Newest Version of the Game!
I need some "input" on this Design...
Specifically I am using 3d6 (White) and 1d6 (Black).
At the Bottom-Left-Hand corner, you see (8/0/0).
What this is meant to "symbolize" is that you need to roll an "8" given ANY White die + the Black die to deal "1 Damage". The most Damage a Monster can deal is "3 Damage". In this case, it is ONLY "1 Damage" because the values are (#/0/0) which means only the # qualifies for a Damage Point.
Had it been (8/5/0) then it would be "2 Damage" points depending on the dice rolls: which are 42% for the "8" and 33.3% for the "5". Meeting both of these Targets means you do "2 Damage".
Okay now that I've explained the dice rolling and the STATS behind them, I have a question:
Can you imagine a BETTER way to resolve COMBAT "without dice"???
See the STATS are: (Power / Skill / Magic).
So in the case of the sample card, the "Goblin" can ONLY deal "Power Damage" PLUS his attack type is "Explosive" (E) and is resistant to "Ranged" (R) and "Wizardry" (W). This trims the field down to which cards in-play that can be targeted by the "Goblin".
Again had the Monster had (8/5/0) it could deal "2 Damage" instead of only 1.
Furthermore, the "Goblin" can ONLY attack OTHER "Power" Monsters since his attack and HP values are controlled by "Power" attacks.
Back to the fictitious example Monster which had (8/5/0), it could deal "1 Power Damage" and "1 Skill Damage" meaning that the opponent will determine which HP can be drained (given that this "fictitious" Monster could deal UP to 2 Damage...) but depending on the opponent, only "1 Damage".
Some things to consider!
Maybe you can roll the dice (1st) and then figure out what Monster to attack (2nd) and then what opposing Monster to target (3rd).
I know this still means DICE ROLLING... But it is "mitigated" meaning that it greatens the effectiveness because you will have LESS rolls which result in NO DAMAGE (0).
I know players DISLIKE "Dice Rolling" because it's a crap-shoot. Meaning sometimes you TRY and FAIL (which frustrates some players). Now if you ROLL FIRST and THEN choose how to attack... That means MORE attacks will be successful even if they are not the targets you would have chosen to initially battle.
Thoughts???
Please feel free to comment, give feedback, share any ideas you may have, it will be greatly appreciated!
Note #1: This is the prototype version (appearance-wise). So don't worry, I have a "rendered" version which is MUCH better. This is B&W for printing and prototyping purposes only.
Comments
Some additional explanations
The Square "1" is a CONFIGURATION cost. Meaning players have 30 Configuration Points (CPs) to build their Deck. This "1" means that it costs "1" CP to the addition of one (1) of this "Goblin".
You can have at most THREE (3) of the SAME Monster in your Deck and you can at MOST have TWO (2) of the SAME Monster in-play.
The THREE (3) STATs (PSM): Power / Skill / Magic are part of the game. But I don't feel like a SOLUTION (deterministic) could exist with these "3 Values".
One solution could be: Attack / Defense / ???
This solution means that the Attack Value would need to match (or be greater) than the Defense Value and you WOULD have a 3rd Stat which could maybe be something like:
Damage: the amount of damage cause by a successful attack. These could be smaller values like "1" to "3" or something like that...
Count: the amount of attacks permissible by this Monster with 1 Damage each time. This means if you have a "3" = 3x 1 Damage = Maximum 3 Damage.
???: or something else which may lend better to determinism.
I'm open to NEW ideas and other thinking. Just wondering HOW(?) to perfect this design into something COOLER and (maybe) less dice.
Again all feedback and thoughts welcome!
Some early thoughts...
So the 3 Values would be: "Attack" / "Defense" / "Max Damage". The "Configuration Points" will be renamed to "Combat Points" (again "CP").
So the STAT values for a "Goblin" would be: 3/1/2 : 1
Which mean: 3 Attack, 1 Defense, 2 Max Damage and a CP of 1.
Why "Max Damage"? Think of a scenario where a Monster has a 9/1/5 : 3.
And he battles a 3/1/2 : 1...
1> 9 - 1 = 8 Damage, mitigated to "5" and requires "3 CPs".
2> 3 - 1 = 2 Damage (no mitigation required) and uses "1 CPs".
It's almost 5 AM ... And I haven't slept much... Had this on my mind and wanted to share ASAP and get it out of my brain and logged somewhere! Haha.
Anyways you get the picture I'm pretty sure. Next step is figuring out COMBAT.
Ugh ... Not sure ... There are plenty questions to ask and examine.
Cheers all!
Furthermore...
I am still working on making a Deterministic Combat sequence ... But there are still issues. The STATs are cool and seem to work in juxtaposition with all the Monsters too (but I have yet to "re-design" all of the Monsters...)
I'm trying to find BALANCE with the Monsters, their STATs, Attack Types and HP types too... It's a bit tricky and not always "optimal". But I'm working on it!
I'll have to design a NEW prototype and see where that leads me TBH. I will continue to work on the STATs and see how that turns out too. Clearly I do see a PATTERN for the "Combat Round" which is the last Round of the game.
PSM: Power/Skill/Magic are still present in HP types and Mana Points too. But the STATs now will be "Attack"/"Defense"/"Max Damage". A serious change which has not really affected the game TBH!
But the Combat Sequencing has to be examined further too... I need to finish designing the Monsters and then TEST the decks to see how they fare. This will allow me to also figure out HOW(?) combat phase is to be handled.
However I am HAPPY that I've removed the Dice for the "Attacking" Portion of the game even though the STATs rely on "PSM" values for the available amount of attacks... Still working on it, so I cannot comment further.
Sincerely.
Note #1: I am also working on using an RPS-5 ... Not sure if it will be "fully" used or not (maybe only partial) TBD...
This will be the 24th Design Cycle for MK. 24... Wow!
This is been one of the games that has been playtested SO MUCH that it is on its 24th Design Cycle. That's right there have been 23 Prototypes prior to the version which I am working on now which is Version #24... The format of the game makes creating a new version "reasonable" but like @larienna said in his other thread when there are "core" changes, the "Special Abilities" need to be tweaked too...
I've also playtested MK so much that I pretty much KNOW what needs fixing after another iteration of the game and Monsters. The Fundamentals have not changed, but there are a bit of minor tweaks that are required to support the NEW Combat Round... There are still questions remaining and I will have to take a closer look at the game as a WHOLE to see if this NEW "deterministic" version of the game is COOL and SOLID. Both of those are required before I can Self-Publish this game seeing as this is a project that I can HANDLE on my own!
Best!
Some additional thoughts
So while I created new STATs for all Monsters, I still need to Print and Playtest them. Normally I go to Staples to print the MK Cards and I will probably do that next week (or Sunday)... TBD.
What I am trying to achieve is a COMBAT "Combo" experience. What does this mean?
Well to be short, it means each ATTACK or BATTLE can have "3 Combat Points". And it breaks down into three (3) distinct possibilities: "1x 3", "2, 1", "3x 1" in terms of Monsters...
I'm still in the process of figuring things out... Like HOW(?) is it possible to Battle a "3 Combat Points" Monster ex: Treant (8/4/4) versus "3x 1 Combat Point" which could be ex: 2x Demon (3/2/2), 1x Mercury (3/3/2)... Let examine this in more detail (just to see what we get...)
Treant (8/4/4) "3" vs.
Demon 1 (3/2/2) "1"; Demon 2 (3/2/2) "1"; Mercury (3/3/2) "1".
1> Mercury is Resistant to Treant's Melee Attack.
2> 8 vs. 4 = 4 Damage, both Demons would die.
3> The Demons Angel would deal 3 + 3 + 3 = (9) adjusted to "6" Damage and the Treant = -2.
And Mercury would be the SOLE survivor.
This type of FINESS in terms of attacks is exactly what I was looking for. And I think the RULE is simple: The Attacker decides on the "Combat Points" for the attack: is it "1", "2" or "3" CPs.
And then the opponent can put up whichever cards they see fit.
This is still much up for REVIEW. This is just some AMAZING "Card Play" that I find really makes this game interesting. Exactly what I was looking for...
I'll design the cards and see to getting them printed. TBH, it's not 100% sure yet. There needs to be more analysis... Just to see how to get ALL things to work with these new Monsters.
I will continue to see how I can IMPROVE the odds of ATTACKING and COMBOS, etc.
Cordially.
Working through the challenges
One of the apparent problems is STACKING and ATTACK versus the opponent's DEFENSE. Since EACH Monster is given "Battle Points" ("1", "2", or "3"), it kinda makes sense to DROP the "Maximum Damage" and go for "Combo Damage".
This could very well be an "option".
Because if everything is done in Combination of one or more Monsters, having a CAP on the Damage is confusing.
So I truly believe that a COMBO Damage makes more sense as you introduce more combatants to a Battle, it just RAMPS UP the amount of possible TEAM Damage versus one stronger Behemoth (like a Treant)...
Still more to think about. But this design has been in evolution for many YEARS TBH... So no worries that it's not 100% just yet. MK is an evolving beast and I hope that at some point I can launch it and people will love it!
Cheers!
Note #1: I will stick with "Maximum Damage" as there is no reason to have a Combo Damage. There should be a LIMIT per Monster and that's what the "Maximum Damage" does in addition to capping the Combo Damage. This is pending some more playtests... But I've been working in Notepad and making attempts to ensure more COMPATIBILITY.
One of the approaches that I see is the RPS-5. I may keep it for future reference in that abilities may trigger depending on the RPS-5. What I DEFINITELY DON'T WANT is to use the RPS-5 to limit Combat options.
This new deterministic version, has it's own limitation and therefore I don't want to limit the Combat Outcomes any further. Previously I had wanted MORE caps on Combat Outcomes... Now this is no longer necessary and I want players to have MORE options than LESS...
Further examination is still required as I ponder the changes...
Dealing with the Battle Round and connected mechanics
I'm trying some scenarios with "Combined" Attacks and I've done a couple examples and it seems to be working pretty decently TBH. Granted that (1/1/1) Monsters do NOT make any sense because they are too weak (1 Atk - 1 Dfs = 0 Damage) even when combined ... So I doubt they are of use.
Unless they form a PAIR and that means (2/2/2) and maybe some kind of Interrupt ability which says something like: "When Attacked this Monster Doubles its STATs."
And the result is (4/4/4) which is still on the lower spectrum of "2 Battle Points" which is normally 5 or 6 Attack. Of course there are a bunch of possibilities with this new "Combat Mechanic" which uses deterministic resolution instead of rolling dice.
I like the determinism better it's easier to comprehend and doesn't have a HUGE RNG Factor that the game had before.
I may also KEEP the "RPS-5" for different Tactics... Still not sure about this I feel like it maybe like: "If Explosive Damage, deal -1 HP to this Monster." Or something like that TBD. The main motivation is to keep it for Tactics and conditions that vary the game and the Monsters. There is only so much you can do with limited "STATs" ... The more variables, the different the Tactics can be even if they are just Bonuses or Penalties.
I will print and make the 24th Prototype...
It's usually a day process since there are 36 cards per player... So 72 cards and I must print and then cut them to make the latest batch of cards and then see what the prototype looks like...
Obviously I will be looking to do several rounds of playtesting and test some of the Pre-Con Decks.
That's one of my strategies to help people figure out the game. There are a total of five (5) Pre-Con Decks which allows you to CHOOSE one (1) and then after some match-ups ... You can either TRY another Pre-Con Deck or customize the current Deck with Singles that will be purchasable to customize the player's deck... This has been carefully thought-up because it's been a long journey for this design.
I'm happy that the design has evolved even though it's challenging to make a NEW prototype (Version #24), I hope that some fine-tuning and minor balancing may occur and be able to playtest this version to some extent.
I am very satisfied that the design has EVOLVED the right way and it's definitely a 3rd Contender for a product that has merit and potential. This specific design has been around for a while with small tweaks in perfecting it to something MORE than just "playable" (like struggling to make the game WORK) but also feel EXCITING and even THRILLING.
Making the game Deterministic was a BIG STEP and it took a lot of attempts to REFINE the game and various methods of play even though the design has been changing with small improvements from one version to another.
The GOAL is to PERFECT the game ensuring that it has merit and is challenging to play. I know that even though this will be a physical product ... I do believe that IF this NEXT prototype (Version #24) proves to be MUCH improved, that the game may FINALLY be hitting its peak and that I can finalize the game as the cards become fully rendered.
We'll have to wait and see how the playtest go in the next week...
Cheers all!
Note #1: So I managed to print the cards today ... I haven't yet had a chance to cut them (they come on a sheet: 9 cards per sheet) and that is a bit of a tedious task. I have to be primed and ready to cut them. Perhaps I may find time later tonight... It's ALWAYS such a "chore" to make a new version and since this is Version #24 ... It's been a lot of printing and cutting over the years.
But I shelved the design for 6-Months and it was good because I came away with a deterministic solution (which needs playtesting!) but the good news was that the progression towards this was a "process". It didn't come to me all in one shot. Took month of effort and shelving/returning back to the design with FRESH ideas and a new perspective...
Note #2: I already began the cutting process ... But it's going to take AT LEAST two (2) more hours. It's very manual and will take a lot of time to finish. And so I don't know if I will be able to finish up tonight or maybe tomorrow (some time during the afternoon at earliest - because I have some errands to run in the morning...!)
It it what it is... And it takes time. Plus everything is so HUMID with the humidity in our area (like 41 Degrees with the Humidex). So the paper is sticking to the cutting board's surface and so forth... What can I say except is that it's going to take more time than I had initially anticipated!
Note #3: I'm 75% done ... I will no doubt go to bed afterwards as I need to be up early tomorrow. I'll check back with the community tomorrow and maybe I'll find the time to PLAYTEST a round or two of the game... Here's hoping!!!
I want to ensure that I did not create any TOO POWERFUL Monsters such that they default to MUST-HAVES in a Deck. I want the Deck Construction to be more flowing and lead to much offline FUN (before playing a match-up).
Okay so everything looks squared-away and ready...
I'm currently in the process of making supper ... But I plan to TRY the latest (and greatest) version #24 whenever I find some time for an Hour or so! I try to make it a FAIR DUEL by playing one player... Taking a break and then coming back to the opposing player to try to balance the cards being played (as if it were two players...) because by waiting, I forget which cards were played and the values associated with each Monster.
It's easy to forget when you take a 5 minute break between player turns and makes it more even in terms of the choices (they are specific to each player and not a result of the opponent's card play)...
I'll be sure to reply and let you know what I think and how the game's evolution has impacted my satisfaction with the design of MK.
Cheers.
Note #1: Couldn't find the time to playtest tonight. Had some online chatting regarding Marvel Cards and it took some time away from the playtesting. Sometimes you need to strike when opportunity knocks and it did, I traded Marvel Cards tonight and will send them off tomorrow. I'm happy with what I will get... Nite all.
No time to playtest ... YET!
I hope that tomorrow will be an off-day and I may get the time in the afternoon to playtest version #24 of MK. Should be possible. We'll have to wait and see how things evolve tomorrow. I've been rather busy these days because my cousin has Kemo therapy (for cancer treatment) and I help out picking up my uncle from his work (because my Aunt drives my cousin to her appointments). It's not very positive in terms of news... We are dealing with it as a Family would.
Keep you all posted on the status of playtesting tomorrow.
Best!
Initial rounds done in playtest ... but...
The selection of Monsters and choosing Monsters for the Keep ... Is great. It's to the point and simple. Even if it feels a bit challenging there is NO Analysis Paralysis (AP). At times it could be "arbitrary" but that's okay... The more you play with a Deck, the more you understand what cards to play and how to allocate Hit Points (HPs) to the various Monsters.
While all of that was good and POSITIVE... Let me get to where I am NOW: the Battle Rounds.
And TBH I'm not sure how to approach BATTLES. Although I have some guidelines, it's a bit of a challenge to figure out WHAT is your FIRST MOVE (like an opening in chess)... I will playtest the Battle Rounds tomorrow as the rounds have been setup and ready for COMBAT.
I also realized that some cards are still IN ERROR. I will review tomorrow as some of the Monster Tactics are still INCORRECT. That too will be taken care of tomorrow (hopefully).
I want to be certain that I take special care of the Battle Rounds and make VALID choices that the players would make using the Monsters that they have chosen.
More on this soon...
Note #1: As an Update, I have examined some of the cards and have some insight into what should be the "BEST" move (or Attack) for Player #1... I will continue to reflect on the board tomorrow and we'll see what my final conclusions are on Sunday. I know it sounds ludicrous to take 3 Days... What kind of game is this??? Not at all, I'm just spanning the analysis to ensure that it doesn't bias the Second Player's Attack Round. The more time it takes the less likely I can formulate a response from the Second Player...
I have decided to ALTER the game mechanics
Doing some Analysis ... And I came to the conclusion that the "Battle Round" is much too "over-complicated"! But the basics of the game "Power/Skill/Magic" do have a simple effectiveness to that trio of abilities. The plan as of now is to TRY another METHOD of play. Let me explain:
The Winning player EARNS his Bet Value (1 to 5) while ALL the OTHER opponents get a MINUS their Bet Value (-1 to -5). Each player has ONE (1) Monster Tactic they may employ during the Round and there are THREE (3) TYPES of Tactics:
1> Passive: Played immediately as soon as your Monster card is revealed. Usually this is like a "Boon" which gives the player a passive bonus.
2> Active: Takes effect whenever you choose the Tactic to be resolved but is NOT played against an opponent. Usually it alters the game in some way.
3> Interrupt: Can be played at ANY time and stops play until the ability is resolved correctly. Can be played against one or more opponents.
Lastly what happens to the FIVE (5) DISCARDED Monster Cards??? The answer to this is that THREE (3) of them FORM the SIXTH (6th) Round.
After the sixth (6th) Round is concluded, the player with the MOST Victory Points (Bet Points) is the WINNER.
Note #1: It is possible that some players have a NEGATIVE score based on how they fared with their Bet Values and the outcome of the Battles...
Note #2: This all sounds real NEAT and I am hoping to design the cards to see how they work... Right now I only have the mechanics explained and not all of the Monsters and Tactics which need a total REDO!
This NEW method of play will allow from 2 to 6 players to play the game with possibilities of re-ordering the play sequence given certain Abilities.
I need to do further ANALYSIS ... But for certain, this will be a BETTER GAME to play and allow for more opponents to play also. Again I need to do some more work to SEE what seems more FEASIBLE and interesting in terms of Gameplay.
The new mechanics look to be good ... EXCEPT...
There is one (1) Monster Tactic which I am unsure about what it should be. For sure, there is a need to have a BALANCED "Tactic" that doesn't break the game much like the other ones.
Much like @larienna stated in another thread... It can be at times HARD to "balance" Tactics and Abilities (maybe Keywords too!) And so the challenge in my particular case is only ONE (1) REMAINING Tactic... Which is not too bad, I can wrap my head around it and see what is NOT overly powerful.
TBD... We'll have to wait and see.
I will continue to THINK about what is possible in the context of this Monster Tactic and see what I can come up with (that is balanced and interesting too!)
Cheers all.
Just wrapping up the NEW cards for Prototype #25!
At the moment I am reviewing ALL the cards for Version #25 of the "Monster Keep" (MK) design and seeing if there are any mistakes that I might have made... I always TRY not to make mistakes and review everything... But there are a LOT of "tiny" details which need to be correct and the layout of the cards is done in sheets with nine (9) cards per sheet (the are formatted on 8.5" x 11" laser printer paper).
Right now I'm using sleeves to place the cut "paper" cards with a cardback that is BLANK on the face. This makes the cards a bit thicker given that paper is so very thin, it is hardly noticeable when you shuffle the cards.
I'm still not 100% convinced that I designed the cards "correctly" because I made a 15 point limit for each Monster's STATs and I'm not sure that is the correct way to go or not... We'll have to wait and see...
The ultimate test will be PLAYTESTING again.
Best!
Some early thoughts...
I was under the impression that one Card would be the Monster and the other Card would be the Tactic. But it seems like it might be more "interesting" if BOTH Cards were used in terms of STATs and the BOTH Tactics could be available when played.
Again just some things that I am thinking about and looking into.
I'm thinking there should be a "betting" element in-between...
Like you reveal Card #1 and have a BET Value. Card #2 remains SECRET until the Next Phase of the Round which reveals Card #2... But in-between these two (2) phases it might be of INTEREST to correct your betting (either UP if you are more confident that you will WIN the Round or DOWN if you are trailing and feel like you cannot recover...)
So up to FIVE (5) Betting Points (which act as HP) between two (2) Cards ... And then two (2) Tactics that can come in-play depending on the Cards available to be used.
Again NOT SURE... Just some embryonic ideas I may have to TEST-OUT!
Note #1: A COMBINATION of BOTH Betting Values (BVs) is at most a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 5 (across BOTH cards). ZEROs (0s) or minus values are NOT ALLOWED.
Note #2: I will do more "thinking" about the design... I get the impression I'm onto something GOOD ... We'll have to wait and see!
More thinking has led to some interesting IDEAS!
So going with (Note #2), I have been exploring HOW(?) to handle the Power/Skill/Magic aspect of the game. So IF there is NO "Betting", I have come to an interesting idea and it kinda goes like this:
1> Players draw three (3) cards from their Deck IN SECRET (do not reveal).
2> For two (2) cards they choose "P", "S" or "M" and discard the 3rd card.
3> Next, starting with the 1st Player in the ROUND, they reveal ONE (1) card.
It must be one (1) of the three (3) STATs: Power/Skill/Magic (P, S, or M).
4> Play goes around the table and each player decides to REVEAL ONE (1) card.
Same like Player #1... except they FOLLOW THE LEADER (more on that...)
5> A player may SCORE "1 Victory Point" (VP) each time his CARD has the SAME or HIGHER of the STAT #1 revealed by Player #1.
If some of the players cards are below this value, they score NO POINTS ("0").
6> The Highest SCORING player for STAT #1, reveals their STAT #2.
And much like in the first (1st) Phase of the Round, players reveal cards and try to SCORE POINTS in the same fashion as above.
So Player "A" (the one with the highest SCORING VALUE) becomes the LEADER and reveals his SECOND STAT #2... Players must ultimately BEAT STAT #2 and score one (1) point if HIGHER or EQUAL value.
Something like this seems RATHER INTERESTING and MIXES things up quite a bit.
Each player that BEATS Player #1 "STAT #1" earns +1 VP. For each player that IS BEATEN by "STAT #1", Player #1 earns +1 VP. Same rules apply for Player "A" (for STAT #2).
VPs are tentative... Because if you REVEAL identical STATs (#1 and #2) the TOTAL of that stat is used through the SAME ROUND but for only ONE (1) STAT.
An example to clear up the confusion.
Let's say I'm Player #1 and I play a "Power = 6", and Player #4 has "Power = 8". Player #1 scores 2 VPs and Player #4 scores 1 VP. Player #2 and #3 were below so they score 0 VPs.
Now it's time to reveal Player #4 second card which is a "Power = 4". This means that COMBINED Player #4 has a total of "8 + 4 = 12 Power". Going around the table we figure that NOBODY has a higher Power and therefore Player #4 scores 3 VPs and the rest 0 VPs...
IF instead of "Power = 4", Player #4 had "Magic = 6", this would mean that we would therefore go around the table to see WHO beats (or is equal) to "Magic = 6"... And the result is Player #2 has "Magic = 7", the rest are BELOW. This means that Player #2 scores 1 VP, Player #1 scores 2 VPs and Player #4 scores 3 VPs.
It's not 100% SIMPLE ... But it WORKS! I'm going to let this rest for a bit and see where it leads next. For certain, it's not the EASIEST method of play. But it makes it a bit more challenging and less CERTAIN than what I would expect ... And that's GREAT for sure!
I'm not completely sure if this is the LAST "Method of Play" but it's not too simple and it's very dynamic and complex to "manipulate" which is INTERESTING!
Definitely some GOOD potential here...
Furthermore...
I rid myself of the dice (I had planned to use 4D6s) and (maybe) the scoring card and just replace this with a "Blank" card on which you can write on using a dry-Erase Pen. Or maybe I can "re-design" the "Blank" card into something more "functional" and leave more room for proper scoring (IDK)...
But this would definitely "streamline" the game even FURTHER!
I will investigate this FURTHER and report back my findings. I know that the game is much better NOW and offers more challenges and makes a more "complex" method of play which is good because the game is aimed for Teens and older (Millennials, 20-somethings and Adult Gamers who enjoy card games, etc.)
So I will take a break tonight and see what I can come up over the weekend!
Cheers all!
Still re-working version #26 ...
I am finding out new concepts to go with the game. Namely things like written STATs matching the ACTUAL "STATs" of the cards/Monsters. I have also made a very interesting conclusion:
When an opposing card is HIGHER, the OPPONENT scores one (1) Point.
When the opposing card is LOWER, the PLAYER scores one (1) Point.
So for TIES, BOTH players score... Which was an interesting concept since I had originally thought that the opponent needed to have GREATER or EQUAL to beat the player... This way is more FUN for scoring and you can use the Take-That abilities to do damage and piss the other players off... Hehehe!
But yeah, I'm happy with that... It advances the design ever so slightly to the FINAL product,
Best.
I've removed the betting mechanic
In one of my earlier comments in the thread, I was talking about a Betting Value and the possibility that players "could" bet point to win them. I've decided that this would not work with the existing mechanics and have returned to the previous method of play which is:
1> First Card is the Monster in-play and select STAT;
2> Second Card is the Tactic that may be used by that player;
3> Third Card is the one that gets discarded until the LAST round.
This was a previous version (in-between comments) that I had discussed this method of play. It's much more interesting in terms of the design and I feel like this method of Battle/Skirmish to be more FUN and exciting.
I'm still not sure HOW to make the Battle/Skirmish work in ALL of the details, it's still very much as WIP (Work-In-Progress). I'm running simulations in my mind and will get to testing something "close" to see how well this NEW mechanic performs.
To be certain, it's much better than BEFORE... And I've abandoned some of the earlier Battle Mechanics because they "Just didn't Work" and as such left a big gapping hole in the design.
Now the Battle Mechanics are still not 100% but I'm re-working without needing to make a NEW "prototype". As I work through a few iterations on different levels of the mechanics... I'm "proofing" in my mind and how "interactions" will take place and what's the most likely method of play and how that impacts the design.
We'll have to wait and see... TBD.
Furthermore...
The turn order is going to look something like this:
1> Player #1 selects one (1) card to be his Monster and at the same time he also selects a STAT: Power/Skill/Magic.
2> That same Player #1 reveals the card to his opponents.
3> The NEXT Player having Partial Information, decides which Monster he wants to play and MUST play the SAME STAT as Player #1.
4> Play continues to ALL players have chosen ONE (1) Monster card.
5> Player #1 now select one (1) card to be his Tactic and plays THIS card HIDDEN from all the other opponents.
6> Play continues whereby all other players CHOOSE a Tactic card in secrecy.
7> Direct Tactics get RESOLVE one-by-one during this ROUND. And as such are revealed and their effect are in-play immediately.
8> Interrupt Tactics are played at any time during ANY ROUND. And so they can remain in secret.
9> Scoring of the FIRST ROUND is done by comparing the ATTACK VALUE of the chosen STAT. Ties = BOTH players score one (1) Victory Point, when Player #1 is HIGHER, Player #1 scores one (1) Victory Point and when Player #1 is LOWER, the opponent scores one (1) Victory Point.
10> Then the NEXT ROUND begins and Player #2 is now the Leading Player. Play continues in the same fashion for a total of six (6) ROUNDS.
11> At the end of the sixth (6th) Round, players add up all their Victory Points and the player with the HIGHEST value is the winner.
Some important points to note is that Monster Tactics that are Interrupts can occur from a PREVIOUS card in-play. Which means the SCORES are a bit FLUID until the VERY END of the LAST ROUND (6th one). So this means nothing is a guarantee that one player will score the SAME amount of points because he/she may be affected by a penalty in a later round which can affect all of the scoring...
That's why we say that "Interrupts" when played are in-play until they are fully resolved.
This is the method of play that I am currently proposing. Which seems pretty decent and has a lot more depth of strategy than initially anticipated.
Let me know if anyone has any questions, feedback, comments or has other ideas which may be of value.
Thank you all.
Monster Keep Tactics
Well I decided to list here the various "Tactics" since they will be an integral part of the design. There are four (4) different types of "Tactics" and they go as follows:
Passive: must be resolved on your turn immediately and be played at the same time as your Monster is played. This Tactic is concluded and resolved before the next player plays his turn.
Direct: can be resolved during the same round and may be played anytime while Monsters are being revealed. If this Tactic is used, it must be concluded before the end of the round. It may remain unresolved.
Indirect: can only be resolved at the end of the round and must therefore be reserved to play once all players have revealed their Monsters. This Tactic must be concluded at the end of the round if it is used. It may remain unresolved.
Interrupt: can an be resolved at any turn in any round and therefore can be instantaneous and resolved at the time the Tactic is revealed. This Tactic must be fully resolved before play continues. It may remain unresolved.
I originally had three (3) different types of Tactics and just added a fourth (4th) one today when I realized that "Indirect" made sense for the END of the Round as opposed to "Direct" which can occur anytime DURING a Round. That small difference has forced me to make a distinction between "Direct" and "Indirect" Tactics.
That's it for now... This is more or less a FINAL version of the Monster Tactics and how they are to be resolved from immediately to never and at any given time in any round.
Cheers all.