Hi everyone. I developed an abstract card game with many options for customizing; there are three game variants in the existing rules already and ideas for more. When I describe it to people I frame it within a certain context in order to give them a frame of reference, however, my vision for it is much broader. Ultimately, I see it as "Lego-like" card system that provides players with some structure to play with, and the freedom to expand and create your own game with it. There's even an augmented reality component that would allow players to customize the theme of their cards and game.
As gamers, does the idea of near limitless control over rules (as agreed among your fellow players...even if you play "Calvinball" style you all must agree to it) appeal to you or does it sound like too much freedom within the context of a card game?
Would it be better to continue billing and refining is as a particular style of game, and allow players to customize if they desire?
The game variants as they exist have been playtested, and are continuing to be tested. Overall the game works and the ability to customize is strong. Most people have enjoyed the options given to them once they had a basic understanding of the game's established structure, and player interaction is high from start to finish.
Overall I'm confident with what I have, and will be proceeding one way or the other. I'm early in my push to get it out there so I have time to adjust strategies.
Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated...
Would you play a card game system that allowed you to create your own gaming experience?
I'm happy to give more detailed info about the game itself. just ask in the comments and I'll answer ASAP.
Would you play a card game that offered players "Lego-like" control over gameplay?
Sorry, but not really. I think it would just make for misunderstandings leading to arguments and/or people feeling taken advantage of. Someone puts in some seemingly random rule that people don't realize until playing that it allows for an exploit that basically ruins the game.
However, I do very much like the idea of different components of a game, of which only some are used in any one instance of playing it. This is what makes Dominion so great -- See my post (#9) in http://www.bgdf.com/forum/game-creation/design-theory/why-do-you-replay-...
Another game that takes this to an even more amazing level is 504 (whose BGG page seems broken at the moment, but is here, I guess: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/175878/504 ) This is an amazing concept for a game, with the most amazing aspect is that it actually works. Briefly, there are 9 different sub-games. To choose the full game you are playing, you pick one sub-game as the primary, one as the secondary, and one as the tertiary. For instance, I might pick Game 2 as primary, 4 as secondary, and 1 as tertiary, so that's referred to as combo 241. The primary game is always how you earn victory points, but for all of them you need money to do it. The secondary game is how you make money. The tertiary game is always a special twist, possibly providing bonus powers, possibly putting time pressure on the overall game, or whatever. You can't just focus on one of the three sub-games, because they interact, and every combo is different.
The difference between your idea and these games is that there isn't discussion, negotiation, and argument (read: bickering) over the rules setup. They are randomized according to one scheme or another. There are occasionally combos, even exploits available, but everyone was on an equal footing to notice and use them.
So go ahead and make your game with lego-like rules, but then have a controlled and/or random way that we choose the set of rules for THIS game.
504 is a fantastic example. The rulebook seems a bit difficult to read for me (I own it and have only sat down to play the tutorial setup game), but the concept is fascinating.
As for other games "you make up as you go along," there's a niche called "nomic games" that does specifically this. Fluxx is one of the commercially-viable examples, and has been quite successful in the market. There's also an open-source category of games called Dvorak card games which follows the same format. Here's a link:
http://www.dvorakgame.co.uk/index.php/Main_Page
I helped make the "Pumpkin" deck, which is very similar to the card game Lunch Money.
A key component to making something like this work is the presence of an expandable framework. There are some ground rules or guidelines that establish the foundation, but then allow the players/game-makers tremendous flexibility within those guidelines. This goes for theme as well as mechanics and the end-game state.
Will it be fun? Perhaps. That's where design comes in.
![Syndicate content](/misc/feed.png "Comments for \"Would you play a card game that offered players "Lego-like" control over gameplay?\""){kind=small}
