Skip to Content
 

Eminent Domain - Print and Play opportunity

24 replies [Last post]
Wed, 03/31/2010 - 19:03
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008

My deck building game Eminent Domain is coming along nicely, and at this point I'd like to invite anyone interested to print and play the game to see how it goes over with your groups.

Eminent Domain is a streamlined civilization building card game using deck building as a central mechanism. Your civ is described by the contents of your deck, and your hand of cards represents how potent each of your actions could be that turn. It is a Role Selection game and as you select roles, additional cards associated with that role go into your deck, making your civ a little bit better at that particular role, or at least more specialized toward that role. You'll need to manage the contents of your deck and decide which combination of roles to focus on in order to build the best civilization...

The game is currently set in outer space, like Race for the Galaxy or Twilight Imperium. One thing I'd like feedback on is the theme and possible alternate themes that could be used.

If you would like to print and play Eminent Domain, please send me a PM and I will hook you up with some PDFs and rules. I would love to know how your games go.

I should mention that there are 170 cards to print. I find that card stock in opaque sleeves works nicely. 31 of the cards (Planets) need clear sleeves because they are double sided. There are also player aids and a "board" on which to set the cards.

I also have a record sheet which makes it easy to track what happens in a game, and how many turns it lasts. I would love to get that information from anyone who decides to try it out.

Thanks,
Seth

Top
Mon, 04/05/2010 - 14:47
#1
scifiantihero
Offline
Joined: 07/08/2009
Just as long . . .

. . . as there's not Brownium . . .

:P

Top
Mon, 04/05/2010 - 15:34
#2
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
No Brownium!

The resources in this game are Food, Water, Iron and Silicon. Though it's been suggested that this be themed as Terra Prime: The Card Game, in which case Fertile planets would yield Bluium and Greenium, Advanced planets would yield Yellium, and Metallic planets would yield Brownium!

Top
Fri, 04/23/2010 - 02:12
#3
Jean Of mArc
Jean Of mArc's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2010
Printing Out

Hey!

I haven't yet played a game of Eminent Domain, but you've given me access and I'm trying to assemble the game right now. Before I forget to mention anything, I'd like to write down and bring up questions as they come to me that may help you in the design of this game.

I have a question about printing out/building this game. I have printed them out on regular A4 paper, but I would like to put them on some card stock to make them stronger. Do you have any suggestions as to which cards should have the same backing, and which can have different backing? For example, the Action/Role cards have white backs while the Research cards have orange backs or something like that. The colour doesn't matter as much as making sure that the ones that should have the same backs do. Also, are planets supposed to have prints on both sides? It looks to me like that's the intension. However, when I print them out, are they already back-to-back? What I mean is if you have one sheet like this

A B
C D
E F

And one like this:

1 2
3 4
5 6

And let's assume that B-2 means that on one side it has face B, and on the other face 2. Is the intention for it to be assembled like this (example 1):

A-1 B-2
C-3 D-4
E-5 F-6

Or is is like this (example 2):

A-2 B-1
C-4 D-3
E-6 F-5

Because if I put the papers back to back, it will end up like example 2, but your intention might be example 1.

In the "Components" section you write "Research" cards, but in the rules you write "Technology" cards... are these the same thing?

When I looked at/printed the EDBoard.pdf file, it was cut off at both the left and right sides... is this a mistake?

You say that planet cards start off "face down", but I don't think it would be obvious to plays which side is "Face Down", since both sides have something printed on them.

It looks very interesting though, I'll be sure to let you know how it plays!

Thanks!

Top
Fri, 04/23/2010 - 02:51
#4
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
I'll try to explain...

The planet cards are indeed 2 sided, and everything else ends up in your deck so all the Technology cards need to have the same backs as the Action/Role cards.

I use opaque sleeves for the Action/Role cards and Technology cards, and clear sleeves for the Planets. Speaking of sleeves, that's a really good way to make the cards stiffer. If you find they're not stiff enough even in sleeves, then you can add playing cards or Magic: the Gathering cards behind the paper in the sleeves.

For the double-sided planets, if you put the pages back to back (your example 2) then they should be correct. The "Front" of the planet card shows the VP value, resource slot, and any Icons the planet might have. The "Back" shows only the type of planet, and the Colonize and Warfare costs. So a "Face Down" Planet card has the "Back" showing.

And yes, the "Research cards" in the Component list are in fact "Technology cards" (not to be confused with the Research Action/role card). I just updated the rules file to reflect that.

Top
Fri, 04/23/2010 - 05:21
#5
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Jean Of mArc wrote:When I

Jean Of mArc wrote:
When I looked at/printed the EDBoard.pdf file, it was cut off at both the left and right sides... is this a mistake?

I forgot to address this...

It is not a mistake. Cut the 2 halves of board out and tape them together. If you want to quad-fold it, you can score the board at the lines provided (1/4 points) and it should fold up nicely.

Top
Mon, 04/26/2010 - 03:09
#6
Jean Of mArc
Jean Of mArc's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2010
Got It!

Hey, thanks for the explanations!! I've made the cards, but I haven't had a chance to try out the game yet. Being in Japan right now limits me as most of my game-playing buddies are back in Canada. I will see if some of my friends here want to give it a try though, then I'll give you some feedback. :) It looks like a good bit of fun, like a mix between Dominion and Puerto Rico, but distinct from those two enough to be a unique game.

EDIT: Having tried playing a practice game by myself at work (yeah... I don't have much work this week) I discovered a few initial design suggestions that would be nice:

1. In the rules, there is very little mention about the Technology cards, such as how they act, when you use them, and what they do. Only how to get them is clear. For example, do they mix into your deck just like the action/role cards? It seems that they only have actions, so does that mean that you can use them instead of normal action/role cards, or in addition? Do you just leave them out on the table, or discard them after your turn? The icons at the top (Harvest, Research, etc) are these just for purposes of counting icons? When you "research" them, can you CHOOSE any card you want (assuming you meet the requirements) or do you have to take the top card?
2. In the rules, you mention that level 1, 2 or 3 of each planet is required to buy the technology cards. Although the rules do tell you which is which, it would be nice if you could just look at the card and see how many planets of a particular type you need to be allow to purchase it.
3. On the planet cards, it would be really great to know, just by seeing it face-down, what you "get" out of the deal (ie victory points, resources, etc). Sure, you can do this by flipping the card around each time you are selecting a planet, but it would be easier to get the whole picture if the information were all on one side.
4. This is just an idea, but it would be kind of neat if the technologies had names to them. So rather than just all having the word "Fertile" or "Advanced" or what have you, they could be called "Storage" or "Warehouse" for "Each planet can store 1 additional resource this turn" and "Big Military" for "Collect 2 Armies".... things like that.

That's it for now. :)

Top
Mon, 04/26/2010 - 20:48
#7
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Jean Of mArc wrote:1. In the

Jean Of mArc wrote:
1. In the rules, there is very little mention about the Technology cards, such as how they act, when you use them, and what they do. Only how to get them is clear. For example, do they mix into your deck just like the action/role cards?

The rules say that they go into your hand, Once in our hand, they are part of your deck, you play them or discard them, they get shuffled into your deck to be drawn again. Once in your deck, they stay there unless removed by some action such as the Research action (though I think most of the time you would not remove a Tech card with a Research action! But you could.)

Quote:
It seems that they only have actions, so does that mean that you can use them instead of normal action/role cards, or in addition?

As the rules say, during the Action step of your turn you are allowed to play 1 card from your hand for it's "Action:" effect. There's no reason that card must be an Action/Role card - indeed, you could instead play a Tech card in hand for whatever it's "Action:" effect is. You do NOT get to do that in addition to some other action, you only get to play 1 "Action:" effect per turn.

Quote:
Do you just leave them out on the table, or discard them after your turn?

Per the rules, any cards you play get put into your discard pile during Cleanup. This includes any Action/Role or Tech cards played for their "Action:" effect, their Role effect, or to boost their Role effect.

Quote:
The icons at the top (Harvest, Research, etc) are these just for purposes of counting icons?

Yes, you can use a Tech card to follow or boost either of the 2 roles whose icons appear on the card. Some Level 2 tech cards have 2 of the same icon - those count as 2 symbols when you use the card to follow or boost a role.

Quote:
When you "research" them, can you CHOOSE any card you want (assuming you meet the requirements) or do you have to take the top card?

You choose any tech card you want, provided you qualify to purchase it by having the appropriate planets face up in your tableau. You may pick up the piles and look through them at any time. You are not limited to the top tech card.

Quote:
2. In the rules, you mention that level 1, 2 or 3 of each planet is required to buy the technology cards. Although the rules do tell you which is which, it would be nice if you could just look at the card and see how many planets of a particular type you need to be allow to purchase it.

I absolutely agree! I need to get around to adding that to the Tech cards and updating them! However the last time I tried I had trouble fitting that information on the Tech cards. In the end, yes, there should be for example 2 Fertile icons on the Level 2 Fertile tech cards, and 1 Metallic icon on the Level 1 Metallic tech cards, etc.

Quote:
3. On the planet cards, it would be really great to know, just by seeing it face-down, what you "get" out of the deal (ie victory points, resources, etc). Sure, you can do this by flipping the card around each time you are selecting a planet, but it would be easier to get the whole picture if the information were all on one side.

I didn't want that information to be available to (a) your opponents and (b) when looking at the top of the planet deck. After playing I'd like to know if you still feel that way or not.

Quote:
4. This is just an idea, but it would be kind of neat if the technologies had names to them. So rather than just all having the word "Fertile" or "Advanced" or what have you, they could be called "Storage" or "Warehouse" for "Each planet can store 1 additional resource this turn" and "Big Military" for "Collect 2 Armies".... things like that.

I agree with that as well! If you are volunteering to come up with names for some of the techs, I'm all ears :)

Thanks, and I hope you get a chance to try the game soon!

- Seth

Top
Tue, 04/27/2010 - 20:03
#8
Jean Of mArc
Jean Of mArc's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2010
Playtest #1

Hey sedjtroll,

So, yesterday at my apartment I had some Mormon Missionaries come and visit. We were chatting for a while, and they expressed that they really like board/card games when the topic came up. I told them about how I had been on these game design forums, and now I had just printed off a game for which play-testing was requested called Eminent Domain. They were really interested and so I ended up playing my first game of ED with them!! Here are our thoughts/questions:

1. First of all, GREAT game! We had a ton of fun playing it and trying to figure out the rules and develop strategies. Because it was our first game, it took some time to get into, but after we got the hang of it we were all enjoying it. So good job on making a quality game that isn't even published yet!!

2. When we were playing with Harvest / Trade cards, we were not sure if "Follow"ing players had to choose the same role or a different one. For example, if one player plays the card as a role and harvests a planet, can another player "follow" by trading his already-harvested planet?

3. When a player chooses a role which is the same card as his action, does that action card count as a symbol? As in, if a player plays a Warfare card as his action, and then chooses Warfare as his role, does the first Warfare card played as an action count as a symbol (so in this case he has 2)?

4. When a player follows, do they draw enough cards to make up 5 right afterwards? So for example if a player follows a "Colony" role with 2 Colonies, do they draw 2 cards immediately afterwards?

5. When you flip over a planet so that it is face-up, do you take the victory points that are indicated on the face of the card, or are the VPs mostly for trading only?

6. When the game ends by a player taking the last VP, but the round continues, are other players still able to get VPs by trading, or are they out of luck?

7. There is an Technology card which reads "Settle a planet and/or either settle another planet or add this colony to a planet". It took me like 3 reads to understand the wording, and even with that, I wasn't quite sure what "add this colony to a planet" means. Does this mean "add 1 colony to a planet"?

Top
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 01:03
#9
Jean Of mArc
Jean Of mArc's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2010
Suggested Names for Technologies

Hey sedjtroll,

Here are some initial brainstorm suggestions for your Technology names. Because in the game they are called "Technologies", I wanted to limit the names to things that are human-made or done by humans. However, I've also listed some other potential names if they can be considered just "special" cards rather than "technology" cards, since a particular "technology" was hard for me to think of. I have || between different suggestions. Many of them might not quite "fit" though. You can either use the ones I've written, or change them completely (obviously, since it's your game!)

"Produce 2 resources" - "Grain Elevator" || "Tractor" || "A Good Year"
"Collect 2 Armies" - "Big Military" || "Recruitment" || "Propaganda"
"Get an additional 1 VP for each type of resource traded this turn" - "Refiners" || "Mass Distribution" || "Jack of all Trades"
"Draw 3 Cards" - "Navigators" || "Explorers"
"Draw 2 cards, then remove any number of cards in hand from the game" - "Revolution"
"Settle a planet, and/or either settle another planet or add this colony to a planet" - "Warp Speed" || "Settlers"
"Choose 1 type of resource. That type trades for 2 VP this turn instead of 1 VP" - "High Demand" || "Low Supply" || "Highway Robbery" || "Monopoly"
"Remove a card in hand from the game before choosing a role" - "Elimination"
"You may trade armies instead of resources this turn" - "Alliances"
"Collect 1 from the supply" - "Synthetic Material"
"Remove up to 2 cards in hand from the game" - "Science Experiments"
"Planets settled or attacked this turn come into play with resources full" - "Jackpot" || "Loot"
"Add this card as 2 colonies to a planet. If that planet has enough colonies, settle it." - "Population Boom"
"Draw an additional card when not following a role" - "Savings Account" || "Neutral" || "Second Opinion"
"Each planet can store 1 additional resource this turn" - "Warehouse" || "Storage"
"After surveying this turn, attack a planet." - "Trigger Happy" || "Aggressive Army"
"Play an additional card for its action effect" - "Globalization" || "Communication"
"Attack up to 2 planets" - "Tactics" || "Surprise Attack" || "Starships"
"Take any 2 role cards into hand" - "Hoarder"
"Take the top card of the planet deck and put it into play face down" - "Telescope"

Again, you'll probably notice that it was very hard to stick to the "Technologies" theme... if these ideas don't do it for you I'll try and limit the names even more so that they fit a bit better... but these are just initial brain-storming ideas.

Hope that helps!!

Top
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 15:39
#10
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
If it's a deck building game,

If it's a deck building game, how is your game different than Dominion? Or what is new or special about your game compared to other deck building games?

Top
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 16:23
#11
hoywolf
hoywolf's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/27/2009
Want to test

Hey ive a really big fan of card games, I would love to test out your game, could you send me a copy of it :)

Top
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 17:24
#12
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Jean Of mArc wrote:So,

Jean Of mArc wrote:
So, yesterday at my apartment I had some Mormon Missionaries come and visit. We were chatting for a while, and they expressed that they really like board/card games when the topic came up. I told them about how I had been on these game design forums, and now I had just printed off a game for which play-testing was requested called Eminent Domain. They were really interested and so I ended up playing my first game of ED with them!!

Wow, that's awesome!

Quote:
Here are our thoughts/questions:

Good questions... here are the answers. I will add these to the FAQ file in DropBox.

Quote:
1. First of all, GREAT game! We had a ton of fun playing it and trying to figure out the rules and develop strategies. Because it was our first game, it took some time to get into, but after we got the hang of it we were all enjoying it. So good job on making a quality game that isn't even published yet!!

Wow, thanks! I'm really glad you enjoyed it :)

Quote:
2. When we were playing with Harvest / Trade cards, we were not sure if "Follow"ing players had to choose the same role or a different one. For example, if one player plays the card as a role and harvests a planet, can another player "follow" by trading his already-harvested planet?

When someone chooses a Harvest Role, opponents have to follow THAT role - not Trade. Although they use the same card, Harvest and Trade are completely different roles! So no following Harvest by trading resources!

Quote:
3. When a player chooses a role which is the same card as his action, does that action card count as a symbol? As in, if a player plays a Warfare card as his action, and then chooses Warfare as his role, does the first Warfare card played as an action count as a symbol (so in this case he has 2)?

No, you've used that card already for it's action. You only get to count symbols on cards you play specifically to boost the Role. No double-counting cards. Good question, as that's not necessarily clear in the rules. I might change it so that after resolving the action you discard the action card immediately (rather than during cleanup), then there should not be that confusion.

Quote:
4. When a player follows, do they draw enough cards to make up 5 right afterwards? So for example if a player follows a "Colony" role with 2 Colonies, do they draw 2 cards immediately afterwards?

No! the ONLY time you refill your hand is at the end of your turn (during cleanup)! You can draw 1 card when you Dissent instead of Following a Role, but outside of that you do not draw when it is not your turn.

Quote:
5. When you flip over a planet so that it is face-up, do you take the victory points that are indicated on the face of the card, or are the VPs mostly for trading only?

No! And you're not the first person to ask that question...

You ONLY take VP tokens from the supply when directed to do so by a card (for example the trade Role or Action). When flipping up a planet you will be scoring the indicated points at the end of the game, but you do not touch the VP token supply.

Quote:
6. When the game ends by a player taking the last VP, but the round continues, are other players still able to get VPs by trading, or are they out of luck?

They are not out of luck. I have updated the rules to ake it clear - the limited nmber of VP tokens is so that the game end triggers - if you are due VPs after the pool is exhausted, YOU STILL GET THEM! Use Army tokens or some other proxy if you need to.

Quote:
7. There is an Technology card which reads "Settle a planet and/or either settle another planet or add this colony to a planet". It took me like 3 reads to understand the wording, and even with that, I wasn't quite sure what "add this colony to a planet" means. Does this mean "add 1 colony to a planet"?

A Colony is defined as Colonize symbol on a card tucked behind a planet. "Adding a colony" means tucking a card with a Colonize icon behind a planet. So "Add this colony to a planet" means "Tuck this card behind a planet so that it becomes a Colony."

Does that make sense?

Thanks for your questions!

Top
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 17:29
#13
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
larienna wrote:If it's a deck

larienna wrote:
If it's a deck building game, how is your game different than Dominion? Or what is new or special about your game compared to other deck building games?

It is different than Dominion in several ways. First of all, it is not a "deck building game" so much as it's a "Civ game with a deck building mechanism."

In Dominion you are building your deck so that it can have points in it. In Eminent Domain you use your deck to do other things (Survey planets, colonize or attack them, produce and trade resources...).

And another major difference is that in Dominion you choose a card to buy into your deck. In Eminent Domain, you get cards added to your deck based on the action you choose to do. If you do research, you get another Research card added to your deck. Therefore you are 'better' at doing research (as evidenced by drawing more Research cards more often). At the very least you become more SPECIALIZED in doing Research, because your deck has a higher concentration of Research cards than other cards.

That last bit I think is the most important difference between my game and Dominion/Thunderstone/Ascension. I think it's the next step in the evolution of deck building - a game that uses Deck Building as a mechanism to drive the rest of the game.

Top
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 17:30
#14
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
hoywolf wrote:Hey ive a

hoywolf wrote:
Hey ive a really big fan of card games, I would love to test out your game, could you send me a copy of it :)

I have PDF files in a DropBox folder. If you would like to print and play the game, PM me your email address and I'll invite you to the folder.

Top
Wed, 04/28/2010 - 17:37
#15
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Jean Of mArc wrote:Hey

Jean Of mArc wrote:
Hey sedjtroll,

Here are some initial brainstorm suggestions for your Technology names...

Hope that helps!!

That's great, thanks! I'll probably end up using some of those.

One thing I just thought of is maybe "Terraforming" for maybe the tech where your planet comes into play full of resources.

Top
Fri, 04/30/2010 - 16:48
#16
salish99
Offline
Joined: 02/22/2010
Let's give it a go :)

I could give this a go at some point.
Are the cards playable in b/w?

Also, how many do you have per page, 9, or 12?
With 12, that's just 15 sheets to print, not too bad.
I'll hot laminate them, using single sheet paper, only the double sided cards I might have to print double sided onto single sheet - are your pdfs setup to do that automatically, or will there be problems with alignment?

Anyways, let me know, looking forward to the files.

Top
Fri, 04/30/2010 - 17:18
#17
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Print-n-play

I actually have only 8 cards per page for most of the cards. The planets are 9 to a page.

If you want to try printing and playing the game, you should PM me your email address and I can invite you to join the DropBox folder for the game.

In black and white the game might be tough to play. Mostly it's that the different Roles each have their own color - not strictly necessary, but much easier to play if you print them on different colored paper (in B+W would work on different colored paper) - but then they need common backs. Opaque sleeves work well for that, but that can get a little pricey.

Maybe I should make a version of the cards file with colored borders or something so that one could print them all on white cardstock and have common backs.

I suppose you could print on plain paper in B+W, it will just be trickier and more annoying to tell the cards apart from each other.

Top
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 03:40
#18
Jean Of mArc
Jean Of mArc's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2010
Black and White

Hey sedjtroll,

Thanks for your replies!! I'll write more as soon as I think of more to say. ;)

By the way, I printed out the game in Black and White, and we had no trouble with it at all. It might be easier in colour but it works just fine in black and white. The only problem was that the number in the victory points was hard to see. If you made the number white, it would be much easier. Just a thought. :)

Jean Of mArc on iPhone

Top
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 14:10
#19
tomi71
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
sedjtroll wrote:. I think

sedjtroll wrote:
. I think it's the next step in the evolution of deck building - a game that uses Deck Building as a mechanism to drive the rest of the game.

Hmm... I guess you´ve not seen Evolution Earth: Cataclysm then, because this evolutionary step has been taken. Certainly the buying mechanism drives the rest of the game in EE:C, for example the world building and inhabiting it with species is certainly depending on the players buying of those cards.

No offense, but there´s no point to say who did it first. At least Eminent Dominion it isn´t, however some mechanisms you´ve been telling are interesting enough :)

I think that the emphasis shouldn´t necessarily be on a single mechanic like deck buildnig.

I wish your game all the best and I feel in me bones, that it´s a good one.

Sean Massa´s review:

"The deckbuilding genre took me by surprise. Dominion broke ground there, for sure. Thunderstone came along and had some interesting improvements on the idea, but it was still the same type of thing. Evolution Earth: Cataclysm actually showed evolution (pun intended) on the genre by applying it to something that could be an actual card game, not just a deckbuilding game. That innovation on the concept is what intrigues me about it. I think that this marriage of genres is what will bring the deckbuilding aspect to its pinnacle of value."

I think that you are right talking about the evolution of deck building and that´s why I created this geeklist:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/54484/item/1276892#item1276892

Please feel free to explain your games interesting mechanism more there also.

Top
Sat, 05/01/2010 - 15:32
#20
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
tomi71 wrote:sedjtroll

tomi71 wrote:
sedjtroll wrote:
I think it's the next step in the evolution of deck building - a game that uses Deck Building as a mechanism to drive the rest of the game.

Hmm... I guess you´ve not seen Evolution Earth: Cataclysm then, because this evolutionary step has been taken. Certainly the buying mechanism drives the rest of the game in EE:C, for example the world building and inhabiting it with species is certainly depending on the players buying of those cards.


I have seen very little about Evolution Earth: Cataclysm. From what I saw it looked like you indeed have added board play to the game, and so yes - I would call that an evolution of Deck Building. In some respects it still looked like it could illicit a similar criticsm that Dominion did, that "your hand plays itself" every turn. I don't necessarily think that's true (for Dominion OR for EE:C), but the fact that you draw your hand and all the cards are "this turn only" I think leads people to believe that.

I hope to play EE:C soon so I can see what it's all about! If it's what I think then I'd definitely call it an evolution in deck building, but then I'd call Eminent Domain then NEXT evolution in deck building... I posted the things I think are significantly different in the BGG Geeklist The Sons of Dominion... namely these 2 items:

1. Cards enter your deck as a side effect to the action you take, rather than by direct purchase.

2. You can hold some cards from turn to turn in order to build up to a big play.

Quote:
No offense, but there´s no point to say who did it first. At least Eminent Dominion it isn´t, however some mechanisms you´ve been telling are interesting enough :)

Well, I certainly didn't mean to get into a pissing match over who found another use for a particular mechanism first! :) I'm just trying to accurately describe how my game works, what my design goals were and how Eminent Domain attempts to meet them.

... if there's no point to say who did it first, then why the posts both here and on BGG? ;)

Quote:
I think that the emphasis shouldn´t necessarily be on a single mechanic like deck buildnig.

I agree completely! Evolution Earth: Cataclysm looks like it adds board play, and the state of the board must factor heavily into the decision of which cards to buy.

Eminent Domain adds personal tableaus, not a central board, but has other mechanisms which make players focus on more than just which card they want in their deck.

Quote:
I wish your game all the best and I feel in me bones, that it´s a good one.

Thanks! I wish you luck on EE:C as well! I see that it's web published - have you approached any publishers about it? Any leads on it getting picked up by one of them?

Quote:
I think that you are right talking about the evolution of deck building and that´s why I created this geeklist:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/54484/item/1276892#item1276892


Cool! I hadn't seen that. Thanks for adding Eminent Domain to it. I will comment with some info about the game :)

Top
Sun, 05/02/2010 - 05:51
#21
tomi71
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
I think that your idea, that

I think that your idea, that a player can hold cards and save them to the next round for example is a great idea! It gives more control to the player and it´s also a decision to keep or not to keep certain card for example.

Decision making is what we call playing.

I will be watching this game, since It´s interesting and hopefully can play it in the future.

Top
Thu, 05/06/2010 - 21:42
#22
Jean Of mArc
Jean Of mArc's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2010
Playing by the Rules

Hey sedjtroll,

I haven't had a chance to play ED again, sadly... I was away on vacation with my family, and my friends are still gone on vacation now so I haven't had anyone to play with. :(

Just wanted to make a quick comment on something though: I was reading your blog and you wrote how surprised you were that despite your rules, people were making rather unexpected mistakes. Maybe it would help you to know the process by which I (and likely many other) people go about learning a new game.

When I was reading your rules the first time, I didn't yet have the cards and such printed out, so I had to imagine the game being played in my mind... not an easy task.

I then read them again with the cards printed, so I could better visualize things.

Then I played the game just by myself for a few rounds just to get the hang of a "real" game.

Finally, when the Mormons came over, I tried to explain the whole game from scratch and from memory, having never really played a "real" game before.

As a result, there are a lot of rules and such that are not yet solidified in my mind, so explaining was a bit all over the place. And then, when they would have questions about things, I wouldn't know the game well enough to answer their questions. Looking in the rules all the time, especially if it is just written in text and not easy to quickly look up a certain rule, slows things down too much, so we rarely do it. Actually in this case I forgot them at the school I teach at. :P

One thing you mentioned in your blog was people's confusion over when flipping a planet if you take VP or not. This might seem obvious to you, having developed the game and played it a number of times... but to a new player, it's not that it's confusing, but rather they just aren't sure if that is the intention or not. The rules just aren't clear on that point. It's not that you have to mention every single time that VPs are not taken. You don't have to say "and then the player draws a card. This does NOT mean that they take a VP!" But I think in cases like this, where you flip over a card and it has the VP symbol on it, the rules should say something about whether that symbol alone is enough for VP, or if they have to take VP tokens. Writing one simple phrase in your rules about this should clarify things.

So anyway, I just wanted to comment on that because it is hard for developers to see things the way their players do, since their players are not as familiar with the game. It's kind of like trying to describe a painting verbally. You might know EXACTLY what it looks like, and try to explain it, but what the other person is imagining from your description can often be very different.

Hope that helps!! :)

Top
Thu, 05/06/2010 - 23:49
#23
Pastor_Mora
Pastor_Mora's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/05/2010
I'm people, I did that too

So the game turned out very short, indeed. We run out of VPs way before any role deck was spent and we didn't get to use tech cards because of that too.

Sometimes the most irrelevant things can ruin a game for you. Hopefully I'll be testing ED again to get the right impression. Anyway, this is what playtesting is for!

Keep thinking!

Top
Fri, 05/07/2010 - 04:52
#24
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Pastor_Mora wrote:So the game

Pastor_Mora wrote:
So the game turned out very short, indeed. We run out of VPs way before any role deck was spent and we didn't get to use tech cards because of that too.

Sometimes the most irrelevant things can ruin a game for you. Hopefully I'll be testing ED again to get the right impression. Anyway, this is what playtesting is for!

Keep thinking!


I've added a phrase in the rules under Settling and Attacking (when you flip over planets) indicating that there are VPs shown on the planet cards, to be scored at the end of the game, NOT to be taken from the VP supply.

Hopefully that will make things clearer, because as Pastor Mora said, taking VPs from the supply when flipping a planet up would really ruin the game.

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut