running.
• Nothing particularly screams "doll" in there. The main mechanic does not exactly fit the theme.

TENYI

Design: Good

All the Maindeck monsters follow a strong common mechanic, assisting <Monk of the Tenyi> and <Berserker of the Tenyi>. Unfortunatuly, they have a lot of Extra Deck monsters that break their own theme of assisting non-Effect Monsters... By being Effect Monsters.

Flows:

• Strong common mechanic.
• Fitting theme.
• Fairly straight-forward gameplay.
• They gifted us the most awesome Synchro of the game.

Flaws:

• A shame they can't actually run it.
• Random ED Effect Monsters they shouldn't have instead of a Link 2 non-Effect monster so they aren't forced to tech "Lancephoryncus" in case sh!t happens.
• Some very basic things like spell/trap destruction or GY revival/removal are not possible with the main archetype cards alone. Aka their toolbox is lacking.
• The Spells/Traps could be a lot more related to their main theme/mechanic.

MADOLCHE

Design: Terrible

Forget the common mechanic helping the archetype, this is crippling it. Madolche basically cannot afford to have their own effect triggered without appropriate spell/trap setup. To make up for it, they've gone full retard with the +ing, trying to make the common mechanic matter as little as possible. Think about it, when facing Madolches, what comes to mind? The fact that they get reshuffled to the Deck when destroyed, or the crazy Specials from Deck and endless +ing effects? Unfortunately, "Madolches" are nearly the epitome of interchangable consistency boosters.

Flows:

• Fun theme.
• Madolche Palooza. I know most people are scratching their heads, but it's the epitome of what Madolche should have been.

Flaws:

• Disasterous common mechanic. It actually hurts its own Deck.
• Not one, not two, but FIVE different Specials from the Deck (Anjelly, Hootcake, Petingcessoeur, Puddincess Chcolat A-La Mode, Ticket). Remember to tip the plumber, because this pipe is taking a lot of piss.
• A stupid amount of +ing.
• It's been nearly 10 years, but "Tiaramisu" remains degenerate.
• Uncoordinated mechanics like Battle Position control that buffle me to this day.

DOGMATIKA

Design: Average

One of the newest archetypes of the game disappointed me to no end, despite its beautiful aesthetics. Konami seems to have gone for a general style rather than a specific common mechanic (in the same manner that the oldest archetypes were made, like Lightsworn and Lavals), which does the archetype few favors. Update (19/11/23): The deck is now a Ritual Deck and it's a blast to play. Changed score from "Bad" to "Average".

Flows:

• Great Aesthetics.
• Dogmatika Nexus. It has f@ckall to do with its own Deck, but dropping a 3200 ATK beatstick from any random deck that link-climbs is pretty fun.
• "Holy knight" theme... Until we get to Alba Zoa. I'm a sucker for the trope of God turning out to be an eldtrich abomination.
• And much like my favourite deck, Dogmatikas empty the opponent's Extra.

Flaws:

• The closest thing to a common mechanic they have is "Cannot be destroyed by battle with a monster Special Summoned from the Extra Deck.", but only the Level 4s have it, and each of the higher Level monsters has a different summoning condition that is vaguely connected to the ED.
• Without a common mechanic, the archetrype is forced to rely on random consistency boosters, having at least X2 (in some cases X3) of all the basic cancers: Searches/Specials from Deck/Specials from GY etc.
• Their Spells/Traps are a bit hit or miss. A card called "Dogmatika Genesis" shouldn't be that awful.
• This is not on Dogmatika, but I really don't appreciate "Herald" and "N'Tss" triggering effects when pitched from the ED without hitting the field properly first. It feels cheap.

KOZMOS

Design: Great

All the Psychic monsters of the archetype can be "ridden" for a higher level of the archetype from your hand, all the Machines will Special a lower level from the Deck when destroyed, and all Level 7 and higher monsters have untargettable. The very common mechanics of the Deck reduce the need for brainless consistency boosters.

Flows:

• 2 strong common mechanics that compliment each other.
• Secondary themes on top of the basic ones.
• The mechanics fit the theme.
• Good versatility.
• No effects repeated other than the main mechanics.

Flaws:

• Thematically, Dark Destroyer and Dark Eclipser shouldn't have the same ATK.
• Dark Planet randomly having a different summon condition than the rest.
• It's a bit weird that some of the Levels are repeated twice (2/3/4 Psychics, 5/6 Machines) but others aren't.
  
  
  
  
  

TRUE DRACO

Design: Terrible

(obviously referring to the Tribute-based Deck, not the Pendulums) All together now! Lets count the +es! Out of 10 archetype cards (including Diagram in this), one is banned, and 6/10 + you on their own. Christ, I hated these things with a passion, even when I was the one playing them, and that's ignoring the fact that the Deck can easily run "Card of Demise", which is absolutely horrible.

Flows:

• Both the monsters and the Spells/Traps have a common mechanic that they all strictly follow.

Flaws:

• Similar to "Madolches", the amount of free +ing is simply stupid. It is a fact when facing True Draco that no matter what you do, you will be providing card advantage for your opponent.

MEKK-KNIGHTS

Design: Average

First off, the monsters have great aesthetics and theme, they're one of my favourite archetypes for a reason. Unfortunately their common mechanic makes them inherently largely rely on the opponent to set up even a basic board, which is... Awkward, to say the least.

Flows:

• Beautiful/Cool theme. The art is eyecandy.
• All the monsters other than the newest one follow the common mechanic, and emphasis is put in the columns.
• Amazingly splashable in a banished Psychic Deck for anyone interested.
• Some of the Spells/Traps also follow the common mechanic of the Deck (Whispers, Key, Secrets) which is great.

Flaws:

• The rest of the Spells/Traps have f@ckall to do with the mechanic. Even their Field Spell has nothing to do with columns or even Special Summoning, and keep in mind, as a Futuregamer, I cannot even imagine a Perfect Future without it (to the 5 guys who actually got that reference: Remember, you guys are the real heroes.)
• They largely rely on the opponent's plays to do anything. Unless you open some very specific combinations, Mekks can only function as a play 2nd Deck.
• Because of the above, they have a "bit" more souless consistency boosting than they should. 2 monster adds, 2 Specials from the Deck, etc.
• Why the flying f@ck are their Extra Deck monsters not psychic...?

DUAL AVATAR

Design: Bad

One of the newest additions to our list, this article is written based on their first wave of TCG support, if in the future cards have been released that contradict everything written here, please don't hold it against me.

Flows:

• No effects are repeated, yaey!

Flaws:

• There is no common mechanic. The closest to it is triggering an additional effect with Fusion Monsters that didn't just use Tokens, but it's nowhere near consistent. In fact, for all their mentions of Fusion Monsters that used Effect Monsters as materials, the only card that properly Fusion Summons is Invitation, which is best used when you have no Effect Monsters.
• Even as someone who owns the cards, Dual Avatar Invitation is bullsh!t.
• Many of the Spells/Traps, including the Field Spell, could belong to pretty much any archetype.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

SPRINGANS

Design: Great

Retroactively added, because I just LOVE how amazing their design is.

Flows:

• Strong common mechanic on all the Maindeck monsters.
• The mechanic fits thematically like peanuts on butter (they're basically ammo for the Xyz, and considering how Xyz Monsters operate with the overlays, it's so beautiful it brings tears to my eyes, much better fit than Rokkets acting as bullets for the Links.)
• A generic boss monster with just average effects of its own that gets completely busted due to the archetype's mechanic.
• They target Card Zones instead of the cards themselves because they're just doing bombardments. God, that's beautiful.
• Plenty of space for teching.

Flaws:

• Overeliance on the Field Spell for the initial play.
• "Ziegenburg"? Who might that be? I am unfamiliar with the gentleman.
• The 2nd Xyz (still unreleased in the TCG) should have also had a scaling effect based on the number of Xyz Materials.
  
• Murder of a TCG name translation.
• 2 searchers. Not a big fan, though I do understand that they are trying to make some use of extra copies of monsters in the GY.

ELDLICH

Design: Average

I've only recently began playing them, and I can safely say that they were just a step away from being balanced, but they f@cked it up and went from strong and functional to unfair.

Flows:

• "Eldlixirs" and "Cursed Lands" have a nice cycling common mechanic of searching each other, with an hopt and effect choice limitation on them.
• "Eldlich the Mad Golden Lord" (3800 ATK abomination that is completely undestroyable and with a pretty respectable steal effect, all the yes). I run "Flash Fusion" and "Vampire Fraulein" X3 in "Eldlich" just thanks to how busted he is.
• Related to the above: "cleans throat" WRRRYYYYY!
• Plenty of room for splicing, which self-respecting folks will not use for f@cking "Aleister" again.
• Trap Monsters, with all the advantages and disadvantages that brings.

Flaws:

• All Spells/Traps that are not "Golden Lands" or "Eldlixirs" f@ck up the flow of the archetype completely.
• More specifically "Cursed Eldland" gives them consistency they should not have and allows both of its effects to be used in one turn unlike every other Spell/Trap of the archetype which is just dumb, "Golden Land Forever!" is very niche choice and not recommended (also has a really dumb name) and "El Dorado Adelantado" is not worth the bricking chance (it would have been way better if it allowed you to use 1 or both effects since they depend on different cards anyway, but whatever). 
• "Seven Cities of the Golden Land" should also have a GY effect, it's not even following the common mechanic of other "Golden Land"s.
• More on the consistency issue, if you want to have consistency boosting as part of the common mechanic that's fine, but if you do that you cannot just add more sh!t on top of that afterwards. "Cursed Eldland" is the card that single-handedly makes "Eldlich" unfair.
• Why the f@ck does "The Mad Golden Lord" not specifically list the basic "Golden Lord" as a material? It's like they made that choice specifically to f@ck the deck over.
• Konami changed the rules of Trap Monsters just to promote "Eldlich". Once again, this pipe is taking a lot of piss.

ICEJADES

Design: Good

My newest addition, and my first purchase of a deck after a long while. Not gonna lie, it was the art alone that made me buy them in the first place.

Flows:

• Destruction-triggered effects.
• Old-school big-@ss maindeck bosses.
• "Kingfisher" is bloody busted and I love him for it.
• A variety of battle focused effects, including lowering the opponent's ATK and inheriting the Superheavy Samurai playstyle.
• A ROTA that is not once per turn because HOPT is not a mandatory addition to anything but requiring a bit of planning, as its effectiveness lessens over the course of the game.
• Likewise "Kingfisher" has no OPT for his equips, nor should he. Honestly it just warms my heart when I don't see hopts where they aren't needed.
• Good Golden Lord, the art is just perfect. Amazing aesthetics AND crystal babes on top? Konami just take my money.

Flaws:

• Lack of a universal common mechanic, even if it were exclusive to the lower levels. "Aegirine"'s variation of the common mechanic is cool as ice and beautiful as a jade, but it still doesn't sit well with me.
• So we can summon big boys on the field. Awesome. So... What exactly are we doing with them?
• "Icejades" kinda care about fighting from defense position... But not really. Again, they needed a common mechanic to be great.

God that's just beautiful.

Closing, again: When we're talking about designs we are not necessarily talking about performance. A deck where every card adds would obviously perform well, but would be poorly designed. Likewise for a deck that has no searches/+es and performs horribly. The goal is to find the balance between practicality and not being cheap with your cards.

If you have any ideas for more fitting archetypes that would make good examples of good/bad designs, I'm all ears. 

Hm... What to end this on... Oh, I know: