The reason for Backlash?

[DanTheTimid]

Wow can't believe I missed that. Thank you very much for pointing that out. Well then this begs the question, why include character backlash as a rule? Other then for Lore reasons I'm not seeing a good reason for it. It defiantly makes named cards alot riskier to run in your card file, perhaps it was just meant as a sort of extra "negative" effect to allow named cards to be a little bit stronger then non named cards, although if thats the case I'm not too fond of that since the negative effect only comes into play in mirror matches where both players are using the same faction. In all other scenarios the named cards are just going to be straight up better.

[Awod]

I don't think it'll be that bad we may notice it more at first since we only have a total of 100 cards or so. However I'm sure the Japanese who have A LOT more barely even notice it. But it's definitely something to be aware of and helpful to know especially if you plan on building a deck around named characters.

[bahka]

Since this game is centered on storyline, that is justification enough for me. To further that point, when each character has characters on the field, they talk to each other. Having 2 of the same people really kills that situation.

[DanTheTimid]

I don't think it'll be that bad we may notice it more at first since we only have a total of 100 cards or so. However I'm sure the Japanese who have A LOT more barely even notice it. But it's definitely something to be aware of and helpful to know especially if you plan on building a deck around named characters.

While its true the effect of the rule will become progressively less noticeable as more cards are released, it does still effect things. If named cards are comparable in stats and effects to non-named cards, why should I ever use named cards? Sure once we have alot of cards most of the time it won't make a difference but on those occasions when it does make a difference your going to wish you had a non-named card in its spot.

Conversely if they make named cards a little stronger then non-named cards, sure right now its risky to use named cards but when we get more cards and named cards become a heck of alot less risky to play suddenly it'll be non-named cards that won't see much play. After all, why use a non-named card when the vast majority of time a named card of the same level is superior.

So overall I think this rule could indeed cause some balance issues. HOWEVER that explanation about the fact that the cards talk to each other on the field does make sense as for why such a rule would exist.

[Awod]

Since this game is centered on storyline, that is justification enough for me. To further that point, when each character has characters on the field, they talk to each other. Having 2 of the same people really kills that situation.

I've heard this before but hows this work exactly, I mean I assume it's automatic but like is it just a few set phases does it depend on the character themselves do they react to enemies, what if the enemy is an ally [example: like when you mentioned the unit of "2nd Shrine" you said theres a leader, Shathia. if a 'regular' knight of the same unit or kingdom were on the opposing battlefield would she call him a traitor?] Does it has any positive/negative effects on the battle like bonuses/penalties?

Mostly I'm just curious because I would disable it if it happened often and was repetitive.[if theres even a choice, but like I said I don't know much about it which is why I'm asking]

[Logress]

Lot of good answers already here. There are a few good card combos in the first set, and all of them end with a 1SP card, so it actually might be a cheap way for you to stop them. Lupos actually did that to me at Akon, when I tried to end a combo he'd seen me do before with Sylph. It was a level 1 blue card, but it makes a decent addition to a basic Lawtia deck and he had one. It might be more unlikely as time goes on, but in these games there is always a danger of certain decks becoming too popular. You know what I'm talking about, when all of a sudden it seems like everyone's got the same 2 or 3 decks. I'm hoping that having as many penalties on predictability as possible will limit that.

Although, I have my own theory for why Backlash is there. In Alteil, both players pick their next card independently, but at the Reveal Cards part of the turn, both cards are turned over at the same time. This is the moment when you see what your opponent has Set, and vice versa. Thanks to the Backlash system, this moment is pretty nerve wracking. I know that when I'm desperate to get out certain cards as fast as possible for my plan to work, the drama of the Reveal Cards is high (and doubly so when I'm up against the same color deck). Sure, it hurts the other guy too, but for some reason that doesn't stop the Reveal from being suspenseful... and suspense is one of the things that makes a game fun.

As for characters versus units, I'm not going to say that characters are universally better. However, they are generally above average for their level and more complicated. They tend to have the weird powers that combo artists love. Units are simpler, but sometimes straightforward is best. For example, if you want someone with as many HP and DF as possible blocking for you in the front row, most of the time that's going to be a unit. If you want someone to bring out when conditions are absolutely, exactly right to kick way more butt than any one person really has a right too, or if you want someone to make all of your unit's powers feed off each other and pump each other up, now we're talking about characters.

[DanTheTimid]

Ah very interesting and very reassuring. So named cards are a little stronger but also alot more restrictive in the type of card file they can succeed in as opposed to name-less cards which are more of the meat of a deck providing the raw stats that can make them effective anywhere.

As far as the suspense of the reveal, if I understand things, I think its created by the fact that any turn back lash occurs the player whose already winning on the field continues to be winning so if your behind a backlash will keep you behind and perhaps allow your opponent to further his advantage. If your ahead, you may actually be in suspense because your hoping for a backlash, because any time a back lash doesn't occur theres a chance your opponent just played something that turned the tide on you.

Thank you to everyone for their insights on this matter!

[GunCastor]

So if someone has multiple copies of a particular character card, does that mean that they can perhaps keep their opponent from playing that same card for almost the rest of the game? If it goes down, they can just revive it with one sp (or none for some of those character cards on the list so far). The race to get their own character card becomes even more important now, doesn't it?

[hickwarrior]

Well, do remember that you have limited sp to work with, and reviving a character might prove very costly in the end and help your opponent to win... You can artificially keep your opponent's sp low this way, and prevent him from getting the key cards he/she needs in the duel. It's really tricky, but might just work if done right.

[Akjeil]

Two cards still can exist at the same time, just they can't be PLAYED at the same time so I don't think the lore reason really makes sense.

Cards that have a person's name on it(ie. Dark Overlord / Bahka) are unique and can not exist at the same time. If one is in play and you try to play it, you will get backlashed...

Iczer(s)...are given control of the enchanted cards used to command the heroes, monsters and magic of Lavato.

A tricky question. Though I'm not the ultimate authority on this, I think it's safe to say two (or many) card duplicates do exist to command a Character, but only one of each Character linked to that card-type question exist; thus in lore-terms, only one instance of a Character is summonable in a head-to-head face-off (that Character can't battle him/her self), though many Iczers may possess the card (or tool to summon that Character).

Since this game is centered on storyline, that is justification enough for me. To further that point, when each character has characters on the field, they talk to each other. Having 2 of the same people really kills that situation.

I've heard this before but hows this work exactly, I mean I assume it's automatic but like is it just a few set phases does it depend on the character themselves do they react to enemies, what if the enemy is an ally [example: like when you mentioned the unit of "2nd Shrine" you said theres a leader, Shathia. if a 'regular' knight of the same unit or kingdom were on the opposing battlefield would she call him a traitor?] Does it has any positive/negative effects on the battle like bonuses/penalties?

Mostly I'm just curious because I would disable it if it happened often and was repetitive.[if theres even a choice, but like I said I don't know much about it which is why I'm asking]

Another good and tricky question. I think it can be answered on the same lore basis: Since Iczers are controlling both the Leaders and Units, perhaps a leader like Shathia may take into consideration that the 2nd Shrine unit is not acting out of personal treachery, but the Iczer who commands him outranks Shathia (unless the Leader chooses not to look at it in those terms).
Of course, this theory is null & void if the Characters and Units summoned are unaware that they're being used as pawns by us Iczers; as for positive/negative battle effects, I'm at a loss except to say that Iczers outranking Characters would probably account for no negative effects related to any "defecting" units.

-Akjeil vs. Akjeil in Active Phase "Ouch...ouch...ouch!"

EDIT:

...when each character has characters on the field, they talk to each other.

Speaking of this, where is it referenced- in the storyline or rules somewhere? Is there any mention of it being an actual gameplay function?