본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

build-tcg-deck

Build a competitive or casual trading card game deck. Covers archetype selection, mana/energy curve analysis, win condition identification, meta-game positioning, and sideboard construction for Pokemon TCG, Magic: The Gathering, Flesh and Blood, and other TCGs. Use when building a new deck for a tournament format or casual play, adapting an existing deck to a changed meta-game, evaluating whether a new set warrants a deck change, or converting a deck concept into a tournament-ready list.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(1)

  • SKILL.md9.0 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Build TCG Deck

Construct a trading card game deck from archetype selection through final optimization, following a structured process that works across Pokemon TCG, Magic: The Gathering, Flesh and Blood, and other major TCGs.

When to Use

  • Building a new deck for a specific tournament format or casual play
  • Adapting an existing deck to a changed meta-game
  • Evaluating whether a new card or set release warrants a deck change
  • Teaching someone the principles of deck construction
  • Converting a deck concept into a tournament-ready list

Inputs

  • Required: Card game (Pokemon TCG, MTG, FaB, etc.)
  • Required: Format (Standard, Expanded, Modern, Legacy, Blitz, etc.)
  • Required: Goal (competitive tournament, casual play, budget build)
  • Optional: Preferred archetype or strategy (aggro, control, combo, midrange)
  • Optional: Budget constraints (maximum spend, cards already owned)
  • Optional: Current meta-game snapshot (top decks, expected field)

Procedure

Step 1: Define the Archetype

Choose the deck's strategic identity.

  1. Identify the available archetypes in the current format:
    • Aggro: Win quickly through early pressure and efficient attackers
    • Control: Answer threats efficiently, win in the late game with card advantage
    • Combo: Assemble specific card combinations for powerful synergy or instant wins
    • Midrange: Flexible strategy that shifts between aggro and control as needed
    • Tempo: Gain resource advantage through efficient timing and disruption
  2. Select an archetype based on:
    • Player preference and playstyle
    • Meta-game positioning (what beats the top decks?)
    • Budget constraints (combo decks often need specific expensive cards)
    • Format legality (check ban lists and rotation status)
  3. Identify 1-2 primary win conditions:
    • How does this deck actually win the game?
    • What is the ideal game state this deck is trying to reach?
  4. State the archetype selection and win condition clearly

Expected: A clear archetype with defined win conditions. The strategy is specific enough to guide card selection but flexible enough to adapt.

On failure: If no archetype feels right, start with the strongest individual cards available and let the archetype emerge from the card pool. Sometimes the best deck is built around a card, not a concept.

Step 2: Build the Core

Select the cards that define the deck's strategy.

  1. Identify the core engine (12-20 cards depending on game):
    • The cards that directly enable the win condition
    • Maximum legal copies of each core card
    • These are non-negotiable — the deck doesn't function without them
  2. Add support cards (8-15 cards):
    • Cards that find or protect the core engine
    • Draw/search effects to improve consistency
    • Protection for key pieces (counters, shields, removal)
  3. Add interaction (8-12 cards):
    • Removal for opponent's threats
    • Disruption for opponent's strategy
    • Defensive options appropriate to the format
  4. Fill the resource base (game-specific):
    • MTG: Lands (typically 24-26 for 60-card, 16-17 for 40-card)
    • Pokemon: Energy cards (8-12 basic + special)
    • FaB: Pitch value distribution (balance red/yellow/blue)

Expected: A complete deck list at or near the minimum deck size for the format. Every card has a clear role (core, support, interaction, or resource).

On failure: If the deck list exceeds the format size, cut the weakest support cards first. If the core engine requires too many cards (>25), the strategy may be too fragile — simplify the win condition.

Step 3: Analyze the Curve

Verify the deck's resource distribution supports its strategy.

  1. Plot the mana/energy/cost curve:
    • Count cards at each cost point (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5+)
    • Verify the curve matches the archetype:
      • Aggro: peaks at 1-2, drops sharply after 3
      • Midrange: peaks at 2-3, moderate presence at 4-5
      • Control: flatter curve, more high-cost finishers
      • Combo: concentrated at combo-piece costs
  2. Check color/type distribution (MTG: color balance; Pokemon: energy type coverage):
    • Can the resource base reliably cast cards on curve?
    • Are there color-intensive cards that need dedicated resource support?
  3. Verify card type balance:
    • Sufficient creatures/attackers to apply pressure
    • Sufficient spells/trainers for interaction and consistency
    • No critical category completely missing
  4. Adjust if the curve doesn't support the strategy

Expected: A smooth curve that lets the deck execute its strategy on time. Aggro plays out fast, control survives early, combo assembles on schedule.

On failure: If the curve is lumpy (too many expensive cards, not enough early plays), swap expensive support cards for cheaper alternatives. The curve is more important than any individual card.

Step 4: Meta-Game Positioning

Evaluate the deck against the expected field.

  1. Identify the top 5 decks in the current meta (use tournament results, tier lists)
  2. For each top deck, evaluate:
    • Favorable: Your strategy naturally counters theirs (score: +1)
    • Even: Neither deck has a structural advantage (score: 0)
    • Unfavorable: Their strategy naturally counters yours (score: -1)
  3. Calculate the expected win rate against the field:
    • Weight matchups by the opponent's meta share
    • A deck with 60%+ expected win rate against the top 5 is well-positioned
  4. If positioning is poor, consider:
    • Switching interaction cards to target the worst matchups
    • Adding sideboard (if the format allows) for unfavorable matchups
    • Whether a different archetype is better positioned

Expected: A clear picture of where the deck sits in the meta. Favorable and unfavorable matchups identified with specific reasons.

On failure: If meta data isn't available, focus on versatility — ensure the deck can interact with multiple strategies rather than being optimized for one matchup.

Step 5: Build the Sideboard

Construct sideboard/side deck for format-specific adaptation (if applicable).

  1. For each unfavorable matchup from Step 4:
    • Identify 2-4 cards that improve the matchup significantly
    • These should be high-impact cards, not marginal improvements
  2. For each card in the sideboard, know:
    • What matchup(s) it comes in against
    • What it replaces from the main deck
    • Whether bringing it in changes the deck's curve significantly
  3. Verify sideboard doesn't exceed format limits (MTG: 15 cards, FaB: varies)
  4. Ensure no sideboard card is only relevant against one fringe deck
    • Each sideboard slot should cover at least 2 matchups if possible

Expected: A focused sideboard that meaningfully improves the worst matchups without diluting the main strategy.

On failure: If the sideboard can't fix the worst matchups, the deck may be poorly positioned in the current meta. Consider whether the core strategy needs adjustment rather than sideboard patches.

Validation Checklist

  • Archetype and win conditions clearly defined
  • Deck meets format legality (ban list, rotation, card count)
  • Every card has a defined role (core, support, interaction, resource)
  • Mana/energy curve supports the strategy's speed
  • Resource base can reliably cast cards on curve
  • Meta matchups evaluated with specific reasoning
  • Sideboard targets the worst matchups with clear swap plans
  • Budget constraints satisfied (if applicable)

Common Pitfalls

  • Too many win conditions: A deck with 3 different ways to win usually does none of them well. Focus on 1-2
  • Curve blindness: Adding powerful expensive cards without checking if the deck can cast them on time
  • Ignoring the meta: Building in a vacuum. The best deck in theory loses to the most common deck in practice
  • Emotional card inclusion: Keeping a pet card that doesn't serve the strategy. Every slot must earn its place
  • Sideboard afterthought: Building the sideboard last with leftover cards. The sideboard is part of the deck, not an appendix
  • Over-teching: Filling the deck with narrow answers to specific decks instead of proactive strategy

Related Skills

  • grade-tcg-card — Card condition assessment for tournament legality and collection value
  • manage-tcg-collection — Inventory management for tracking which cards are available for deck building

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Execute structural metamorphosis using strangler fig migration, chrysalis phases, and interface preservation. Covers transformation planning, parallel running, progressive cutover, rollback design, and post-metamorphosis stabilization for system architecture evolution. Use when assess-form has classified the system as READY for transformation, when migrating from monolith to microservices, when replacing a core subsystem while dependents continue operating, or when any architectural change must be gradual rather than big-bang.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

pjt222/agent-almanac422026년 10월 22일 업데이트

adaptic

무료

Master skill composing the 5-step synoptic cycle for panoramic synthesis across multiple domains. Orchestrates meditate, expand-awareness, observe, awareness, integrate-gestalt, and express-insight into a coherent process that produces unified understanding rather than sequential compromise. Use when a problem genuinely spans 3+ domains and the interactions between domains matter more than depth in any one, when sequential analysis feels like compromise rather than integration, or before major architectural decisions affecting multiple stakeholders.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

pjt222/agent-almanac422026년 10월 22일 업데이트

Scaffold a new puzzle type across all 10+ pipeline integration points in jigsawR. Creates the core puzzle module, wires it into the unified pipeline (generation, positioning, rendering, adjacency), adds ggpuzzle geom/stat layers, updates DESCRIPTION and config.yml, extends the Shiny app, and creates a comprehensive test suite. Use when adding a completely new puzzle type to the package or following the 10-point integration checklist to ensure nothing is missed end-to-end.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

pjt222/agent-almanac422026년 10월 22일 업데이트

Add Rcpp or RcppArmadillo integration to an R package for high-performance C++ code. Covers setup, writing C++ functions, RcppExports generation, testing compiled code, and debugging. Use when an R function is too slow and profiling confirms a bottleneck, when you need to interface with existing C/C++ libraries, or when implementing algorithms (loops, recursion, linear algebra) that benefit from compiled code.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

pjt222/agent-almanac422026년 10월 22일 업데이트

aikido

무료

Practice aikido as a defensive martial art emphasizing harmony, redirection, and controlled resolution. Covers centering and grounding, ukemi (safe falling and rolling), core techniques (irimi-nage, shiho-nage, kote-gaeshi, ikkyo), blending and tai sabaki (body movement), randori (multiple attacker practice), weapons awareness, and applying principles off the mat. Use when learning a defensive martial art that prioritizes de-escalation, developing the ability to redirect aggression without causing unnecessary harm, building safe falling skills, or cultivating calm centeredness under physical pressure.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

pjt222/agent-almanac422026년 10월 22일 업데이트

Analyze an arbitrary codebase to identify functions, APIs, and data sources suitable for exposure as MCP tools, producing a tool specification document. Use when planning an MCP server for an existing project, auditing a codebase before wrapping it as an AI-accessible tool surface, comparing what a codebase can do versus what is already exposed via MCP, or generating a tool spec to hand off to scaffold-mcp-server.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

pjt222/agent-almanac422026년 10월 22일 업데이트

pjt222의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고