Monster Keep: Another day, another prototype

The game is getting BETTER... I know for an 18th Generation product you'd think that most things would be ironed out. Unfortunately that's NOT the case.

#1: Complications

This has got to be one of the designs that has taken a LOT more time than I had initially planned to invest into. And it continues to be somewhat elusive to nail down ALL "the moving parts" so-to-speak.

1> Skin-in-the-game or so I'd like to believe

Having rules is a good thing. But when you playtest and realize that some of the more "asynchronous" rules just make things HARD to track, you wonder how good they really are.

This has got to be so stupid: Counter vs. Exhausting vs. Multiple Attacks.

It needs to be SIMPLER... And keeping track of how many resources are used per ATTACK seems to make sense (with the whole Push-Your-Luck mechanism) but it is NOT CLEAR and somewhat CONFUSING.

2> When to "Exhaust" has got me so exhausted

The whole COUNTER and use one (1) Resource and not to "Exhaust" the countering Monster is very confusing. It needs to be simpler and more STRAIGHT-FORWARD!

3> Multiple attacks is possible due to poor "Exhaust" rules

Again more confusion which MAY lead to more attacks but the REACH Levels already serve as a way to "curb" attackers desire to wage war with every Monster.

#2: Health and Health related tracking

Having some cards which become DEFEATED is very cool and simplifies the computation during the Final Round.

1> Forget formulation and stick to ALTERNATE scoring

So this means the VALUES on the CARDS are the ONLY "variables" that are added up together. Quick and simple. AND OBVIOUS. Figuring out how to COMPUTE anything MORE is a 100% complete and TOTAL DISASTER!!!

My solution is ALTERNATE scoring which is addition of the formulas ALREADY present on the CARDS themselves.

2> Health should ONLY be used for DEFEATING a Monster ONLY

This is another conflicting issue. Why ATTACK in the first place??? If the formulae are FIXED ... The ONLY logical purpose is to CANCEL and VOID a card. This means dealing sufficient DAMAGE to DEFEATE a given Monster. Could be one (1) or two (2) but not all Monsters in the Keep.

3> Dice rolling needs to be re-considered

I'm not saying Dice rolling is pointless... But instead of getting mixed up with the Health Bar ... Maybe SEPARATE BOTH. Although this Generation had a very "sleek" and designer interesting method of computing scores and allowing multiple options for POINTS. It should be CLEAR that a card has "X" DICE to be rolled and then a specific amount of Health Points (HP).

Anyhow more thinking on this one ... I know I've had MORE ideas to think about and I'm sure this needs something CLEVER too. But I don't have an immediate solution at this point in time.

#3: Conclusion & re-think

So I'll make it brief... There is STILL "design" work ... But it seems like the prototype is getting BETTER and moving forwards each time I make a new prototype and PLAYTEST it further.

I'm not exactly sure about all the bullet points. Definitely need to REVIEW and RE-THINK a lot of the MECHANISM in-place and see what can be improved upon and EXACTLY HOW(?)

It's 12:06 AM Saturday ... So I'll simply state that I will REVIEW the game during the afternoon around 1:00 PM Saturday. So I'm ready to hit the sack and see what my mind thinks about THIS playtest...

This last playtest has been in the works since 16th Generation and so I've had some EDITS without making sufficient playtesting (mostly aesthetics TBH)!

So bed for now... But definitely NEED a REVIEW... And to see what needs some improvement and clear up the confusing without GUTTING the game again (As this has happened with the game over the generations...) I think it has DEFINITE POTENTIAL... But things need SIMPLIFICATION because it's NOT all that intuitive ATM. And you want the game to FLOW nicely and be CLEAR and NOT confusing. So no Analysis-Paralysis for sure...

Keep you all posting about my playtest analysis in the afternoon!

One of my concept is the POINTS GOAL (which is between 4 and 24)... If I rid myself of this "mechanic"... Then it becomes a rather DUMB dual:

That's TERRIBLE and VERY STUPID.

But what could be a Player's Motivation to DEFEAT an opposing Player's Monster IF all this does is REDUCE their TOTAL ... Making it EASIER to be lower and closer to the POINTS GOAL???

Any thoughts anyone?!

I've been messing with the design ... and ... well ... I feel like I am the cusp of something INTERESTING. I've been FORCING the "math" and have been struggling to find a BALANCE between Deck Construction and Formulation. What I currently have is the idea to REMOVE the "math" and go with scoring BASED on "Damage Dealt" which means this gives very granular control ... but it's a bit RANDOM due to the DICE rolls.

In earlier editions, I did NOT have Dice rolling and since the 16th Generation, I found that Dice Rolling could add a layer of unpredictability. And now I am thinking that maybe the game should be a RACE! Meaning that the FIRST Player to reach the "Point Total" wins the game.

If they "overshoot" it (meaning get more points than anticipated), the game goes on until the OPPONENT determines if they can match the "Point Total" or come closer to it than the opponent.

And basically it would become a RACE until the closer of the two (2) Players wins the game. Sort of like the "Price is Right" but it would be acceptable to score HIGHER ... But by then giving the opponent the chance to make the "Point Total" closer, they could steal the victory from the other player.

IDK... I'm getting the VIBE of a "break-thru" ... But not just YET!

It's horrible that I want to make the MATH go-away... But I've seen that the SCORING phase of the game was just TOO COMPLICATED! It was pretty much "Analysis-Paralysis" and no real ending in sight (to win).

Meanwhile I had values that I placed on various Cards and adding them up made sense and it was a 27 to 17 match-up. However I realized that although the MATH just wasn't working ANYMORE... That quick computation was what I was WANTING for the game.

So then I thought: "What IF I give points to units that ATTACK???" Meaning that all cards started with a VALUE of "0". And then IF I performed "3" ATTACKS, I would gain "+3" Points.

That didn't last because the DECK would be comprised of only the MOST HIGHEST scoring cards!

I've recently concluded that it should be the AMOUNT of DAMAGE inflicted. And that IF I tracked DAMAGE, I could easily compute the adding of all of the DAMAGE and compare it to the "Point Total".

This adds a sense to tension as both player BATTLE to WIN as QUICK as POSSIBLE!

So yeah... It really does sound like I'm on the verge of a "Break-thru"...

More testing and thought is required! Cheer all.

Sometimes simplicity is best. While I REALLY like the "3 Pips"... the "3" without any multiplier I feel also looks more "natural". I guess because those two (2) versions seem to signify "dice" (pips vs. numerical).

BTW I know that the "3" is not 100% centered... I've fixed that in my AI file for the images.

My conclusions is that it must be "3 Pips" or "3 only" ... One of these two (2) Versions because they MOST represent DICE and that's what I feel is important.

Anyone feel like sharing some additional comments/feedback/other avenues to explore, etc... All that good stuff...

Cheers.

And it seems like the "Pips" is the preferred version. For reasons as a I stated it looks like a "dice" and even if it may "seem" like a condition rather than an attempt count, that can be easily explained and then becomes second nature while looking at other Monster cards.

I've also been making corrections to the "To-Hit" and the dice counts (how many each Monster should have of "dice" to roll) and it's coming together rather nice.

I will playtest either later this evening or Sunday as I have an appointment in the morning later today.

But I'm very pleased with the results so far. I can't wait to playtest and see what are the "troubling" issues. I know that by adding some more rolls that has not SOLVED all the problems. Yes as @FrankM says it, I got rid of the last round Math Quiz and will make the game about "dealing damage" to your opponent.

First Player to do this WINs... If the player goes ABOVE the scoring total... Well then the opponent has a chance to beat him. If he fails and goes ABOVE the other player's Total Points, then the first player wins. If both players have the same Total Points a tie is declared and players may play another game to try to become the victor in the next game.

Again I will post on the situation later today (given that it is passed 1:00 AM in the morning over here in Montreal!)

I know there will be issues ... And that's fine, that's what playtesting solo is for... To IRON OUT all the issues and examine each issue separately and work towards resolving them all.

Best!

I just felt like LOST... How do I make an EQUATION NOW??? Like there were too many options. But filling up six (6) boxes and adding those value together to get a SCORE... Now that made SENSE! And it was relatively EASY to do.

The other aspect that I was writing about was the "Race-Aspect". As if the 1st Player to reach a certain Point Goal would be declared the winner. Well I've decided against this and have put in the option of "Knock-outs"... So when you defeat all the Health Points (HPs) of a Monster, that Monster is "knocked-out" and flipped over and the opponent will score a Final Scoring Bonus for each card knocked-out: Level 1 = +1 Point, Level 2 = +2 Points and Level 3 = +3 Points.

Of course I need to playtest this... This is all purely speculative at the current moment. But it's injecting new ideas and mechanisms to help the game flow with the newest generation of the game (19th).

I'll let you know how this generation pans-out!

Best.

I've been thinking a LOT about THIS "aspect" of the game. And your point is the exact reason that I didn't have this type of "scoring" because it would encourage players to play the "strongest" cards over their weaker counterparts.

But after 5 Generations, I PLAN to alter the "Scoring Card" and to basically re-invert the Scoring Pyramid and make it that the POINTS you get is accumulated based on the "Damage" you do to YOUR OPPONENT.

At the same time, you can KNOCK-OUT cards with STRONGER cards. See there is a bit of counter-intuitive logic. If it's all about dealing MORE Damage well then the opponent can build a deck with their WEAKEST cards ONLY. While you think this is possible, it's not smart... Because weak cards cannot give you strong amounts of Damage nor do the amount of dice rolling favor weaker cards.

So then what I see is to NATURALLY blend STRONG and WEAK cards together and create some kind of BALANCE. But if all things average out in the end... Well then why not have MEDIUM cards only. There are then a few strategies available to player and they aren't so obvious TBH.

Like I say, another day, another prototype... So I need to playtest this aspect tomorrow (Sunday being my day at rest!) and see what is the outcome and how to play the Rounds and what is scoring like, what is attacking like, etc.

And so choosing the STRONGEST Monsters means that you have more ATTACK power BUT you may not need all of it and secondly it means your opponent has more "meat" to ATTACK and THEY can score more Points!

I really feel it's a question of synergies and balance TBH. You want some Tanks to deal some "extra" damage and you also want to be able to Knock-Out a card or two to affect the final scoring.

However remember that not ALL Monsters can attack all opponents. This varies as per the Monster's REACH Level. And while the 1st Round is BLIND, the 2nd and 3rd Round are all about strategy and figuring out how to outplay your opponent.

So I believe that there will be this natural balance with a few methods of achieving it which will lead to more "flexible" Deck Construction.

Definitely need more playtesting ... But yeah this "issue" has been around since the START of the game Generation 1 & 2. I was struggling HARD to TRY to FIGURE out how I could make the game work with the HIGHEST possible score. And then it came to me: "Knock-Outs" which focus damage on one specific Monster to "knock-it out" and yield BONUS points for that Monster and the whole odds, balance, damage A PLAYER DEALS to his OPPONENT which SCORES POINTS!

So you want to A> "Knock-out" as many of the opponent's Monsters as possible whenever and wherever possible and B> Balance your Monsters to deal Damage according to your OPPONENT's MONSTERS (and their Health Points).

For example: You may play the "Right of Passage" (Orc Tank) which has 3 Power and 2 Skill. He deals a whooping "3 Damage" and relies on a To-Hit of "9" with 2 Dice and 2 Rolls each. He's more versatile because he DEALS TWO (2) TYPES of Damage not only Power BUT also Skill. But his potential is "5" Damage. It's overkill... Because he may ONLY score "2" or "3" Points towards the total due to the HP of the OPPOSING Monster.

So right now it is INDEED VERY CLEVER. Very TIGHT and intertwined with how the strategy will work. I will of course eventually test DUMB-ED DOWN decks with only weak Monsters or only strong Monster to see the variation of how the cards fare. But from a "Design" perspective... I think I've got something pretty SOLID.

Playtesting some more will confirm... But I want to take 18th Generation for one last couple spins tomorrow and see how they fare with some of the corrections...

Yeah... Don't think that this is the first time I've had to deal with POWER CREEP and only playing the BIG GUNS. Won't work very well because you are EXPOSING YOURSELF to HIGHER OPPONENT SCORING. It works in REVERSE. But I've explained that even IF you play WEAKER Monsters, your opponent won't score as much Damage (and Points) as you would do a stronger Monster but at the same time... Neither will you! Some weak Monsters have some advantages but I would not make a deck of only WEAK Monsters.

Secondly because NOW I am relying on DICE ROLLS and RNG... This also will alter the scoring in favor of one player over the other. Or maybe just balance out (or having a hot-streak ... Or worst a lousy-run).

I've been thinking about this "issue" for a long time. And I can only speak DESIGN-WISE, I think I have a mix that will work. It's not only about the strength of the Monsters it's also dice rolling, the right REACH Levels and figuring out WHERE to take RISKS.

It ain't simple... That's for certain!

Without getting too much into detail, I've seen games with BROKEN "scoring" mechanics which were all affected by Power Creep. I think I had a thread somewhere where I was discussion that very issue. One of the most notable games is "Pokemon"... Pokemon is the KING of Power Creep and as players became accustomed to the first "core" Decks (and boosters - basically the card pool in the first edition), they figured out that PLAYING "certain" Pokemon would yield BETTER odds of beating the opponent because those Pokemon were STRONGER...

And that was WAY BACK AT THE BEGINNING...! Since then, Pokemon has completely gone the "other way" and embraces Power Creep as the newer and STRONGER Pokemon are designed and Launched making or should I say FORCING players to collect newer booster packs (to hunt down those STRONGER Pokemon for their decks).

This is only one game ... But I've seen others too... Pokemon is the most FAMOUS one.

Magic: the Gathering (Magic) is different because there is a CARD ROTATION in STANDARD and MODERN plus there are cards which are BANNED from one Edition to the next... And so players are forced to keep up with Decks that get broken because a card in the strategy of that CONSTRUCTED Deck no longer is possible because of a BANNED card. So Magic handles things a bit differently in TRYING to make some KIND of "Balance". But sometimes they just create TOO POWERFUL cards and those get immediately banned in STANDARD without even going through a rotation or two...

Again there are other games where IF you play the dominant strategy to SCORE the highest points amounts to using the BEST cards that exist. And you build up your Deck with those STRONGER cards and try to "BLOCK" opposing strategies which could be combos with other cards such that you prevent those actions from ever happening. That's another way of BALANCING the games too (a bit...)

For example: I have a card which is called "Midnight Hunt" (It's a werewolf card), it has a Tactic which is "Moolight Howl" which states: "Block any one Monster from attacking." A nice way to say FU to the opponent's idea to try to score some points against you! Haha... A bit of "Take-That" too!

So there are ways to mitigate in some circumstances and in others plain bland ignore Power Creep. So our game has Power Creep!!! Buy the right cards and you too will be on the right side! Hehehe.

This is a topic in itself ... But I think I've explained some of the instances and where you can see this kind of abusive "marketing" behavior. I say "marketing" because it's all about selling NEWER and BETTER cards. And not trying to BALANCE old and new "chapters" (which play differently in a game like "Crystal Heroes")...

Let me know if you've seen this kind of "disruptive" BAD behavior in other games... Feel free to share ones that you know. It helps me examine other games and see how they DO or DON'T IGNORE the problem of Power Creep.

Best!

There is another mechanism that I want to RESTORE to the cards: the Build Value.

Currently I have this FLAG on the TOP Left-Hand-Side (LHS). And in it has some kind of ICON. Well I've realized that this ICON is "useless" and I would instead prefer having a "VALUE" that restricts the way one BUILDS his/her own Deck.

I already have like 5 pre-made decks with various combinations of making the game harder or easier... Those decks were OLD and relied heavily on the "mathematics" of the game. Since I've removed that "utter complication" and made it much easier to compute the scores at the very end of the game, it stands to reason that I will need to revise the "pre-made decks" and correct the VALUES of the various cards/Monsters in each deck.

But IT gives me another IDEA to FOCUS on and to REFINE the game yet ... once again!

Cheers.

Note #1: This "Build Value" which is capped at "30 Points" is another reason why you just can't use ONLY the "stronger" cards and not mix-in a few "weaker" ones and maybe a couple "average" ones too. Everything ATM is RELATIVE and I need to "re-define" what is STRONG and what is WEAK.

Some Monsters/cards are more OBVIOUS but some are not. I guess that's where I get the "AVERAGE" values: if I have a hard time deciding between STRONG and EASY, well then that Monster will be "AVERAGE"... Sounds good in my mind!

I figured out that I could have an EVEN MORE "Balanced" approach to the "Build Points" if I tweaked a few Monsters. And so I have done that ... I hope this latest batch produces a FUN and engaging game. Like I said, more playtesting some time during this week.

But right now I have:

1> Five (5) Monsters with "1" Build Point

2> Five (5) Monsters with "2" Build Points

3> File (5) Monsters with "3" Build Points

So it's 100% balanced in terms of values AND quantities. What I mean is that like before the total for 15 Unique Monsters = 30 Build Points and that averages out to "2" Build Points.

Also it NOW means that there is a STRICT Balance between the various Monsters in that each of the Build Points comes in batches of Five (5) x 3 = 15 Unique Monsters...

Pretty kewl that it all seems to be working out!

No instead I have defined five (5) Decks. Players buy the cards they want to make up the deck of their desires. They can craft other decks too (if they want to...) But there are five (5) pre-defined ones you can TRY and see which one works better for the players.

You can BUY any card you like from the ONLINE store, but the prices vary (Still working on this ATM... I have some ideas, I just need to implement them and see...)

The idea is getting people STARTED with a PRE-DEFINED Deck they like. It shows the players OPTIONS to the decks and then once they PLAY and comprehend the game FURTHER, they can choose to build their OWN deck or customize one of the existing ones.

Indeed... Yeah it's like an Aftermarket Store where the cards are all available and you buy whatever you want.

Yes you are allowed three (3) of the SAME card in your Micro Deck. But remember some cards may be very costly to have three (3) of them (anything "3" BPs is a high customization cost). And that may cause problems building a Deck.

But I already have (like I said) 5 Pre-Defined Micro Decks and so you can use one deck as a model for another and substitute and configure as you see fit.

And you know that MagicA and MtG both allow for a maximum of FOUR (4) COPIES of a card to be present in your Deck. Obviously MagicA or MtG Decks are LARGER so I naturally lowered the duplicates by "1".

It's a bit HARDER to build a Deck (because of the BPs) but at the same time you can say it is a more broader CHALLENGE to define your OWN Micro Deck (15 Cards)...

On some cards I'm only making $0.25 USD. The cost of making and shipping make for a more expensive product. So I'm not even following the 4x or 5x multiplier from COST (and "to let the cat out of the bag", I'm going to make "plastic" cards you can write on so you don't even need to buy sleeves!).

Like I said, I'm going to RETAIL them so no middlemen and therefore I make 100% of the profit. If I had to sell to STORES or go through distribution ... It would probably make the whole project NOT VIABLE.

So if I sell a card for $1.00 USD and am only making $0.25 USD... The price should have been around $3.00 to $3.75 USD for just one card... That's just TOO EXPENSIVE.

Anyhow ... This project is for the PLAYERS and I'll see how many are willing to drop ~$25 USD for a Micro Deck. Like I said, you play for FUN and if you enjoy the game, then you can personalize.

As a price comparison, the Pre-Defined Micro Decks vary from $26.00 USD to $27.00 USD (+shipping)! Like I said, it won't break the BANK.

But I found a site on which they CHARGE a fixed fee for the FIRST ITEM (let's say $18 CAD or $13 USD) and then a micro fee per additional items. So let's say $0.25 USD per card. So that like $3.75 USD extra for 15 cards. And the total would be like $16.75 USD for shipping of one (1) Micro Deck.

I don't know IF I can set a limit on the amount of items purchased... I'll have to look into that in further detail. But yeah there is shipping from China to my home (and it is very expensive) ... There are of course "economies of scale" in which I could purchase 1,000 units of the SAME card. But the stocking of so many cards is rather a COSTLY proposition considering that I DON'T know how WELL the game and cards will sell.

So I'm opting for the lowest quantity and there is no price break. It's unfortunate that I cannot capitalize on the fact that I could buy 1,000 units per Monster/card. And yeah some Gamers will purchase THREE (3) of one card for their needs...

The reality ATM is that I cannot afford such quantities. Especially not for the variety of cards that I will be offering.

That means that ATM the cards are a bit pricier but still within reason. But it would NOT work if I had to sell via stores. An ONLINE store, yes... Because I earn 100% of the Retail Amount. But even then, the pricing of the cards is still not your usual 4x or 5x multiplier from cost.

Everything costs more these days and IF I sold via stores it would NOT be an affordable rate considering that on some cards I only make $0.25 USD. Nobody would be happy with that TBH... Especially stores. It would just make the entire project NON-VIABLE.

But because I sell 100% ONLINE and take all retail profits, well that means that I don't mind the troubles for a $0.25 profit... Like I said, I'm doing it to further my exposure with yet another game and another (different) style of play.

Like I told @Rich the other day, I'm not a "Marketing Guru" or "Pro Graphic Designer" or a "Videographer"... I'm a "Game Designer" who wants to design unique and memorable game experiences. All my games are DIFFERENT from one another and that is BY DESIGN. I don't want ALL my games to be similar. I guess I take a page out of Reiner Knizia's philosophy on making games: focus on one at a time and try to make them different.

At least that's a sort of para-phrasing... I don't know where I got the original comment he made, could be in a YouTube Video or a Dice Tower Video, etc... IDK TBH. But I remember watching or hearing something similar to this and it was in regards to HIS games.

Yeah I printed out a NEW set of cards with the "Build Values", place to write down the REACH Level and overall "fixed" the cards with the most recent version (19th Generation) of the cards.

It's a whole process to PRINT & CUT the cards ... It's on 8 sheets of paper and I use sleeves with cardbacks that I purchased a while back for "Monster Keep" (MK).

Plus I also printed the REVISED Scorecards on 1 sheet (BOTH of them — 2-Players).

I will make the preparations tomorrow (probably)...

And then see how the game holds up... I know I should limit the printing of too many prototypes... I usually get 1 to 2 playtests and conclude that there are still things missing and/or issues with the game.

But I follow a process and it has never let me down before... So why try to FIX something that AIN'T BROKEN!

Cheers all.

I only got 25% of what I needed to do to complete the cutting of the 2nd Deck and "extra" cards for the Pre-Designed Micro Decks. I may get to 50% in the next hour or so... But still will have some of the task left over for tomorrow.

That's the thing (just like @Stormyknight1976 suggests) it's a process to get the cards cut and sorted and so forth. It takes some manual focus but still is a very tedious task (labor-intensive).

So it's not too bad ... We'll get to testing this 19th Generation of the game. And like I said earlier, I think most things are ironed out from a "Stat" perspective ... It's just a matter of ensure that there are rules to govern combat and what is the relationship with "Exhausting" a Monster/card. Is there even necessity for a concept, that IDK ATM. Some more playtests later in the week should conclusively help to firm-up the design and tighten what seems to be a bit vague ATM...

It's pretty darn KEWL!!! It was a close match-up and it all made sense without any of "How do I do this?" or "When should I do that?" ... Definitely NO analysis-paralysis which is GREAT!

No "Exhausting" either only "Knock-Outs" when a Monster has ZERO (0) HP.

Both sides "knocked-out" two (2) Monsters and helped Player #2 go from a lesser score to the more CLOSER "11" Points.

And so this doing the MAXIMUM possible DAMAGE! Hah. Not overkill and my resources had a bunch of points remaining...

It's actually FUN and a bit of "Analysis" (without the Paralysis) which is indeed GOOD. So no concerns with "Exhausting", A-P, Not enough Resources, "Knock-outs", etc. Was pretty clear as to the gaming experience. Pretty decent by my own critique and I'm very harsh on my games.

"Monster Keep" (MK) has reached a NEW level of gameplay and satisfaction.

I will conduct ANOTHER playtest later tonight (depending on my mood - Hah).

Cheers all...

Note #1: The dice rolls for "Resources" were: 5 Power. 6 Skill, 6 Magic and 4 Arcane.

Both sides chose: 9 Power, 6 Skill and 6 Magic.

Note #2: The only thing I need to CEMENT is when ATTACKING you must DECLARE your intention to deal what KIND of Damage (Is it Power, Skill or Magic???) Because sometimes you fail a ROLL but get a DOUBLE which means you only deal "1 Damage" for one (1) Resource (depending which one). I found myself not choosing at the start of combat and then choosing after the rolls and "sort-of" changing my mind...

For my FIRST (1st) playtest ... This was NORMAL in TRYING things to see how to maximize the points and so forth. But I've already ironed out those details by the near end of the first playtest. I had been choosing my resource FIRST and THEN rolling the dice to deal "Damage".

So no biggie... Was a small detail as I figured out the rules and tried things to see how they could/would work out!

It's great when you feel like a DESIGN is "crystalizing" and becoming a SOLID entity (connectivity, purpose, agency, etc.)

No "REACH" Levels are chosen STRATEGICALLY by each player for each Monster/card. No dice rolling for this. Dice Rolling for Resources and to deal Damage.

Some Monsters like the "Frolicking Fairy" can grant a "+1 REACH" Level and that can also play a big part in how some points can go to the opponent's side. I'm thinking that "+1 REACH" Level should be for ANY Monster not just your own... So you can LURE an enemy Monster into a TRAP. That definitely SOUNDS better than just improving your OWN odds... Getting an opposing Monster into some hot waters also sounds NEAT!

It's just the FIRST ROUND because it's all done in SECRECY... It AMOUNTS to being a bit "random" (RNG) as to being a SURPRISE for BOTH SIDES of the table.

eg.: You don't know what your opponent will choose during the rounds, you of course know that BOTH players will REACT to the cards "already in-play". But this tells you no information about the cards for the PRESENT Round.

So when you start, you choose which 3 cards you want to play, which you want to keep and which you want to discard. Then for each of the 3 cards, you assign a "REACH" Level. But there is no additional "information" in the play-area to give you an idea about HOW you are to choose your "REACH" Levels. And yes there is HIDDEN INFORMATION each round at the same time PERFECT INFORMATION from the previous rounds (except for Round #1)...

That's what I meant... It's a bit "random" in Round #1 because it's all HIDDEN INFORMATION when you start a game.

The goal, or more specifically MY GOAL, was to reduce the amount of Battles that could occur. And NOT make the game ONLY about a lot of battles. I wanted to limit the "reach" such that ANY Monster could NOT attack another. WHY(?) Because this led to "Analysis-Paralysis"...

Who to ATTACK? Who to attack FIRST? What TYPE of attack to use?

Sure you have these questions still... but RESTRICTED to a subset of Monsters based on the "REACH" Level.

I didn't want a 100 Point game. Maybe as high as 20 "Victory" Point or so...

And I flipped the game upside-down by making the ATTACK as the points. Not some preset value or values you enter for some kind of Formula, etc.

TBH with you, it seems like the BEST opening is hedging your bets and going "1, 2 and 3" for the lowest level of the Keep. And then see where that leads from there. Too much of one value leads to unbalance and opens up the area of play giving the opponent the opportunity to score some additional points.

But if it was "1, 2 and 3" or "2, 1 and 3" or "3, 2, and 1", etc. That yields a sort of BALANCE and opens up the game. I'm not implying that all match-ups will be FAIR... Some might be a bit unbalanced or otherwise incompatible (sort of like in Magic when you have a 3/2 vs. 1/4, neither can do anything to each other) ... So there are no points in those cases either.

I think one of your earlier concerns was by NOT limiting scoring, that the weak cards could not be used or players would build decks with STRONGER cards. And while this is TRUE (I've done it in one of my pre-defined Decks), it does not mean that this Monster will rule the roost.

Sure it may deal a point or two of additional Damage ... And it could tip the balance in favor of a close victory... But it is FAR from being unbalanced.

Like I say, the dominant strategy here seems to be choose "1, 2 and 3" in the opening Round. If the opponent does something SIMILAR well then match-ups MIGHT be plausible but are not 100% guaranteed either.

I could have a "Skill + Magic" Monster vs. a "Power" Monster... INCOMPATIBLE and cannot deal damage to each other ... Even IF they have the SAME "REACH" Level...

And so the design is very TIGHT. It works better than I had hoped for and the result is satisfactory. I plan to TRY another game soon... Not tonight... During the week when I have some more time.

The bottom line is that the game is well on its way to being something of a FUN small little Collectible Card Game (CCG). I can even get PRE-ORDERS ... Say maybe 20 or 30 gamers order a specific card ... Then I can make and SHIP it...

Sort of like GMT's P500... But for a CCG and not wargames.

We'll have to wait and see. Again I still have a LOT of work to do with this particular design. Even if the DESIGN is SOLID, I still have to finish the "Card Template", write a Rulebook, Create so Pre-Defined Micro Decks (PDFs), etc.

But at least at this point in time, the game is FUN!

I played yet another game where the "Resources" were very limited and the game took ~40 minutes to play. One thing that I learnt and need to add to the rules is if a PLAYER "Passes his turn" (no combat), the opponent gets one last TRY to do some more damage and then the Round ends.

The score was Player #1: 13 vs. Player #2: 15, so Player #2 WON the game.

The dice rolls for resources were: "3, 3, 1, 2(A)".

Still very FUN and even though there is a LOT of thinking and time to ponder... there is NO Analysis-Paralysis. Sometime a Monster may get out of a JAM. By using a "+1 REACH" (for example) and that threw out the hole strategy for Player #2 which could have done even MORE damage.

Anyhow the game is pretty good... Maybe VERY GOOD. TBD.

I'll do another playtest some time tomorrow. At ~40 minutes it's somewhere between a Filler and Gateway Game. Which is COOL... I didn't want the game to be TOO SIMPLE either. I mean if people want to play Magic and win within 10 minutes... Well let them play Magic.

"Monster Keep" (MK) takes a bit longer and it's hard to predict who will win even though both sides ran out of Resources in Round #3 (Top of the Keep).

Cheers!

It looks real nice... With all the information required and made room for the "REACH" Level in the TOP-LEFT Hand corner which is the most important location for any given card template.

I don't want to share it just yet. I will WAIT until the WEBSITE or WEBSTORE is up and ready to allow people to BROWSE the cards and see what is available.

I am going to go in the way of GMT Games and have a PRE-ORDER system.

You will be able to BUY ONE (1) "Pre-Con" Micro Deck ahead of time... Once enough people have pre-ordered, I will have the cards all made and produced for the people who have bought the game.

We're not talking about MONTHS of lead-time... 2-3 days for production and 2-3 Weeks for air delivery. So it's more reasonable than many manufacturers out-there for "Board Games". Nothing like "Sky Games" which took over 6+ Months and made a bunch of errors with "TradeWorlds". I had to catch the errors and even then we could not settle on the $430 USD for the Premium Black & Gold Dice. Anyhow...

I still have a LOT of work ahead of me... Since I've done ONE (1) out of 15 Cards... Yeah the first set will have 15 cards in TOTAL. Obviously the first "Template" is usually the hardest... But still have other colors to do and we'll have to wait and see how the rest of them go... Hopefully smooth. IDK.

Anyhow... I will keep everyone up-to-date on how this endeavor goes.

Cheers.

I spent the last couple days working on the rendering of the cards and they look pretty "sexy"! Haha. No but seriously they look pretty darn good. I want to keep the full ART/COLORED cards confidential... So it will be a bit of a surprise for everyone and anyone that checks out the SALES webstore.

I will post that up as soon as it is READY. I'm still working on the webstore and everything that is required. I just contacted support to help changing the Link/URL at the top to "k2games" since I already have the domain name and want it to be identical as to not cause any doubt. Currently it is "k2consulting" and I recently got the "license" for the "K2 Games, Inc." name in late February 2023.

I also have acquired the Domain "https://www.k2games.ca" the CA version because the COM version is to expensive ATM. Maybe in a year or so ... If the market is good and "Monster Keep" (MK) is still selling and people are still buying... Then we can explore that option to be part of a more GLOBAL Brand.

For now, "el-cheapo" is the motto of the current day!

I've tried to reduce the COSTS associated with MAKING the game... And now need to work on the webstore and configure a bunch of stuff. Right now the webstore is in need of MAJOR "Re-vamping" ... But the name change should be possible via the Customer Support Team.

Keep you all posted and when I get the GAME READY, I will share that information with all of you to visit and maybe even support some of my initiatives. Right now it's ONLY for "Monster Keep" (MK). If it works out good... Well then maybe it could be reasonable for other initiatives and/or product lines (Brands).

Sincerely.