Monster Keep: Another day, another prototype

One of the first things to take note of is that the very first set-up step is to roll 3 White Dice 3D6 and 1 Black Die 1BD6. That roll sets the tone for the battle within the Keep and it is crucial to understand that this mechanic of rolling 4 dice, changes dramatically the strategy available to BOTH players.

Why? How?!

It's very simple... Those dice roll allow flexible rules to determine the amount of Resources a player has. So there is no "Mana Screwed" for one player, BOTH players will have a limited resource pool if the dice outcome is poor. But that doesn't mean it's the END of the game... No it makes the match-up more DIFFICULT but at the same time, much more strategic.

So you START with dice... Is it all about Dice Rolling?! I would say Dice Rolling is an "important" mechanic not only at the START of the game but also during Combat. But before we delve into that... Let talk a bit about PURE strategy and HIDDEN INFORMATION.

Next you will want to play the Monsters from your hand into the Keep assigning in 100% confidential way the "REACH" Level of each Monster which is a value of 1 to 3. Although I haven't exhausted this topic... It is true that the opening Round (#1) offers players NO INFORMATION to make their decisions. They are made in a vacuum and rely on experience, guts, boldness and a bit of luck too!

Now we move on to Combat. Each card specifies the number of dice that need to be rolled (+1 Black die), the number of retries to reach the "To-Hit" Value... And if you manage to roll high enough, you will deal a predefined "Damage". While all this is fine and dandy... You must pay one (1) resource of the type of Attack you are launching and your Monster must have the SAME "REACH" Level and have HP for the attacking STAT (Power, Skill or Magic).

So there is some dice rolling. And you could be lucky/unlucky to roll a PAIR which matches with the Black die which deals "+1 Damage" ... If your roll failed, you deal only "1 Damage" to your opponent... So Boohoohoo on you... The dice got the better part of you on that Attack.

Lastly after all Damage has been recorded on your Scorecard and you've added it all up, that gives you your FINAL SCORE and hopefully it is HIGHER than your opponent' score in order to WIN the duel!

That's "Monster Keep" (MK) in a nutshell...

So there are a couple "3" Damage cards in the First Edition. To be more specific exactly "2". But at the same time, they are also some of the "beefy" Monsters in the First Edition. What do I mean?

Well aside from breaking down all the cards and doing a one-by-one analysis of each card/Monster, I will concede that even thought they can deal more Damage, that's not necessarily the cards you want in play.

Why? Well because they are like Tanks, they have a higher amount of HPs. And we all know what that means, right?! More damage for the opposing Monsters to do on all these cards because they are RIPE with HP and therefore a bunch of Victory Points you can use to win the game.

So if you're thinking the game is BROKEN given "6" cards (3 each x 2 Monsters) well you need to remember the "REACH" Level. Next even if you distribute your six (6) Monsters: "1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3"... You could have a Deck Drawing issue in that you cannot get the two (2) Monsters for this strategy of HIGH ATTACKING.

Also if you think that the opponent cannot "out-smart" your Deck, you'd be surprised on how the remainder of the Monsters can be "useful" and offer you a better return that the two (2) "most damaging" Monsters.

I think it's possible if all the "stars align" but it's a HARD Deck to draw from especially if you are Banking on ONLY one (1) strategy in your Deck.

Cheers...

I had no choice, the card was just TOO POWERFUL. I have re-edited all my PROTOTYPE cards (20th Generation)... But just some aesthetics and fine tuning like the "Treant" nerfing and making the "Hobbit" have an EXTRA Roll (the one I took away from the "Treant"...)

I was going to print the "real" cards and cut them... But then I realized that it would be no suspense or interest (for that matter) if the cards LOOKED final even if they were STILL "prototypes". And so I opted to edit the prototype version AGAIN ... And will be cutting those (as not to reveal the FINAL design)!

I had the sheets all prepared and designed (less the EDITs that I made this morning...) but thought about it a bit and figured I'd rather surprise the buyers with the AMAZING looking "Rendered" Cards rather than have them during DEMOS or further PLAYTESTING.

My nerfing of the "Treant" was necessary ... Making it a little bit HARDER to deal "3 Damage" (which is the strongest attack). There are only two (2) cards in the current roster which have such a HIGH attack. And I honestly I don't really care if players just "stuff" their Decks with those cards and TRY to get those cards out... There are other WAYS of playing that allow you to get around these STRONG cards too.

I also nerfed the "Werewolf" card... It's Tactic was: "Block one opposing Monster from attacking." I changed it to: "Block a Monster attack this Round." So it's not as POWERFUL (and insanely strong) as before but still can be very HELPFUL in Round #3 (for example).

And so there is this concept of "LOCALE": WHEN (?) do you use a Tactic and where do you play your Monsters (Levels) and strategically which "REACH" Level to use to get the most out of your Monsters.

Anyhow... Definitely a CLEVER little game ATM. If people LIKE it ... I can produce more cards for the First Edition (after a few sales cycles). I can't really imagine that it would become TOO POPULAR ... Because I have limited amount of funds and cannot share this with everyone on BGG (aside from the Announcement Section when the WEBSTORE is UP-AND-READY)! What I mean is that there is NO "Marketing Budget" aside from BGG Announcement, BGDF Announcement and posting on a bunch of Facebooks Groups that the game is available to purchase (Not yet... I mean when the time comes...)

Maybe in a Month or so... I also have to work on my WEBSITE too... Generally speaking there is a bunch of things that are NOT resolved ATM ... And I will need to wait a bit before those things get resolved first (before the LAUNCH of the webstore).

So I know most people are going to be like: "Why does a new category of Tactics make an impact on the Meta-Game?"

To put it simply, it means that a sort of LARGER "Balance" where some cards will now be STRONGER and can AFFECT the style of play not only some kind of DUMBED-DOWN version of the game.

If will share ONE (1) such a change:

Why is this at all relevant??? Well IF you sacrifice ONE (1) Card for the Orcish Shaman, this means you only need one of these Monsters to SCRY for up to three (3) Turns.

This improves the Meta-Game because it means that secretly you can PUSH any DESIRED Meta or Strategy you want at the cost of one (1) card/Monster. But at the same time, you may want several of these cards/Monsters in order to gain the benefit of Scrying as "Early" as possible.

Because this allows you to CONTROL the Meta and Strategy of your hands and Deck.

And what this effectively does is ADD to the Meta. What do I mean? Well it means that the game is not broken by two (2) Cards, now there is a third (3rd) Card in the portrait and all of a sudden you go from 2 cards to now 3! Genius.

I will conduct further examination this week regarding more "Meta-Gaming" specifically how a 3-Card Meta can be thwarted by more cards which are even more relevant and capable of "countering" these three (3) cards/Monsters.

Patience... More playtesting is required.

I will keep you all posted on my playthroughs and what may come of them.

If you have any questions/feedback/ideas/comments feel free to respond and share your thoughts!

Sincerely.

After discussing with @X3M viewpoint on FPS games and slower games for an older crowd... I have determined that I should permanently NERF the "Treant" and change its Monster Tactic from "Block one Monster Tactic this Round" to "Reduce a Monster Attack by -1 dice rolls"

What this means is that it can be used to BLOCK Attacks (since some Monsters only having one dice roll attempt) but makes it much LESS potent. It can still have a bit of a punch ... But no more the ALL powerful BLOCK of a Tactic.

This is GOOD because it means NOW MORE "scoring" of Attack Points and no way to STOP an opponent from using some of their Tactics which are "pretty cool" BTW and this whole blocking just was getting in the way of making the game WEAKER and a Meta-Gaming which was too STRONG.

Like I said, I had no choice. I'd rather players score more points than simply do Take-That and BLOCK each other till the sun don't shine... If you know what I mean.

You can still BLOCK an "Attack" during a Round... But that means that NEXT Round it's Open Season again and no harm or foul ... The opponent can exert his revenge! Haha.

This is better for the game... As what's the point if the opponent stocks up on BLOCKs and it makes for a more BORING game. And essentially part of the Meta-Gaming that I am TRYING HARD to counter.

Cheers all.

Note #1: Ahhh... I feel MUCH better! This change makes the "Treant" STRONG (Stats-wise) but having an "average" tactic. It's not as ALL powerful as before making it a DEFINITE "Meta-Gaming" choice (or even requirement)! Blocking Attacks is FINE... Making it HARDER for an opponent to Deal Damage is FINE TOO.

But BLOCKING "Monster Tactics" is just plain "crappy"!

I'm very happy with this CHANGE... It was for the better of the game TBH.

Note #2: What I meant is that for the Meta-Gaming previously it was REQUIRED to choose the "Treant", "Orc" and "Shaman". Now with the "Treant" nerf-ed ... It is no longer essential, the "Orc" may be of value still but it is debatable. And lastly the "Shaman" is good for pretty much any Deck since it allows you to SCRY your Deck and get the cards YOU WANT to play as opposed to the luck of the draw.

The game is in a way MORE strategic and with greater flexibility ... The Meta-Gaming is toned down a bit... Cheers.

The Meta Deck went from ~12 Cards/Monsters to about ~5 Cards/Monsters. That's a SIGNIFICANT change. And a very POSITIVE one because it's in a way LESS about "Take-That" style of play to more strategic thinking about how to outsmart your opponent and squeak out a victory (by even only a couple of points).

The LOWER Meta count is significant because it OPENS up the Deck Construction mechanic and make the choice of strategies more COMPLEXE. 3 vs. 10 Cards open to figuring out another way to react to an opponent's play.

But I still need to make some more analysis and see what comes of the Meta and TRYING to "Break the game".

Like my previous comment, I will let you all know how this new version fares vs. the Meta-Gaming and are there any BLATANT Red Lights (and warning signs) to be looked at further and closely inspected for TROUBLESOME game results or dumbed-down style of Deck Construction.

Best!

That's presently the SITUATION with the Meta-Gaming. In games such as Magic: the Gathering (MtG) and Pokemon you are allow duplicates of the SAME card. In both of those two games it's FOUR (4). But the Decks are a Whooping 60 cards!

So without the Meta-Gaming in-mind, I made five (5) different Pre-Constructed Micro Decks of fifteen (15) cards! Each of those decks have NINE (9) UNIQUE Monsters... This to me sounds all GREAT both interesting and strategic. But... The real question is: "Does this play into the Meta-Gaming OR NOT???"

For the Meta, I am believing that FIVE (5) UNIQUE Monsters and three (3) of EACH is what Meta Micro Decks will look like. Why? Because the Meta-Gaming is ALWAYS about having ONE (1) DISTINCT strategy and trying to ensure that strategy plays out 99.9% of the time.

I have no problem with my Pre-Con Micro Decks and will SELL them AS-IS ... After some further examination and refinement... But still I feel HARDCORE gamers will look towards Decks with LESS variety and more predictable strategy.

This is like in MtG and Pokemon. Once you find a Deck that is a WINNER ... You stick with it... Until someone beats it and then you start playing the opponent's Deck as it won the dominant strategy.

So that's the state of the Meta: 9 vs 5. I really don't have much else to say about the Meta-Gaming in this context because it seems clear that THIS IS the dominant strategy when it comes to "reproducing" a repeatable method of play.

And that's partially what Meta-Gaming is all about: breakdown the game to its most simplest form and then perfecting a strategy and lastly repeating that strategy as best as possible. Is "Monster Keep" (MK) a broken game??? Not really ... It's just that the Meta-Gaming will tighten up the game a bit much like First Edition of Pokemon did!

People will realize that there are BETTER "Micro" Decks than the Pre-Con Decks which will initiate them to the game. The players who will want to PERFECT their game, will notice that such a RESTRICTIVE selection will produce better repeatability. And that's when people will discover the Meta-Gaming in due time...

Hopefully that's how the Gamers will see it...

Kind regards.

I have come to the conclusion that while "Extra Re-Rolls" is COOL and all... Maybe if there was some kind of Push-Your-Luck (PYL) Mechanic to the whole dice rolling combat mechanic.

How? I'm not sure 100% just yet. But simply put if you are unsuccessful with the rolling of ONE (1) attempt (the default - every Monster gets ONE attempt), next the "Number of Re-Rolls" kicks-in.

This is a value from 1 to 5 depending on the Monster.

I don't like simply re-rolling To-hit the opponent... I really feel like there should be some kind of PYL Mechanic to make this rolling more CHALLENGING! And obviously you can STOP whenever you choose to do so.

Here are some early possibilities:

1> Each subsequent attempt to Re-Roll adds +1 To-hit. This makes it more difficult as you retry but still if you fail you have a chance of SUCCEEDING!

2> The Black die instead of HELPING you ... Hinders you. The more dice you roll (1 to 3 White dice) the higher the odds of "matching" the Black die. So if you roll a PAIR, that attempt FAILS even if you manage To-hit the opponent.

I don't know if this will make dice rolling too (overly) complicated or not. But it does introduce some PYL dynamics which I kind of like. Not sure if this approach is IDEAL... For now they are ONLY "early thoughts" on the matter. I will ponder more this approach to see what other possibilities could exist in putting for a PYL mechanic that is more effective and works.

Right now the Black die is a bit ambiguous in its usage. If there is a MATCH you score "1 Damage". If your roll is high enough (To-hit) you deal "Damage +1" ... But this is super chaotic and not very attractive in terms of a mechanic TBH.

I'll see what I can come up with tonight and playtest those "early" ideas tomorrow night.

Cheers.

Note #1: Although I would WANT a PYL mechanic; from a Damage PoV this is not really relevant (and I don't really NEED it).

Since cards normally deal between 1 and 3 Damage which more closer to 2 Damage, I don't necessarily WANT more than "3" Damage per attack. Generally speaking it's more of a BINARY operation: Deal Damage or No Damage.

So maybe there Option #2 about the "Black" die hindering the players... The more dice, the higher the odds for a MATCH and therefore a failed attempt. I really don't think Option #1 (increasing the To-hit value) makes for any type of real LOGIC ATM.

And so I am leaning against MODIFYING the existing mechanics ... JUST BECAUSE I may think a PYL Mechanic is COOL.

More thought on this matter is required... I will take a break to ponder on this and will see how I feel on the matter later tonight!

So getting back to that "Black" die. Another IDEA that I had would be a LOCK Die and it would operate as follows:

A> Roll the Black die and get a value from 1 to 6. That VALUE is LOCKED.

B> Roll x D6s as per the Monster.

C> If you roll a value that MATCHES the Black die, that DIE IS LOCKED and CANNOT be re-rolled.

D> Continue this process until you max-out the number of Re-Rolls.

If at ANY POINT in time you match the "To-hit" Value, you Deal "X Damage" (as indicated by the Monster's Card).

So now we see some sort of BALANCE between a HIGH Black die roll and a LOW Black die roll. With a HIGH value, you have better odds on a Re-Roll to reach the "To-hit" value and DEAL DAMAGE. With a LOW value, it's the opposite, it makes rolling harder with less dice in addition to a low die value.

This therefore works as a PENALTY/BONUS depending on the Black die roll.

Could be rather "clever" and make for an interesting dynamic which can be FAVORABLE or PENALIZING.

I will think about this more tonight ... I'm off to bed. I will take some notes down and see what my mind can conclude given some down-time before sleeping.

Cheers all.

Which is similar to "Worker Placement"... It adds a layer of additional STRATEGY over the dice rolling which many people dislike (33.3% from the poll). So a third don't like to roll dice, more than half say to limit it between 1 and 6 dice...

I'm just playing around with the three (3) Monsters that I put up as examples and it does work pretty good. I tested the "Vampire" and if you roll one (1) "6" the odds are you will do probably "2 Damage"... So that's indeed what I was looking to achieve with this NEW combat mechanic.

The "Goblin" is pretty easy to deal "1 Power" as Damage, I'd probably need to compute the AnyDice probabilities but it's too complicated ATM for me to figure out HOW to make the computation... Hmm...

I will continue to work on that now and see what I can figure out.

Sincerely.

I had a bit of a "issue" with Attacking/Defending. See when you ROLL & ATTACK, you would need to spend "1 Resource" depending on the outcome of the roll and how you allocate the dice.

But previously, the idea was that the opponent could strike-back. The question was evidently, if they roll dice ... Is it a FREE retaliation or should it cost "1 Resource" depending on how they attack.

Well now with this NEW "Combat" Mechanic... My guess is that there is ONLY an ATTACK Phase. No Defending. If an opponent wants to "strike-back", he/she can do so on their NEXT Turn.

This method breaks with standard Card Game Tradition in that a player CAN REACT to his opponent. Although some Tactics can be used (Interrupts) ... For the most part it's all about ATTACKER rolls to deal damage to the Defender. And that's it; nothing further or more complicated.

There are NO BLOCKERS to DECLARE, the DEFENSIVE Monster cannot do anything to the ATTACKING Monster (on this turn) but wait to see the result of the dice rolls. And then he/she can interrupt the Attack (if possible) and then it's the opponent's turn to COUNTER-ATTACK or ATTACK another Monster (perhaps)!

And so this Game is very different than most games... In a way simpler, in a way more Balanced... TBD. I'm still editing the cards and hopefully will think about the Meta-Gaming and see what I can come up with that MIGHT "break" the game...

Cheers!

Why? Well this is a BIG change and I need to assess from the STATs used for the "Combat" Mechanic if the game is balanced (from my Sample Dice throws, it does feel balanced ... but who knows in reality!) and see if the game flows well or not.

Hard copies off my Laser Printer will be enough to cut and validate to see what the state of the game looks like with these dramatic changes. And of course what the Meta-Game looks like too.

That's also something I need to figure out... What is the STATE of the "Meta-Game" and are there weaknesses in the current design. We'll have to wait and see.

I will print tonight and cut tomorrow and wait on the STATUS of the Version 21 of the game to see what things seem to look-like and is the game improved with all the "core" changes.

Cheers.

Note #1: I've managed to PRINT some "crappy" B&W copies to determine if the NEW "Combat" Mechanic works well (or not)! I will begin cutting in a hour or so... And see how long it takes and how much progress I get. Cutting is always a PAIN in the butt ... But necessary if I expect to PLAYTEST anything TBH! So we move forwards and will begin seeing what are the FLAWs (if any) of this new Mechanic.

I decided this morning to go to Staples and print color-copies of the cards. Why did I do this? Because my B&W Laser printer is on it's last legs (Drum kit needs to be replaced) and producing major "streaks". It's an OLD Windows 98 Printer... Imagine that, I have the driver for Windows XP but it keeps asking me to FIND the latest driver and update the OS. I don't because I know the RIGHT driver is the one already installed. It prints, it's just BAD quality ATM.

I bought a Lexmark Full-Duplex 1200 dpi x 1200 dpi B&W Laser printer which is almost the SAME size as my current printer (It's a smaller device) and it's maybe a few inches SMALLER in depth (13.1") and weighs about 15 lbs (or 6.8 kg).

I got the printer at a DISCOUNT ($185.49 vs. $305.49) plus I got FREE shipping and managed to get a $10-Off Discounts for orders of $100 or more. So with all the taxes (yeah I need to pay sales tax) = $200.00 CAD. Not bad for a NEW printer with Full-duplex, 250 pages tray, single feed (for labels and envelopes) and wireless (or Network/USB) connectivity.

Bottom line I saved myself about $150.00 CAD.

I'm very happy with this purchase and we'll see how long it takes to DELIVER the printer... TBD. It says around May 1, 2023 so in about a week or so... Will need to keep an eye on the shipping and be sure that I am home on the DAY they decide to deliver the printer.

Best.

Note #1: The shipping label was created but the shipment has not yet been picked-up from the warehouse by UPS. I'm glad it's UPS because we have a "Brown" Store not too far away in the event that no-one is home to sign for the box... I'm sure "Brown" won't deliver WITHOUT a signature... Which is good to know, because I don't want them to just LEAVE the box "outside" on the porch... So I've got a week or so to wait for it.

I have another concern with regards to Monsters who only DEAL at MAX "1 Damage". These are WEAK units which normally have a STRONG "Tactic" which makes them interesting for OTHER reasons. Be it an Active Attack that can last 3 Round and deal 3 Damage (for example) or an interrupt that simply damage all adjacent units by "1 Power" (so potentially 4 units affected)!

But this does make me think that some player will build their decks with the units that have the "potential" to deal the most damage (or "3 Damage" per Attack)... I'm not talking about Tactics... Just BASIC "Attacking" / Combat.

Of course I won't have time to cut the cards today nor tomorrow... Maybe as early as Wednesday and get playtests on Thursday or Friday evening.

The concern seems REAL to me... And I will need to see what cards to WHAT and how this influences anything that can BREAK the Deck Construction or the Micro Decks, etc.

Another day, another issue! Hahaha.

If there COULD be a way to COMBINE HP attacks... Like DEAL "3 Power" of Damage instead of just "1 Point" that could be good. But ATM I only have ONE (1) "Black" D6 to work with. And it's being used for "To-hit" Values > 6 (7 to 12).

That's something else to think about... That would NOT require to CHANGE the HP, but work with it in some DIFFERENT way.

How?! TBH I don't know ATM...

Need to take some time to think about all these issues. I don't want to move to a Version 22 TOO QUICKLY because there are OPTIONS open to me... And there are things to consider in terms of COMBINING or DEALING MORE DAMAGE than "1 Power" (for example)...

Let me think about it... Over the weekend and see what I can come up with...

Best.

Twenty-Five (25) Unique Combinations of STATs (Power-Skill-Magic) which means that while the "base set" will feature only Fifteen (15) Unique Monsters, that set can be expanded upon by adding Ten (10) more Monsters... Which could be created and expanded upon if sufficient Gamers LIKE the game. What I mean is if there is a PLAYER BASE, well then if the cards sell and do "Okay", I'm open to adding more cards that can be played with AND collected. Something like that!

So far, I have not come up with a BETTER solution that reducing the HP for some of the Monsters... I will continue to think about this today as it's a major problem that leads to "Analysis-Paralysis" (AP)... Some confusion about what and who to attack WHEN(?!)

I will conduct more thought experiments and see how this can be IMPROVED upon.

Another Prototype, this time Version 22 ... And it seems like everyone (almost) has been "nerfed" when it comes to their STATs and HP. I will see IF I can get a print done later in the week. But for now the cards are edited and I feel like I have two (2) very unique options:

1> Keep the STATs as is and focus on lower amounts of Damage per Monster.

2> Use the variant rule that indicates that in excess of six (>6) To-hit points will inflict "2 Damage".

The second option which works pretty well kinda evens out the playing field in terms of STRENGTH of the Monsters. Yes there are six (6) that deal "3 Damage" but nine (9) that deal "2 Damage". No more "1 Damage" and four (4) more "3 Damage". So I'm going to playtest BOTH methods and see what works better.

For sure there is less going on ... So the amount of AP (Analysis-Paralysis) should be down too. Given the REACH Levels that too makes a difference and has been a cornerstone of the NEWER versions.

Maybe over the weekend I should get a better idea about what works and doesn't and what is the next steps for "Monster Keep" (MK).

Best!

Note #1: So this last iteration, I made updates to my OLD spreadsheet (from Version 19) and it allowed me to make quite a few standards in that the STATs match up with SETs and grouping of the other Monsters/Units. I did this because at first in the last version (Version 20 and 21) the STATs were (I'll admit it) a bit "random". Not quite but something about how I FELT a Monster should have as STATs and how much damage it could deal.

In Version 22, I streamlined all of this into sub-categories with all kind of different STATs and HP to be more aligned with something more COHESIVE.

We'll have to wait and see if this IS ENOUGH or not...

Well the conclusion that I have come to, is that I have been procrastinating the actual cutting of the latest batch of cards. Even with two (2) methods of play to playtest, I've been a bit on a downer... Why? IDK... I just feel like the game is taking longer than I had expected to "cement". I thought Version 21 would have been the definite version from Version 19 ... But Version 22 was required to streamline the STATs a bit and to try out the two (2) methods of play:

1> Either as previously determined in Version 21, one (1) point per STAT.

2> Or as newly thought up, two (2) points per STAT over six points (>6).

This in a way should be very exciting and hopefully enough to CEMENT the Version and conclude that the design is DONE. Keep you all posted and maybe I'll find the time to BOTH CUT and Playtest tomorrow!

Cheers.

I've got to wrap up the remainder of the cards tomorrow evening (after 7:00 PM). That should allow me to be able to playtest the different options on Thursday evening. And then we'll see what is better (in terms of Combat Rules).

I watched about a couple of hours of the "Mandelorian" which is always cool TBH.

Everything in due time. I've had some progress this week. And I've also worked on the KS for "Monster Keep" (MK) too. I've been working on the description for each card ... Since I plan to list ALL "Cards" and corresponding descriptions so that Backers can choose which ever option is better for them.

I still need to account for enough cards of each type. And figure out how may of each type I will allow (TBD).

Again "Thank You" to @FrankM for motivating me to cut some cards tonight. They've literally been waiting for me to have more time. And I finally made some time tonight... So things are progressing!

Cheers all...

I finally finished cutting BOTH Decks and all the "extra" cards for various configurations of the Deck(s). I will maybe do one (1) playtest later tonight.

We'll see. It depends on how I feel. And will I be sufficiently motivated to do that playtest or wait until some time tomorrow.

I already vacuumed the entire apartment in the event that the Bell Technician needs access to my home. But from what I saw of the work order, all he really needs is access to the BOX (outside) and to re-program my 25 mbps to 30 mbps...

Not a big change... It's just that it's $10/mth less (for +5 mbps). How could I not take the deal, especially since my Year-Plan was coming to an end (next week) the timing was right and the deal was great for what I need it for?!

So we'll see how it goes... Hopefully the same as last year.

I'm guessing that the change of plans was required since they no longer OFFER 25 mbps... Hehehe... How tech changes so rapidely. They probably got a TON of new clients that they decided to lower the barrier to entry with their services...

I've got to make supper (had a coffee and muffin earlier) but I'm going to make a reasonable meal from scratch (I cook ok) and enjoy that with something lite this time of the year. Maybe only dirty a cup, bowl and frying pan.

In any event, I should have time for a playtest around 9-ish! We'll see...

Keep you posted.

I realize that this 3rd Update of Round #3 ... Deserves it's own comment because I have figured out something of INTEREST. Before I get to that... Let me recap the score: Player #1 = 10 VPs and Player #2 = 9 VPs.

Pretty decent. Active Tactics are a bit "tricky"... Overall the game plays pretty good. The game took 40 minutes and so I would say about 45 minutes for a 2-Player Duel. This may be more than a game of Magic: the Gathering (MtG) or a Magic: Arena match (MagicA) ... But is very different. Now let's talk about the interesting thing that I have figured out...!

That sounds AWESOME!!! So any Monster Knocked-Out in Round #1 only gives +1 VP. But if you wait for Round #2, +2 VPs or even Round #3, +3 VPs...

Of course this is YOU "pushing your luck" if you WAIT too long... You may have more to contend with in the 3rd Round that you had not foreseen and it is a bit dangerous to leave cards in-play which can still deal damage ... Just because you decided NOT to Kill-them-off!!!

Now THAT is COOL... I'm going to STICK with the "1 Point" for all Attacks even those with higher To-hit Values (>6) ... It works good with the present system... The PYL option in this comment is VERY KEWL!

There is a LOT going on ... And it can be tricky to remember all the STEPS for each Phase/Round. Active Tactics are also tricky in that each Round you get another selection of that Tactic to strike 2 maybe 3 times in a Game. Scrying definitely HELPS major ... Because it allows you to check-out your deck and what cards are coming next.

The change to "3" or "4" HP is VERY HELPFUL too. And as you can see by the SCORE... the PYL mechanic will add a bit more DRAMA to the game...

So THAT's the EXTRA Victory Points (bonuses) that I will ADD to the game on the next playthru tomorrow. Overall it's NOT too bad. I want the "Knock-out" Bonuses to make a more SERIOUS statement and AFFECT the game further.

It'll be interesting to see what STRATEGY the players choose in the NEXT game!

I wanted to be sure that the game is UNDER 60 minutes and clearly there is another 20 minutes to go for that which is GREAT! A shorter game is preferred as this means more matches can be played in one sitting (with the same or a different opponent).

The KEY will be the Round Knock-outs which will AFFECT VPs more dramatically and add a LAYER of "Oomph". And that is very much a sort of Gambling Effect!

@FrankM: I realize that the term "Knock-out" was used which is similar to "Epic Battle" ... TBH I had that terminology before "Epic Battle" rules were shown. And furthermore, my game relies on Victory Points (and Scoring) rather than the actual fact of "knocking-out all your opponent's cards". Rest assured I did not copy you on this term... I've been using that term for a long while and it is coincidental that we are BOTH using this terminology.

My PYL "Bonus" system is also different... Because it relies on "Knock-outs" in subsequent rounds to score HIGHER Victory Points. So we have two (2) very different systems going even if some of the terms may sound similar.

***

The DICE ROLLS are great now that there is NO MORE THINKING INVOLVED! You always rolls 4D6s on all attacks, independent of the STATs or To-hit Values. This is GREAT and I'm happy that I streamlined this for Combat in-general because it simplifies what the player needs to roll. One-size fits all!

The NEW To-hit values also "feel" good too... That's also positive because I had to do spreadsheet analysis to UNIFY them into categories which mean that there is LESS "randomness" and more "predictability".

***

My one BEEF ... Is that it took more than 30 minutes. I would have liked a match to last around 30 minutes or less... I suspect that with the introduction of the PYL (Bonus Points system) that will add a bit more time to a game (maybe 5 minutes at most) bringing the game more around 45 minutes.

It's OK... But I would have preferred a SHORTER game.

***

I guess that's it for my Thursday Night Adventure!!! I'm getting sleepy and it really is getting late (almost 1:00 AM!) So I will call it a NIGHT... And do some more playtests tomorrow. I'm happy that I gave it a TRY tonight as this was really unexpected and totally spontaneous.

Last note, that while I feel there is a bit of Back-and-forth between cards... This is something that I don't know how to fix or correct (if it is even needed). But in a ROUND, eventually you run out of OPTIONS and Mana from your MANA POOLS. That's good because it limits the game.

***

ATM I am thinking that IF I used the OTHER rule (>6) = "2 Damage" that could MAYBE ACCELERATE the game a little bit and REDUCE the amount of Back-and-forth which could be EXACTLY what I am looking for. TBD.

My NEXT playtest looks like this:

1> To-hit Values (>6) deal "2 Damage" of that Resource.

2> Push-Your-Luck on SLAYED (instead of "Knocked-out") Monsters produce more VPs Bonuses depending on the Round the card was slain (Round #1 = +1 VP, Round #2 = +2 VPs and Round #3 = +3 VPs)

***

Something that I have noticed is that VALUES in the tiny boxes on the Scorecard are hard to erase and re-write... I have an idea for this and I also figured out a way to impose a HARD-LIMIT to the VPs per card.

My thoughts are nine (9) Victory Points per card x 6 cards = 54 Victory Points.

That's the TOP SCORE (in theory). Now will players be able to ACHIEVE this??? IDK... More will be "3" + "3" (Max) = 6 VPs. x 5 Cards = 30 VPs a more reasonable goal... Far from "9" or "10" in my sample duel... But I did not yet have the PYL Mechanic and adding this will influence scoring for certain.

So we end it on that note tonight. More from me tomorrow!

Cheers.

Here are some of the important IDEAS that I have in mind that will SHIFT the way the game is played into something "better" (right now I have some issues with the gameplay — I'll explain...)

A> The game is TOO LONG. 40 to 45 Minutes is just too long to play what was supposed to be a SHORT duel.

This is definitely a BIG issue. Clearly the method of play just isn't sufficiently well adapted to players being able to play the game and have it done in around 30 or so minutes.

What do I propose?

Well clearly this will be a DRAMATIC change: I want to CHANGE the "Health Points" and the way Damage is dealt. So "Health Points" will be SELECTED by the PLAYERS themselves. Instead of REACH in the TOP-LEFT CORNER, the players will allocate 30 Points among Monsters in Play.

To cut down on TIME, player will NOT Battle Between Rounds. Instead the Combat will be done ONCE after the three "basic" Rounds. This will dramatically reduce the time to PLAY since Combat requires A LOT of THINKING.

The game will have FOUR (4) Rounds:

1: Play three (3) Monster hidden and reveal. Blind Round.

2: Play two (2) Monster hidden and reveal. Partial Information Round.

3: Play one (1) Monster hidden and reveal. Perfect Information Round.

4: The "Combat" Round.

B> Both the STATs and DICE are GREAT! I will keep these AS-IS since they are important parts to the game and are 100% compatible with the previous point (A).

C> I may introduce a sort of RPS (Rock-Paper-Scissors) Mechanic into the game.

How? I'm not sure exactly... I'm thinking of having some kind of RESISTANCE & WEAKNESS or something like this. Plus I want to have some kind of Damage Type that is either: Power, Skill or Magic PER Monster.

What I mean is that some cards will be PRESET others will have CHOICES and so forth. It's part of the STRATEGY to TRY to prepare your best Monsters against your opponent given the information in all Rounds.

So in a WAY "No" to "Health Points" but "Yes" to a Health of a specific TYPE.

D> I want to introduce COMBOS (maybe!) I am thinking that Monsters with the SAME Level of Health can attack as a GROUP. So all Monsters with "2" HP can attack TOGETHER any other Monster(s).

This needs MORE development. Right now the idea is embryonic... I still have to think about it some more before I manage to SOLVE how this is going to WORK!

E> The Scorecard is going back to it's previous Version... I really DON'T like the new one. Just not what I want it to look like. I will be reverting to Version 19.

Again this was to try something in Version 22 ... That didn't quite excite me.

***

Believe it or not, Version 22 has helped in giving me MORE ideas and how to IMPROVE the game to make it QUICKER, SIMPLER, MORE FUN and most importantly a BETTER GAME OVERALL.

The game in its present form is ... Hmm... So-So. Not AMAZING but not too BAD... So it's not GREAT... It may be, hmm... "Mediocre" to me. TBH I'd much rather spend my time PLAYING "Crystal Heroes" (CH). CH is a GREAT little Gateway game, it hits all the check-boxes.

But "Monster Keep" (MK) is TOO COMPLICATED. Although there is not any A/P (Analysis-Paralysis) it is DIFFICULT to make choices and the "Health Points" just make the game HARDER to play. Yes there were EARLIER (in previous Versions) the need to have HP and figure out how it should be used... But NOW I think I've got the game to a level where I can STRIP BACK some of the various layers and FIX them.

I've thought about these CHANGES for a couple days after concluding that the PLAY TIME was TOO LONG and the game was TOO COMPLICATE that EVEN ME as the Game's Designer was forgetting to do steps (in the game!) That shows me that the game is too DETAIL-ORIENTED and while some "Grognards" that enjoy rolling dice and games with a lot of decision making involved ... For the AVERAGE gamer the game is WAY TOO COMPLICATED. Granted it is simpler than a Miniatures or Wargame... For my crowd, it's TBH just TOO MUCH...

Like I said, IF I forget STEPS ... Imagine what the AVERAGE gamer will miss. And no I don't say this as being the Aficionado of Games or CCGs, more simply because I am DESIGNING the game and so I see the various challenges or issues that come from this.

I want the GAME to BE FUN!

That's the most important part. And I've seen games that some people PLAY that are "Not FUN" IMO. I'll never understand the FUN behind games like "Lorenzo Il Magnifico" (for example). Just too many moving parts (for me that is).

So that's my GOAL with the game: to make the game MORE FUN.

A noble goal I might add... So we'll see... I will work on this NEXT WEEK as it's Mother's Day weekend and I'm spending quality time with Family.

Cheers all!

And so I've been thinking more about this... "RPS" and how it can act like a NEW "REACH" Level... Since the "REACH" Level was replaced with the HP (of a specific type), I was thinking that even IF the 4th Round was the ONLY "Combat" Round, there could be some problems and potential A/P (Analysis-Paralysis) in the final Round which could make the game (AGAIN!) difficult to PLAY.

So I am thinking a bit like a "Resistance" to indicate which COLORS cannot ATTACK a given Monster. This is SIMPLE and effective and could actually WORK with an RPS-5 (given five different colors of cards).

I'm working on it NOW... Before going to BED. But the idea behind this special "status" (Resistance) is that 2-COLORS cannot attack each and every other card. This will add further limitation to the "Combat" Round and make the game that much more playable without any A/P.

Report back when I have come up with the correct "scheme"!

What I mean to say is that there are already rules for a NATURAL RPS which works with the "Type" of HP for each Monster. If the Monster has "Power" as a "Type", this means that the Monster can ONLY be attacked by a Monster which deals "Power" Damage... If the Monster has a "Type" with BOTH "Power" + "Skill" that means it may be attacked by BOTH those type of attacks.

This creates a very UNIQUE and synergistic pool of Monsters with different STATs and "Types" of HP.

I honestly feel like the "Color" RPS-5 is NOT needed. It's just adding TOO MUCH variability and could create difficult situations for attacking which are no longer necessary due to the NATURAL RPS used by the "Type" of HP (and the type of Damage that may be dealt).

We'll have to WAIT and SEE. I need to finish the EDITING of the cards and then print out a FRESH Batch of cards and then cut them to see IF this NATURAL RPS is sufficient enough to "filter" the attacks and offer more VARIABILITY.

TBD... I'll let you all know if this will be enough or not!

Sincerely.

Scoring is affected by the NEW "HP" tracking. How so? Well instead of dealing the most Damage and recording the Damage (which may seem reasonable was just too tedious and required too much erasing which made the mechanic difficult to use), we can now simply record the damage done and at the end sum the values remaining.

So I (ATM) revised the amount of Points to be distributed to 30. This is double the original 15 Points I had thought of earlier ... Because 15 seems too low and you can't create any interesting dynamics with only that small amount.

While 30 Points may seem "excessive", it works out to be 5 Points per Monster.

So instead of recording Damage on the Scorecard, all you do is write the ending amount of HPs per Monster and add that up to get your SCORE. The player with the higher score WINS the duel. As easy as that.

Another bit of streamlining which may dramatically improve the gameplay. But I still need to finish up editing (which is 50% done ATM) and then print the files tomorrow such that I can get the right cards for the next series of playtests. I'm still working on it...

Cheers!