Skip to Content
 

Is 4-7 with unique characters better than 2-7 generic?

6 replies [Last post]
Fri, 04/22/2016 - 11:49
mongoosedog
mongoosedog's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2012

I got a chance to run my card game last night. With the characters in play you can only go down to about 4 player before the game breaks down and is to big for the players. If you strip away the characters and make it generic, you can go down to 2 players, but then the trade part of the game gets minimized.

It was really fun and kind of evil with 7. People were trading, lying, and backstabbing.

The question is, is 4-7 or 5-7 to weird of a range?

Each character has special abilities and collection goals. That part made everyone different. Adding a new character would be easy and take it from 5-8 for a really fun game.

I have already simplified the game a bunch (taught it in under 5 min) and I like where it is. It needs a few tweeks in the collection balancing but that is about it.

Top
Fri, 04/22/2016 - 12:24
#1
ElKobold
ElKobold's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/10/2015
Not every game has to be able

Not every game has to be able to be played with 2 players.

Moreover, if you have a quick filler/party/light game, more players is a plus, rather than a minus.

Top
Fri, 04/22/2016 - 12:24
#2
polyobsessive
polyobsessive's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/11/2015
Aim for the fun

Without knowing the specifics, I would say that in general you want a game to have as wide a range of workable player numbers as you can, but if to do so you remove what makes your game fun then you should keep the fun at the expense of flexibility. Adding the extra character to extend the range sounds like a good idea.

Top
Fri, 04/22/2016 - 12:33
#3
mongoosedog
mongoosedog's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2012
ElKobold wrote:Not every game

ElKobold wrote:
Not every game has to be able to be played with 2 players.

Moreover, if you have a quick filler/party/light game, more players is a plus, rather than a minus.

That is what I was thinking. I know range really opens it up but the fun part is way more important.

Top
Fri, 04/22/2016 - 12:37
#4
mongoosedog
mongoosedog's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2012
polyobsessive wrote:Without

polyobsessive wrote:
Without knowing the specifics, I would say that in general you want a game to have as wide a range of workable player numbers as you can, but if to do so you remove what makes your game fun then you should keep the fun at the expense of flexibility. Adding the extra character to extend the range sounds like a good idea.

The extra character was going to get added anyway because then each of my resources will have a character with that as the main. I just need to make sure I can come up with a nice unique ability for it.

Top
Fri, 04/22/2016 - 12:52
#5
Gabe
Gabe's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/11/2014
There are very few games that

There are very few games that work well with 5+ players, so there's definitely a place in the market for games with large player counts.

Personally, I think having a fun game that only plays 4+ is a much better option than a watered down 2+ version.

Sometimes games take on a life of their own and they go places the designer didn't expect. If your game only wants to play with lots of players, let it. Don't feel like you have to force it into a box.

Top
Sat, 04/23/2016 - 21:40
#6
Zag24
Offline
Joined: 03/02/2014
For our game group, if the

For our game group, if the reviews were to say "Best with 7 players" and were otherwise positive, that right there would be enough to buy it. We often have 7 players and there are very few games that are really good with that number. For the # of players to be 4-7, that would not at all be an obstacle to buying it.

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut