Villainous Flim-Flam; optional rule

In the TV series, My Little Pony, Friendship is Magic, Flim and Flam are always up to no good and always involved in some kind of scam or con.

I've always thought that if both Flim and Flam were to be played (regardless of who controls them), something terrible should happen!

Ultimately there are only two ways these two troublemakers can come onto the playing field at the same time.  

~         ~         ~

A) they are each played on different Problems.

In this case, they create a new "3rd Problem".

The new "3rd Problem" is played on just like any other problem. (Except both players' friends, and resources are potentially divided among three problems instead.

This new "3rd Problem" has the following rules, powers, and limitations:

1. Neither Flim or Flam count as being in control of a Troublemaker (thus more troublemakers could be played).
2. Requirements to resolve this Problem is 7. This requirement is in Wild Points.
3. Points to resolve are as normal problems (1 point). First player to resolve get its bonus in addition to the 1 point for resolving. 
4. Its bonus points value is 3
5. The winner of a Problem Faceoff receives 3 points.
6. If a Problem Faceoff occurs, instead of the Problem being replaced, both Flim and Flam are dismissed and the "3rd Problem" ceases to exist. Play returns to normal.
7. Hypothetically, another Flim and another Flam could be played, creating a "4th Problem"
8. Note: A Troublemaker can be played on this "3rd Problem", since they no longer count as controlling more than one troublemaker. 
9. Each round (for the turn player) their ability triggers. Seeing that they are no longer Troublemakers but a new Problem, these abilities trigger at the beginning of the turn player's Main Phase. That being "exhaust a Resource and exhaust a Character at this problem".
10. For cards that must specifically be played on an Opponent's Problem (for example, Marvelous Chapeau) , this Flim-Flam Problem is considered an "Opponent's Problem" for both players.

What makes this new "3rd Problem" challenging is that it is either ignored (in which both players every turn exhaust a resource) or they attempt to challenge the (new) Problem. The difficulty in this is that a character is exhausted at this problem every turn. Amassing enough characters to meet it's requirement of 7 could prove difficult (but also rewarding!)

(Aug. 24/14 Addendum) -
Another point that I hadn't taken into consideration originally, is that this 3rd Problem option creates a possible Triple-Problem Faceoff.
A possible advantage to triggering a Triple-Problem Faceoff is that you could clear out all characters from all problems and reset both problems. This could be especially useful if you are outnumbered or outgunned at both problems. 

~         ~         ~

B) they are both played on the same problem:

In this case both troublemaker cards gain the ability of Villainous.

Villainous: Both Troublemakers join to become a single Troublemaker with Villain, combining their powers, bonuses, and abilities.

Villainous Flim-Flam has a Power of 7 and a Bonus of 3. At the start of the turn player's Troublemaker phase they "exhaust a Resource and exhaust a character at this problem".

MLP CCG - Beta Multiplayer Rules

My Little Pony Collectible Card Game Multiplayer Rules are available, although in a beta (testing) format.

Although this is exciting, there are so few players where I live currently, I'm hoping we can get enough to even try it out.

From what I understand, it doesn't seem overly complicated, its trick will be found within the gameplay itself (which is how I've always believe multiplay ccg games should be).

New terms that come into play and become critical are Rival, Adjacent, "Your Opponent" and "An Opponent".

Basically, your opponent to your left is your Rival. You will always play before your Rival.
Your Rival's Problem deck is considered Adjacent.

You may only play or move cards onto your own problem or that of your Rival's.
(Thus you can still only play Troublemakers on either your own problem or your Rival's. However, the player to your right could play a Troublemaker onto your problem).
You may only move cards controlled by other players to either problems of their own or their Rival's.

Other exceptions/interpretations: When a card refers to "your opponent" or "an opponent" you must choose any one opponent. Only when a card specifically refers to "each player" does it refer to all players.

Ultimately, you end up (with three players) with a playing area looking like this:

It becomes more complex and interesting past 3 players. (Remember, you will only be directly dealing with your problem deck and your Rival's problem deck).

However, the one beta rule I'm not too convinced of - specifically when coming to playing Resources or Events - is whether these should be restricted to playing only on your own problem or that of your Rival's. I think the ability to play Events, and especially Resources, beyond this limitation could make for some interesting strategies. (Helping establish alliances, at least temporarily!)

Studious, part 2

The current rules for Studious seem somewhat weak and limiting.

Studious (When you win a faceoff involving at least one of your characters with this keyword, gain 1 action token.)

When I read this single card's ability, I would interpret it as being read for each card with Studious.

However, this is further clarified as follows:

Studious is not a stackable keyword; a player winning the faceoff with multiple Studious characters will only gain 1 action token regardless of how many Studious characters were involved in the faceoff.

Practical Game Dynamics

There are only 3 Mane Characters with Studious. Twilight Sparkle, Faithful Student, Twilight Sparkle, Gala Greeter, and Princess Luna.

Of all the friends – although there are 6 – only 2 are common (Mint Jewelup & Sealed Scroll), the others are either Ultra Rare (Twilight Sparkle, Ursa Vanquisher & Princess Celestia, Ray of Sunshine), Rare (Spring Forward), or Promotional (Twilight Sparkle, Research Student).

If we deal with only one Common card (let's say Mint Jewelup) and with the limit of 3 individual card copy rule, we find ourselves with a scenario where you could have a maximum of 4 cards at one problem with Studious.

In this case it would be pretty bad and likely to break the game. (That's potentially an extra 4 action tokens per turn).

In an absolute worst-case scenario* you could (potentially) have 19 characters (remember, 3 copies of each 6 Studious characters plus the Mane Character) for a whopping total of an extra 19 action tokens per turn. Definitely broken.

But with an average purple deck, within an average game, based upon to availability of these cards, realistically, we might be looking at 2 characters at a problem with Studious at any one time. Winning this faceoff and gaining 2 action tokens would not unbalance the game. In fact, it would very much balance out this power (Studious).

Maybe the wording should change to read an action token per character title or type (some sort of variance of the unique card rule).(ie having 3 Mint Jewelups at a single problem will only yield 1 action token. With an additional Mane Character brings this up to 2).

Option 2:

The wording could read:

Studious (When you win a faceoff involving a character with this keyword, gain 1 action token per Card Title.)

(Essentially eliminating multiple card copies).

Let's look at this variation in an absolute worst-case scenario*.

The main character with all 6 friends with Studious (3 copies of each), totalling 19 characters with Studious. However, there would only be 7 with different Card Titles, totalling an extra 7 action tokens. Although this would be devastating and a game-ender, I don't think this would be unbalanced considering the difficulty (if not impossibility), cost, and effort to get this far with this many characters out, at the same problem, and into play.

However, we should keep in mind these cards' other abilities. (Twilight Sparkle, Research Student can generate still another action token, Spring Forward with here +2 power per opponent's characters at problem basically wins most faceoffs, Twilight Sparkle, Ursa Vanquisher can move 2 opponent's characters home, ending their ability to even have a faceoff).

Option 3:

Another wording variation could be:

Studious (When you win a faceoff involving a character with this keyword, gain 1 action token per Card Type.)

(Essentially limiting Studious to 1 Mane Character and 1 Friend, as all other 6 cards with Studious are all of the card type “Friend”).

Personally, I think this variation would be the most balanced and fair.

It gives the purple deck and power of Studious a bit more of an edge while not unbalancing the game.

* This absolute worst-case scenario is highly unrealistic. It would necessitate a Purple/Yellow deck, 6 ultra-rare cards, 3 promotional cards, 3 rare cards, and 6 common cards (18 friends), and having all 20 cards out in play and on the same problem. When we consider an average 45-card deck with an average of 25 friends, these 18 (extremely difficult to find) friends would constitute over 70%.