Skip to Content
 

Deck Building Dungeon Crawler

12 replies [Last post]
Mon, 02/17/2014 - 08:42
Castlemaster
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2014

The dungeon crawler has been around for decades, and we continually make strides in new experiences like these. I want to present a deck building dungeon crawler. For my prototype I am using Castle Ravenloft mini's and board, and the game is influenced by the D&D adventure system. So what is unique?

1) As a hero you have a deck of card, hit point pool, and action point pool. You draw cards, move, and spend action point to play cards

2) Much like D&D adventure system, you use dungeon tiles and self-directed monster cards. However, instead of exploring a single tile at a time, you will draw an "encounter" card that will give a set up to the next encounter. Like defending from an ambush, finding the dragon's lair, or interrupting a ritual. This brings much more variation and depth to each adventure.

All other details are secondary to these differences.

Please tell me what you think, as feedback is appreciated.

Top
Mon, 02/17/2014 - 09:52
#1
jvallerand
Offline
Joined: 10/12/2013
1- Have you played

1- Have you played Thunderstone? Thunderstone is also a deckbuilder about dungeon crawling. Your idea seems very different, but still, it's a must to play the "mainstream" game with the same premise. Plus, it's not a bad game.

2- I have trouble seeing how the deck building will relate to the on-tile encounters. Do you mean that while on the tile, to do an action, you must have that particular card in hand?

3- Is this meant to be a co-op game or a competitive game?

Top
Mon, 02/17/2014 - 15:25
#2
Dan Felder
Dan Felder's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/06/2014
Similar Project

There's definitely no reason it can't work. I've done a similar project called Wizbots that has been extremely fun. However, I have to caution that deckbuliding games are *hell on earth* to develop and balance. Cooperative games are hard to balance, because you have to get things precisely balanced against the 'AI' (the game's own mechanics) and deck-building games introduce so many added variables that it's utterly ridiculous. The value of every card depends on the number of other cards in your deck, the combination of its value with the other cards in your deck that have synergy with it and more. In addition, there is significant variance in performance from the average if you aren't very careful - which can wreck a game that should be balanced for the average one way or another.

I you don't have a lot of experience balancing games or a fondness for logistical nightmares, approach with caution. My doc on the math for balancing Wizbots was 30+ pages long and only partially solved the issue (we believe we found a final iteration that would work perfectly, but we were too exhausted to go through and rebalance all 150+ cards to the new metrics at the time and decided to temporarily shelve the project).

That said, the game was also an extraordinary amount of fun to play, just a nightmare to balance.

TLDR; The idea is rock-solid and will probably be a great experience to play. When it comes to developing it though, may god have mercy on your soul.

Top
Mon, 02/17/2014 - 18:58
#3
Castlemaster
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2014
Thanks for feedback. I have

Thanks for feedback.

I have not played thunderstone, and thank you for the suggestion, as the best place to start is with someone else's

Here is abridged rules:
1) Every turn you can move and play 1 card
2) Your character starts each encounter with 5 action points, and a hand of 4 cards
3) You spend action points to play cards, and these are how you deal damage.

As a result, your methods for dealing damage rely on the cards in your hand. The strategy is managing your action points as well as the hand you are dealt

Yes it is a co-op game.

Top
Mon, 02/17/2014 - 19:11
#4
Castlemaster
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2014
Thanks for the feedback

Thanks for the feedback Dan,

Here is how I am approaching it to minimize my work. First playtest early (what a surprise!), and accept that I can't perfectly balance any game.

My basic plan (the same as for any game) is that I will start simple and build depth before quantity. I'm sure I will run into math stuff and am fine with it: I actually number crunched alot of stuff on Castle Ravenloft and wondered if they even did it themselves.

I appreciate the insight and will keep it in mind as I develop the game.

Thanks for the encouragement.

Top
Mon, 02/17/2014 - 20:15
#5
blgarver1982
blgarver1982's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2013
Ah, the dreaded math

Ah, the dreaded math stuff.

I'm entering that phase in my own dungeon crawler.

How elaborate is your tile placement element?

I'm using a randomly place hex board that is "discovered" as the players move around. I considered a deck building element too, but wondered if it wasn't too many moving parts when paired with the tile placement. So now I'm putting all my steam into the tile mechanic and character creation, since I really want a stronger RPG element than the D&D board games provided me.

I'm very curious to see how your game develops.

Top
Mon, 02/17/2014 - 20:29
#6
Castlemaster
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2014
For right now I am using an

For right now I am using an intentional tile placement. E.g., one encounter card will say, "draw 4 tiles and place them in a block formation. Place 3 random monsters on the tile furthest from the entrance. Victory when all monsters are dead."

I am experimenting with this b/c the D&D system offered a homogeneous experience. My intention is that even simple tile placement differences makes encounters feel different. Also, this allows more freedom in the type of monsters. You can have a support monster, or a healer, b/c you can count on there being another monster nearby that will benefit.

Top
Tue, 02/18/2014 - 10:19
#7
jvallerand
Offline
Joined: 10/12/2013
I think it could be

I think it could be interesting. I personally didn't like the monster-AI of the D&D games, but you seem to have a different opinion, so no worries.

However, let me play devil's advocate:

1- Does the deck building really add to the experience of the game? What does it represent thematically in the game?

2- Co-ops usually succeed because of tension: you always feel like you're going to lose, and when you start to turn the tables, something happens that puts you back in trouble. How will you reach that?

Also, other questions, which I can then turn into feedback:
3- Is it meant to be played as multiple quests one after the other, until you drop ("my high score is 8 quests!") or with a pre-set number of encounters?

4- When is the "buy" part of deck building coming in?

Top
Tue, 02/18/2014 - 19:03
#8
Castlemaster
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2014
As I discuss it more, I

As I discuss it more, I realize I am probably not shooting for a deck-building game. You have a deck, but you do not do much building. I will have restrictions, and the variance will be a few abilities here and there. It will add an element of strategy and randomness without overwhelming choices. One complaint for D&D adventure is that you don't have much strategic depth. The deck is meant to add that.

Co-op tension will probably be achieved through alot of playtest balance. My current plan is to have the key event happen after X encounters, so that they players are using their resources (their deck and hit points) while gaining others (treasure cards). The most basic "adventure" is put Boss encounter card after 8 encounter cards. The boss encounter card will not be part of the normal encounter stack, and will probably involve unique monsters. Once I have a basic adventure down, I will probably try other adventures that will deviate from this formula.

I abhor "complete X quests" or "kill X monsters" quests. I want some semblance of a story and theme driving each adventure.

As far as buying, that is way to far away for me to think of right now.

Top
Wed, 02/19/2014 - 16:50
#9
Dan Felder
Dan Felder's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/06/2014
Core Idea

What's the exact experience you're hoping to create in your players? I feel like a lot of my favorite games tend to be laser-focused on creating a certain type of experience. Whether the partner-clutching-tension of Pandemic, the wild adrenaline/excitement of Escape: The Curse of the Temple or the explosive paranoia of The Resistance.

Personal Example Incoming... Feel free to skip next paragraph...

For Wizbots, we decided we wanted the whole game to drive a sense of fast-paced satisfaction and improvement. The core mechanic was killing monsters with the cards in your deck, which simultaneously rewarded you with progress towards multiple goals. Killing a monster would help your chances of surviving, as well as give you more gold (saving up to buy that shiny new card for your deck), as well as getting you further in the dungeon towards the next treasure chest (which would give you a ton of gold if you reached it alive) and allow you to unlock more powerful cards in the shop. Then, after getting a new card (which happened frequently), you'd want to play with it for a while to try out the shiny new toy you've been looking forward to... And by the time it's started to lose it's luster you're already close to buying your NEXT card (which might combine with a previous card you've bought in a cool way). The entire game was designed for fast-paced satisfaction-via-progression and all its design choices were focused on that feeling. Kind of like melding Ascension and Torchlight 2 (it was co-op).

Nailing down a core design goal for your game early might help you figure out which mechanics will provide the experience you're looking for (or at least help us provide useful feedback).

Top
Thu, 02/20/2014 - 15:53
#10
Castlemaster
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2014
The unifying idea is the D&D

The unifying idea is the D&D experience with no DM required. In all likelihood, the encounter cards would also include traps, non-combat encounters or the equivalent of puzzles (will all of these ideas work well? Probably not, that is why they are just ideas right now).

Top
Thu, 03/13/2014 - 08:31
#11
Shoe
Shoe's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/21/2012
Castlemaster wrote:As I

Castlemaster wrote:
As I discuss it more, I realize I am probably not shooting for a deck-building game. You have a deck, but you do not do much building. I will have restrictions, and the variance will be a few abilities here and there. It will add an element of strategy and randomness without overwhelming choices. One complaint for D&D adventure is that you don't have much strategic depth. The deck is meant to add that.

Co-op tension will probably be achieved through alot of playtest balance. My current plan is to have the key event happen after X encounters, so that they players are using their resources (their deck and hit points) while gaining others (treasure cards). The most basic "adventure" is put Boss encounter card after 8 encounter cards. The boss encounter card will not be part of the normal encounter stack, and will probably involve unique monsters. Once I have a basic adventure down, I will probably try other adventures that will deviate from this formula.

I abhor "complete X quests" or "kill X monsters" quests. I want some semblance of a story and theme driving each adventure.

As far as buying, that is way to far away for me to think of right now.


Make sure to check out the Pathfinder Adventure Card game, this idea sounds quite similar

Top
Thu, 03/13/2014 - 20:40
#12
fnord33
fnord33's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/12/2014
It sounds like you are trying

It sounds like you are trying to cross Wiz-War and D&D, which could work out to be a really fun game. I think Mice and Mystics has the most story of the dungeon crawlers I've played. It has little event breaks in each mission that push the narrative forward. Maybe you could have a deck with event components that build the story like literature Legos that get shuffled into the monster deck.

I recommend playing the Pathfinder card game and the Resident Evil card games a few times to find out what not to do. Resident Evil was the one I thought of first, since you're going through a mansion finding items and killing monsters using a deck building mechanic very similar to Dominion. I like that one okay, but everybody I play with hates it, despite liking Dominion. I agree that there is something wonky with the mechanic, but I've never quite put my finger on it aside from it taking a lot longer to play than it should.

I think the major issue with Pathfinder is the randomness of what is in your hand and what you encounter. I have played it about ten times and have never found a good way to manipulate the things I want into my hand. If I discard a bunch of stuff to draw new cards, those are precious hit points I'm throwing away. Also the timer doesn't change whether you have one player or six, but the more players you have the more places you have to beat. It might help if you could ignore Boon cards you didn't want. The way it is, your strategy is simply to be lucky and draw the villain then be lucky on your role and have your friends be lucky enough to fill the requirements at their locations. It also takes way too long to play.

I don't mean to bash anybody's game. They obviously put a lot of work into both of those. They aren't bad games. I just think they could have been more fun with minor variations to the mechanics.

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut