In the stratagy game I am designing I have realized that with what I have so far it could either be a game with every thing already included, or a collectible card game, where I could make hundreds of cards, and people would have their own decks, like in Magic: The Gathering, and others.
Which do any of you perfer? Should I make only enough cards for a standard game, and then dupicate it? Or go all out with a massive collectible card game project?
What about a base game with expansions? Not collectable, but you know what's in the box when you buy an expansion.
You could still have the idea of people making their own decks out of the available cards. I like the idea of being able to customize my own deck, but I do not like the idea of not knowing what's in a booster (or box).
You also have a serious marketing problem for CCG's. The market is, if not flooded, really soupy with CCG's, and some big names as well. Not to mention, atleast among my friends as a sample group, people are tired of them. I agree with above, I like to know what I'm buying. I also like to know that what I'm buying is a complete playable game with all the rules inside. So if there are cards I don't have, there are essentially rules I don't have. Not to mention the cost of CCG's.
I think a game with expansions is much more likely to be well recieved. If nothing else, it takes up less shelf space so places are morelikely to carry one or two pieces rather than have to dedicate a shelf to all the booster boxes. Standard boxes should also make it easier on you, if you do attempt to produce it.
As for making it customizable within the box, thats sounds really interesting. However, think about the numbers in the box. If a made-deck is 40 cards and the box only contains 100, then you only get 20 cards not in the two player decks. This might be fine, I dunno. There are several games that I think have tried this customize within set-box thing, but I can't think of exact titles nor success thereof.
My vote is for all-in-a-box.
Scarab Lords by Reiner Knizia uses the "deck building in a box" system: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/4488
I think a "deck building in a box" game that involves players drafting cards to build their decks could be a lot of fun.
If you go the CCG route, then you will be expected to design many cards. If just anyone can buy even one of every card, the collecting aspect becomes redundant. You will save yourself time and energy if you keep it "all in the box". That way, when you tire of making new expansions you can just stop. If WoTC were to stop making new cards *ever* I predict the hobby would collapse pretty quickly.
Bottom line: it takes serious dedication and capital to do a CCG justice, so until I'm a millionaire I'll leave it to the big shots.
When Magic and all the other CCG's came out, I tried to design many types of CCG's most of them based on licenses, like Final Fantasy, Tenchi Muyo, and even a checkers/chess type game (which I still want to do, but probably will do an all-in-the box version.)
I think designing a CCG is:
1. Not a one person design team anymore
2. Too hard to break into without a major company behind you.
That doesn't mean people shouldn't design them, cause I still will play a good one, and I still play some of the dead ones (espeically Guardians which was a much better game than Magic and had the best art ever for a CCG.)
Regular all-in-the box card games are easier to design and easier to find people to play and playtest than the next big CCG. So that's part of the reason I'm sticking with them. (And the fact I may actually finish it, instead of wasting weeks on a CCG that I barely got a few cards for.)
If WoTC were to stop making new cards *ever* I predict the hobby would collapse pretty quickly.
Interesting point. I played the Star Wars CCG for a while when it was just the premiere cards. Then when the a new hope expansion came out, I bought a few boosters and tried playing with the new rules, but it seemed like the rules were contrived just to make people buy more cards and they actually took away from playability. There eventually were about 10 expansions.
I had to stop playing when the expansions came out because most people bought the new cards with each one and I quickly found I had nobody to play it with.
I think constant expansions are just a scheme on the part of the game maker to force people to keep pouring money in once they've started.
I ended up spending over $100 to get the game to a good, playable state, and then after a year they manufacturer put my in a situation where I had to either throw in more money to keep it playable or stop playing.
I'm not the only one who feels that way; on ebay now you can buy boxes of the cards for less than a deck of plaincards.
Basically, I love the deck-building mechanic, the collecting idea is just intended to rip off the people who get suckered in.
As a former magic junkie, (hi, my name is Kevin and I can get you an unopened box of Fallen Empires), I would have to agree that the all-in-the-box is the way to go. WoTC has played the expansion ticket to the hilt, along with tournament play only with the latest expansions.
Don't get me wrong, I was a willing junkie to the cards. But now that I am older and hopefully wiser, any game that I consider, either in creating or in buying, should be complete as is.
This brings up another question. What do you think of the games that are complete in themselves, and can be merged with other games from the same company that are also complete? I am thinking of Cannibal Pygmies and Grave Robbers from zman games. Both fun games all by themselves but can be put together to make a much stranger "movie".
Just a couple of pennies from Brooklyn
K
It's not uncommon for professional card printers to be set up to print roughly 54 cards at a time (though it can vary by printer -- some do sets of 60, for instance), so 54 or multiples of 54 (like 108) are probably what you're shooting for if you hope to have it published some day.
Otherwise it's just whatever works well for the game, providing enough variation to make the play enjoyable without having more information than a person can reasonably keep track of (e.g. if you had to understand the completely different effects of 100 different cards then the game would be difficult for anyone but the most dedicated to play... like Magic).
-- Matthew
I am also a former magic junkie. I quit (pretty much cold turkey) because the newly released expansions (Odyssey, and on) were too gimmicky. It seemed that they dumbed down the game and added "n00b" bait to increase sales. Also, with the discovery of the rares distribution in various booster boxes, I was really put off and decided it was not worth collecting. The community itself is much too rigidly organized around releases. Some of the best fun I ever had playing Magic was while drafting from old card-piles. *phew* sooo . . .I think that all in the box is certainly the way to go (I fear that it would turn into a money-centric game as most successful CCGs do). The customizable deck/drafting idea really and I mean really intrigues me . . . .
that's it, sorry to dissapoint :wink:
- Silverdragon0
so 54 or multiples of 54 (like 108) are probably what you're shooting for if you hope to have it published some day.
It's also not bad if you undershoot the sheet size a little bit. People like getting blank cards so they can design their own cards.
If your game is popular enough, you might even be able to sell small packs of blank cards at a higher per card cost than your game.
Jason
 | Power Creep, a Dungeon Pages adventure (0) by jasongreeno |
| Build your own [insert game genre here] (8) by questccg |
| Board Game Blueprint - New Episode Every Wednesday (21) by The Game Crafter |
| Premium Bullet & Premium Toxic Waste Board Game Pieces at The Game Crafter (0) by The Game Crafter |
 | PoA — Major shift back closer to FCE (2) by questccg |
| What “Should” Be in an RPG Design Book (11) by lewpuls |
| Blank Poker Card Sale - 3 Cents Each! (0) by The Game Crafter |
| Blank Playing Cards - Bridge 57mm x 89mm UK (1) by questccg |
| Finally returned after all these years (1) by DyminoMonsters2004 |
| State of the let-off Union - November 2024 (0) by let-off studios |
| Shoppe: The Simulation of Guilds (1) by questccg |
| The fine line between a game and a simulation (22) by X3M |
| Only 24 hours left to bid on games for the Extra Life Charity Auction (0) by The Game Crafter |
| Songs of Conquest is now 60% off plus an additional discount for... (5) by questccg |
| Returned the reMarkable 2 and purchased the BOOX Go 10.3 (3) by questccg |
| Happy Halloween 2024 (0) by questccg |
| Epic Metal Monster Coins - Now on Kickstarter - Created by The Game Crafter (0) by The Game Crafter |
| DuelBotz: Sample New Card (12) by questccg |
| 2 levels for an unit (wargames) (6) by X3M |
| Dragon Spark Playthrough (0) by The Game Crafter |
| New Board Game Pieces - Premium Water Droplet & Premium Blood Droplet (0) by The Game Crafter |
| Designer with an 'almost' ready product (18) by questccg |
| Protospiel Madison - Only 17 Days Away! (0) by The Game Crafter |
| New Board Game Pieces - Premium Milk Bottle & Premium Beer Mug (0) by The Game Crafter |
| Testing chat GPT for mechanics searching (6) by larienna |
Ok, so far it looks like the consensus is to design the game to be complete in one box, but open to expansion sets. I like this idea.
I have a system of using one deck, but still picking what cards you will have, and not knowing what your opponent has. This will work nicely. It also means I won't have to design lots of 'unique' cards.