Skip to Content
 

Weird west

28 replies [Last post]
pwyll
Offline
Joined: 07/15/2016

I'm working on a weird west spell slinger game.

You play as a ragtag posse traveling the west shooting spell bullets. Each game you equip your character with spells and equipment. Then set off to deal with the "bounty".

My main problems are if I should roll dice to activate spells, where you would need a certain number to cast the spell (along with it being your battle order or if you should pull x colored chips out of your bag and you can cast a spell (and/or activate enchanted equipment) with it ming each slinger can cast only 1 spell a turn (unless you have twin pistols).

I'm thinking the monster pull from a element bag (or card set with a element and number) what they can do and their spot in the battle queue ... I have monsters most of the game figured out, monsters, spells, quests, locations.

I'm stuck on the battle section which sadly is what every thing hinges on.

Main inspiration (what I stole most of my ideas from) are Diceborn Heroes and Zephyr: Winds of Change.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Need some clarifications

pwyll wrote:
I'm working on a weird west spell slinger game...

I'm stuck on the battle section which sadly is what every thing hinges on.

Main inspiration (what I "borrowed" most of my ideas from) are Diceborn Heroes and Zephyr: Winds of change.

Is this a multi-player or duel game (PvP)?

I ask because I'm not sure if what you need is the ENTIRE "Combat" mechanic or an AI for the game... Also 2-Players versus 4+ Players can also be very different too. I think when you share with me some of these answers, I can share with you some of my early impressions...

Just as a quick method for AI, you can use an AUTOMATA approximation of the ACTIONS the players can take (Combat-related). And then it would be the AI taking "x" ACTIONS on its turn. Wish I could share with you some TradeWorlds AI cards... Some examples of the approximation:

1. Each starship requires three (3) card: Starship, Weapon and Crew. The AI cards have ALL THREE (3) stats on ONE (1) card and therefore mimic a player having a starship.

2. As per some rules, there are ACTIONS on the cards too. For example: If AI Starships >= Player Starships then the AI ATTACKS OR Play an additional card.

So IF the "If-clause" is not satisfied, the AI draws an additional card and then you do the ACTIONS on that newer card.

I'm just explaining because this MIGHT help you understand how AI is handled in TW ... And therefore you have a REFERENCE to something TANGIBLE. Like I said, the AI is a Deck of ONLY eighteen (18) cards. So it's a SMALL Deck that does all the Enemy/opponent simulation.

Now if you are looking for a 2-Players or 4+ Players method of COMBAT... That is a whole other ballpark. It's just not clear from the OP which of these you are looking for: 2-Players, 4+ Players or AI.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
The reason that I am "unsure" is because of this sentence...

pwyll wrote:
I'm thinking the monster pull from a element bag (or card set with a element and number) what they can do and their spot in the battle queue ...

It seems to be an AI mechanic TBH. Not a Combat mechanic. This sentence leads me to think that you're not looking to resolve how "Combat" works... More how the Enemies (and therefore AI) performs its duties.

Let me know IF I am correct... And then probably the number of Players in the game doesn't really matter (not sure!?)

Cheers.

Note #1: Could this be a "co-opetive" game??? Meaning ALL players compete but don't actually battle each other?! Instead if may be more like the players each battle Monsters and that's the type of Combat mechanic you are searching for?! So, all players battle Monsters but don't engage each other... Maybe there is some kind of Victory Point goal to see who is the best "Gun-slinger"... Or something like that.

Please let me know. I don't want to offer the WRONG advice in what is specific to your own game.

pwyll
Offline
Joined: 07/15/2016
It's both AI and combat. My

It's both AI and combat. My game is a co-op 2 to 4 player. Think old school jrpg combat (in a sense).
I'm thinking monster roll a d6 and that determines both initiative and their action. But if I bag build the players "mana bullets" with a preset of dice determined by the character there is a chance they might not get the color or number they need to act. But pulling color chips (or blocks or what not) does not determine the initiative so would that would have to be on the spells. Higher spells taking longer so lower initiative.(1-6) with some items and status effects changing that.
Indirectly you might have solved it by asking. I'm in a bit of a idea vaccume when it comes to mechanics and such)

Example(of my thoughts from typing now): we drew a Griffin and a harpy as monster after we awt up their health and armor we start combat. Since the harpy has a stun attack (makes opponent it hits with it go last) you decide we should try to take it down first if possible you draw 2 earth 1 fire 1 water and a wind elements. You have a fire blast, a miasma and earth spire using your 2 fire mana (name might change) you cast fire blasts a tier 2 with a 3 initiative spell doing 2 dam to main and 1 dam to other monster. (I'm not going into my draw to speed up my example). I cast air blades a tier 1, 2 initiative spell for a wind mana causing 1 damage the harpy rolls a five which is an evade since we have higher initiative (low to high not sure if you can only target lower initiative or not.) Our spells succeed causing 3 damage to the harpy and 1 dam to the griffin (sorry for not rolling for her getting to streamline the battle.) First to the armor then the health.

I might separate monster depending on the leg of the journey so you don't end up fighting monsters to strong. Instead or just dealing random monster from a big deck. But if I do how are you going to heal get spells and equipment between locations.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Okay ... just some general ideas to help you along...

If you are drawing chits from a "Bag" ... For your Monsters make it SIMPLER.

What I mean is if something like a "Fireball" Spell costs the Players THREE (3) Red Mana ... For a Monster it would cost LESS like maybe ONE (1) Red Mana... And specify like maybe two (2) or three (3) spells depending on the chits drawn ... That could work.

And that could open up the game to combos like "Fireball" (1 Red Mana) and "Crashing Waves" (2 Blue Mana). So if you DREW 2 Blue + 1 Red ... Your Monster could COMBO and cast two (2) spells.

You could also have some kind of "Ranged" or Physical attack too... that is the DEFAULT action when there are zero (0) matches in terms of chits pulled.

I was going to say Melee... But this is Gun-slinging action ... So some kind of PHYSICAL "Ranged" attack sounds better. Obviously WEAKER than most of the spells ... But some kind of "last resort" for the Monster...

Another alternative could be some Monster can DRAW +1 Extra chit if no Spell matches occur. Or another alternative is the RE-DRAW three (3) entirely NEW chits (for Mana). Three is just an example... You could specify for EACH Monster, the number of chits that are drawn. This can make some Monster bad-er (ie. stronger and more dangerous) than others.

Things like that... You can also make the Monster Damage less for the same spell as the Heroes (or Gun-slingers) ... To make it more fair for everyone...

Note #1: As far as "combos" go... Well I think you can have a simple RULE that the Monsters do the most possible damage. That will ensure when there are DECISIONs it is simple because of the "rule".

For example: Fireball (1 Red Mana) or Rain of Fire (1 Red + 1 Blue Mana). And you draw 2 Blue + 1 Red. In this case, you would choose the spell that deals the most damage since both spells require Red Mana and you only have one chit of these...

Something like that. Keep it as simple as possible... Just some general rules to ensure the combat flows "naturally"...

pwyll
Offline
Joined: 07/15/2016
I was planning on some form

I was planning on some form of melee attack for monsters its a natural attack like a dive bomb for the Griffin or claw rake for the harpy. The monsters get a dice roll, while we are pulling chits.
I did plan on combo spells but they would be tier 2 and 3.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Some additional thoughts

pwyll wrote:
I was planning on some form of melee attack for monsters its a natural attack like a dive bomb for the Griffin or claw rake for the harpy.

Ok that sounds reasonable... But it should be like the LAST resort attack in that it's because there is no other "spell" or "attack" that is matching.

pwyll wrote:
The monsters get a dice roll, while we are pulling chits.

Ah ... My bad, I was trying to get a SIMILAR mechanic for ALL combat ie. the Players AND Monsters. The dice roll is something like "Roll for the Galaxy" automaton... It uses dice and mirrors the actions that players can perform.

This is only my personal preference, but given the chance to use a very similar mechanic versus "randomness" ... I would pull chits out of the bag for Monster AI too...

But it's your game... Do whatever works best for your design.

pwyll wrote:
I did plan on combo spells but they would be tier 2 and 3.

Not sure what his means? Other than some Monsters CAN combo and others CANNOT. If you can make this a function of their "matching" capabilities, well then that would be natural in terms of how the Monster do battle.

pwyll
Offline
Joined: 07/15/2016
By pulling chits it mitigates

By pulling chits it mitigates one set of randomness I was planning on, different colors of dice, to match the elements. So by drawing a die or two then rolling them theres a chance of not getting a number and color you need. But with chits theres only the randomness of the draw.

I could do a small deck of colored numbers giving initiative and an element for the monsters. But this would make the griffins dive bomb not be a last chance move, 4 elements one magic, one physical, one or two evades depending on strength, and or a special (heal, counter attack, shield, whatnot.) Colored numbers might be the best.

By tier I meant level stronger spells; higher spells higher tier. Also higher on initiative

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Definitely needs some clarifications

pwyll wrote:
By pulling chits it mitigates one set of randomness I was planning on... But with chits there's only the randomness of the draw.

Why is this a "problem"??? If player draw chits from a bag, why not make the AI do the same? It's just a question, I'm trying to understand your reasoning which at the moment eludes me. If each Monster Card has the Spells on it and the NUMBER of chits to draw, that makes it SIMPLE to understand and is near identical to PvP, no?

pwyll wrote:
By tier I meant level stronger spells; higher spells higher tier. Also higher on initiative

I'm not sure I understand what YOUR "initiative" is. This is because my OWN game TradeWorlds has the term "initiative" and it is a dice roll to determine which player has the upper-hand during a space battle.

Are you saying that you need to ROLL a die for YOUR initiative??? If so, how does it affect the outcome?? TBH not many people like the dice aspect so I just wanted to caution you as to its usage. So, is it like I roll 2d6s and get a 6 + 1 = 7. Therefore I can cast spells from 1 to 7 ONLY?!

Something like that??? If YES, I'd be a bit concerned that people will NOT like that... Many people prefer determinism... Pulling chits from a bag is one thing... Adding the randomness of a couple dice rolls may turn off a bunch of people who may like your game.

I'm just warning you... These are all assumptions ATM because I'm not 100% sure I understood correctly.

Please clarify and explain if I may have misunderstood.

pwyll
Offline
Joined: 07/15/2016
The spells have better

The spells have better versions you can get (higher tiers) but they also take longer to cast (lower initiative)

If I use 1d6 per monster it would be both the initiative and their attack based on what the table on their card says.
If I do a colored number, the number is their initiative while the color is their action according to the table on their card.

Monsters pulling chits only shows the action, unless I gave the 4 actions a initiative number.

Players pulling chits is better that dice because I was at the start planning on a die per element so you might not pull a die you need or roll the number you need.

I do apologize if I confuse you.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Okay ... Again just working through your explanation

pwyll wrote:
Monsters pulling chits only shows the action, unless I gave the 4 actions a initiative number.

What if the "initiative number" was a VALUE on each Monster card. And "this" initiative number would indicate the number of chits you can draw from the bag...?

Obviously some spells will require MORE chits of specific colors and then you can have a "catch-all" Melee or Ranged "physical attack" which is not a spell.

So let me explain, because I think you are missing the reasoning behind what I mentioned.

1. Each Monster has an QUANTITY which is the NUMBER of chits it DRAWS. You can call this "Initiative".

2. Once a Monster draws his chits, next he forcibly tries to use the most strongest spell available to him BASED on the chits from #1.

3. Each Monster has maybe 2 to 4 spells with the chits combinations (like 2 Red, 2 Blue, 1 Yellow & 2 Blue and 3 Red for example). For sake of argument, let's say the Monster has an INITIATIVE of 3. Meaning he draws three (3) chits for each attack.

4. One you figure out the most POWERFUL spell that can be cast, use it and inflict damage. If there are multiple spells permissible (like combos) remember to deal multiple damage.

5. If with your INITIATIVE you drew 3 Green chits and there are no GREEN spells or you don't have the matching colors, deal the "Melee" or "Ranged" attack instead (according to some rules)... Maybe in this case rely on a Attack value and if your Defense is lower, deal damage.

Something SIMPLE like that... I like "tight" mechanics ... Not dice for some and for others not. And like I said, if you can REMOVE dice from the game (in terms of the AI) it may make the game cheaper to make and streamline the whole Monster AI into something more "straight-forward".

Again just my thoughts... It's your game and so you will ultimately decide what is best. I just thought that you did not clearly understand what it was that I was proposing (in terms of mechanic and simplicity).

All the best to you with this game... Maybe someone else can chime in and offer their insight. For the moment, that's all I've got. Cheers!

Note #1: And this term "Initiative" could have MORE chits to draw. Like have Level 1 to 3 spells (require 1 to 3 colored chits) and have an Initiative like 5... Meaning the HIGHER your Initiative for the Monster... The MORE DANGEROUS they are BECAUSE they have more ODDS of pulling the right combo of chits which DEAL more DAMAGE.

Again very elegant, scalable, tight and simple. I don't see WHY you want to over-complexify your Monster AI with DICE ... When you basically invented the PvP combat which could be adapted as presented above...

Like I said, people don't LIKE dice when it comes to OUTCOMES. They (a majority) prefer determinism and the above "Initiative" concept lends well to something PRECISE and FLEXIBLE ... Meaning the higher the Initiative, the odds more POWERFUL spells will be cast ... Exactly what you've told me that you wanted.

Not trying to "railroad" this concept. Like I said, I'm only offering up some suggestions to HELP you. But like I said, it's your game and you will do what you feel is BEST for your game.

pwyll
Offline
Joined: 07/15/2016
I was planning on scrapping

I was planning on scrapping the dice. I was thinking of turning to a deck of cards with 1 to 6 in 4 different colors.
I also planned of splitting up the monster into 3 decks (4 if you want to include gang bosses, alpha dire mountain lions and others that you only deal with at the end of some bounties). So depending on how far you were on the bounty (generic term for quests) you would run into stronger monsters. A griffin welp being a starting monster while a griffin matriarch or elder being a higher level with some extra bonuses perhaps a auto heal from air or auto evade air spells.

Im not sure if monsters would have combos/ multi element spells I was linking them to one element, griffins were air affinity (for lack of better terms) while goblins have fire affinity. (They are akin to rats scavenger and everywhere) I am planning on the players having them, (multi chit spells) but would the monsters have a need to develop them? I planned on lightning being a wind or water slinger spell (combo perhaps) but I do have Phoenix and thunder birds (an ancient Phoenix)so it might work I'm going to need a lot more spells... (joking tone)

The cards I figured would be good because it would show action order ( the number)along with its attack, defend, or evade (the element). But yours flows better, gotta figure out evades and such, things step out of the way from time to time.

With initiative I meant turn order. (Old dnd player) I could do simultaneous action so everything hits at the same time, similar to cookie Fu and zephyr. Could be bad healing while getting shot.

You have been extremely helpful, We are not connecting right. Dice out (has been for a bit.), chits or cards (possibly) in. Initiative meant turn order. Way better than last time I poste. (Probably expecting bad answers. Sorry)

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Some additional thoughts

pwyll wrote:
I was planning on scrapping the dice. I was thinking of turning to a deck of cards with 1 to 6 in 4 different colors.

That could work... So a Deck of 24 cards, right?! Doesn't sound unreasonable. You would use this instead of chits also?? And draw like maybe more than one (1) card depending on the nature of the monster?

pwyll wrote:
I also planned of splitting up the monster into 3 decks (4 if you want to include gang bosses, alpha dire mountain lions and others that you only deal with at the end of some bounties). So depending on how far you were on the bounty (generic term for quests) you would run into stronger monsters. A griffin welp being a starting monster while a griffin matriarch or elder being a higher level with some extra bonuses perhaps a auto heal from air or auto evade air spells.

Makes a lot of sense.

pwyll wrote:
I'm not sure if monsters would have combos/multi element spells I was linking them to one element, griffins were air affinity (for lack of better terms) while goblins have fire affinity. (They are akin to rats scavenger and everywhere) I am planning on the players having them, (multi chit spells) but would the monsters have a need to develop them? I planned on lightning being a wind or water slinger spell (combo perhaps) but I do have Phoenix and thunder birds (an ancient Phoenix)so it might work I'm going to need a lot more spells... (joking tone)

I thought the whole IDEA was to have multi element spells. The more powerful, the more the amount of different elements required. Simple spells like "Fireball" = 1 Red or "Flaming Touch" = 2 Red and more complex meant combos of elements. So your NUMBERs on the cards could signify how powerful a color could be (Red 6 being the most powerful Red card) and the number of cards you draw something like the POWER of a Monster (in a sample case, you could draw up to 5 cards maybe!?)

pwyll wrote:
The cards I figured would be good because it would show action order ( the number)along with its attack, defend, or evade (the element). But yours flows better, gotta figure out evades and such, things step out of the way from time to time.

No worries, you'll figure out what works best for your design! :)

pwyll wrote:
With initiative I meant turn order. (Old dnd player) I could do simultaneous action so everything hits at the same time, similar to Cookie Fu and Zephyr. Could be bad healing while getting shot.

Ah I see. Turn Order makes sense now. I thought it might be a timing issue. Maybe you could have 2 Turn Phases: 1. Attack 2. Healing and similar. So during Phase 1 (Attack) all things are simultaneous and in Phase 2 (Recovery) Other actions outside of attacking. Gives you GREAT FLEXIBILITY!

pwyll wrote:
You have been extremely helpful, We are not connecting right. Dice out (has been for a bit.), chits or cards (possibly) in. Initiative meant turn order. Way better than last time I posted. (Probably expecting bad answers. Sorry)

No worries... I was doing my best to understand given the limited amount of details that I know about your game. If I misunderstood anything in THIS message, please advise me. I like to be certain I am understanding all the nuances in your message (and design) to give you the fairest advice that I can give, giving an approximate knowledge of your game.

Again don't worry about "connecting right"... Just offer up some explanation and I'm sure I can read and understand what I may have misunderstood. But I think I'm getting a better feel for it... Cheers!

pwyll
Offline
Joined: 07/15/2016
It might be more than 24

It might be more than 24 cards. If monsters have combo then multiple cards would need to be pulled. With simultaneous action then no need for action turn order. Which would negate the need for the numbers as they would determine when we would act in combat so chit pulling is in.
Monster would have 3-4 spells a natural melee attack and a defensive evade or ability.
If I keep elemental affinities then the spells would have that element as its primary for spells, the minimum pulled would have to be 3...

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Much greater understanding

Yeah... That's much more of a logical outcome. It's always a challenge to limit the size of a Deck to a certain limit, because there is always the temptation to go higher in card count.

The question that remains is:

A> Do you want to use cards with numbers to allow for a TURN ORDER?

B> Do you prefer ONLY using chits and pulling them from the bag?

Like I said in my previous post, spells could have a number 1 or 2 to indicate if they are part of the Attack Phase (1) or the Recover Phase (2). Three (3) to four (4) spells sounds reasonable... But may be a bit high. I would go two (2) to three (3) on average. PLUS the melee Attack and/or an Evade or ability.

A Pull of three (3) is reasonable. But you may want this to be specified on the Monster's card to add more difficulty with certain monster... (Think like 5 or 6 chits).

Either way both approaches seem reasonable. Best!

pwyll
Offline
Joined: 07/15/2016
I was figuring minimum of 3

I was figuring minimum of 3 chit, but it would definitely depend on the monster. I'm also removing players having to buy mana chits and pulling a certain number from the bag. Then we dont have to worry about buying the right spells for the preset and bought mana.
Monsters would start with less 2-3 but as we get further along they would get stronger spells and perhaps special abilities. Some items will have abilities as well.
Thanks you have definitely been helpful.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Funny, eh?

We've been discussing your game and its mechanic over the last three or four days... And nobody has posted any new threads!? Is there some kind of last of summer yahoo going on???

I've wanted some other of the other designers to share their opinions too...

But I wonder "where" everyone is!? I'm guessing enjoying the last parts of summer TBH. Since the 21 August the number of contributors has tanked and I see not too much thread participation...

So Weird!?

In any event, I'm at least glad that I've provided you with a "sound board" and that you've been presented with some ideas to help you with both your Monster AI and PvP Combat.

In any event ... Maybe someone may show up soon... And give up their own ideas or comment/provide feedback on some of mine. IDK. Summer hiatus maybe! LOL

pwyll
Offline
Joined: 07/15/2016
Maybe they are on kickstarter

Maybe they are on kickstarter drooling over that one game. Or back to school events. Or they are elbows deep polishing their games the don't have time.

You have been a great sounding board. I'll have to plop my butt at my table and start working. As soon as I right up my idea for a Little Dragon Cafe inspired board game. Flamecraft reinspired me to thingk about that one.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
No worries

pwyll wrote:
Maybe they are on...

IDK what it is ... But it's a bit "unsettling"!

pwyll wrote:
You have been a great sounding board.

No worries ... That's my job. I volunteer here at BGDF to be the Host of the site, Administrator & Moderator in order to share my passion with like-minded people who all ASPIRE to become good (and maybe Great) Game Designers.

Cheers!

Note #1: For some it's feedback for their hobby games, for others it's information to help resolve obstacles, and another group would be the indie designers that are "in their bubble" working on the next great thing (more professionally something they want to get "out there" in the market), etc. Both hobby and professional designs are features here on BGDF.com!

pwyll
Offline
Joined: 07/15/2016
Don't know what what is.

Do you mean kickstarter? It's a crowd funding site.

I'm really digging Flamecraft. Dragons working at shops. Really cute artwork.

I had to flip the round order so I can have players casting defensive spells like element walls, shields and healing. Then offensive. Unless I put the defensive spells onto coats, and accessories. But then monsters would not get them.

Just wait until I bug you on my Grimm noir game idea. Or mad scientist faire. Or even Phantasy Star legacy.
Lots of my ideas are either video games I want as board games, or existing ones I want better.

pwyll
Offline
Joined: 07/15/2016
Could not find how to delete this one

Crud, double posted. Any idea what to do with money in a western 4x game?

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Victory Points to Win the Game...?

pwyll wrote:
... Any idea what to do with money in a western 4x game?

How about you need to reach "?" Victory Points to WIN the game??? This adds a little "urgency" to the entire game.

Makes it a bit of a RACE to be the first gunslinger to earn "?" Bounty to become known as the best gunslinger!

Something like that, maybe?!

pwyll
Offline
Joined: 07/15/2016
Possible. It's for a older

Possible. It's for a older thread. I double posted, couldn't find delete here...

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Any additional roadblocks???

pwyll wrote:
I'm working on a weird west spell slinger game...

Anything else that you've got to work on with this design??? Or looking to share more ideas and see what we can offer as alternative ideas?! I think the novelty is definitely there. Which is good most of the times.

Personally I wouldn't FUZE West with Spells. As in magical bullets. What I would DO would be like a "Magical Arena" where Mages face-off against each other. Hmm... I guess this is the premise of "Mage Wars Arena"...

IDK about the whole "Magical Bullets" idea. While I like the DUEL idea and having Mages face-off ... I don't know about the whole "West" aspect.

Another ANGLE you could examine is "Menzoberranzan": the underground city of the Drow (Dark Elves). And maybe tie in various types of Magic ... That may lead to something more "compatible" with the game... As you grow so does the economy of the city unlocking different shops to equip and customize your Mage.

Or tie it into Rogues: theive-ish + magic-alism ... That goes well with the "City of Spiders" concept.

Again just suggestions... You can ignore my ramblings. Like I always say it's YOUR game. I'm just offering up IDEAS from my perspective and trying to marry some of your ideas with alternate ideas that may be of interest!

Cheers.

Note #1: "The City of Spiders" is divided into 50 house but only the Top 8 are part of the ruling council. So maybe choose your 8 Houses ... And figure out what Monsters are a fit...

Another idea that I had is that much like Cock-Fights ... Duels between house-trained Monsters could be cool too!

There is also a "School of Wizards" too! That's also something that is cool in the Drow culture. And you don't need to LINK it to Menzoberranzan either. I'm just giving you an ANGLE to explore further.

Note #2: I personally really like the following NAME "The Silvestry School of Wizards"... Taking a step-back from Harry Potter and go with the "?" Guilds each with their own Monster roster. And the school is all about MASTERY of "CONJURING" Monsters.

Again just some ideas to break away from Harry Potter, et al.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Again... no worries if...

You are not interested in my OTHER ideas for a "theme". I'm just trying to offer you some other ideas that you may or may not know about and how they "could" tie-in with your concept.

Again it's fully YOUR design. So you can ignore my suggestions or take a peek at some of the ideas by Googling... And see what works BEST for YOU.

Cheers mate!

pwyll
Offline
Joined: 07/15/2016
You cleared most of the roadblocks.

You covered most of the holes in the game. Mind you I need to figure out a loot table for enemies, and how to get equipment and spells as we travel to our bounty, along with a crap ton more spells. Besides that I am good.
If your lonely on here I can post one of my other game ideas for you to think about.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Glad I could help!

pwyll wrote:
You covered most of the holes in the game...

Cool Beans!

pwyll wrote:
Mind you I need to figure out a loot table for enemies, and how to get equipment and spells as we travel to our bounty, along with a crap ton more spells.

Yes there are always aspects to "our" games that need more thought. As we all work on making prototypes that are functional and cover the 90% of the game as it is known.

pwyll wrote:
Besides that I am good. If your lonely on here I can post one of my other game ideas for you to think about.

Trust me... I have over six (6) games in different stages of development plus some expansion ideas (like 3 for TradeWorlds). I've got a lot on my plate too. So don't worry I'm not starved for work. Sometimes I wish a design would "crystalize" faster... But it takes work and thought. I'll post up a topic of my own next. Cheers!

Fri
Offline
Joined: 09/06/2017
Magical subtypes

Here is a possible framework to deal with your oustanding comcerns:

There could be a large zone in the center of the board for these magical villains to hide out . Surrounding this area would be five towns, each specializing in a magic subtype. You could aquire spells and equipment in each of these towns. Each town could have one or more bounties for a magical villain(s). There could also be  bounties for non magical wrong doers.

Now the five magical subtypes would be rps-5 system. I am not clever enough to instantly come up with an example with names so lets just call the subtypes A, B, C, D and E.   In this rps-5 A is beaten by B is beaten by C is beaten by D is beaten by E is beaten by A.

So town that specialize in magic type A would have a bounty for villain that used magic type B to cause trouble In their town.  Since type B magic beats type A this makes sense because this town would have trouble dealing with a type B  magical villain. It also means that the best way to beat a type B magical villain is to acquire some C type magic that is in a different town.

Once your party catches a magical villain,they have to return to that town to claim the bounty. Now they have money to aquire equipment and spells at a store or stores.

As a small variation on this framework I guess you could have 3 or 6 towns and use a normal RPS 3.

I thought that this would be a themetic way to get payed for defeating villains and acquiring equipment and spells. Also if you can fill in the blanks for the magic subtypes, hopefully it will give you some inspiration for spells.

As an aside it is also okay to repeat spells. In fact this will make your game easier to learn.

Feel free to disregard use or improve upon.
Good luck with your game.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
One small comment

Fri wrote:
...As an aside it is also okay to repeat spells. In fact this will make your game easier to learn...

I STRONGLY AGREE with this! Although I will be using Randomized Boosters for cards in "Quest AC, v2.0" (The 2nd Edition)... Some cards are UNIQUE and other cards can have up to three (3) multiples. This is my own game however, the explanation is rather simple:

questccg wrote:
Much as in Magic: the Gathering, some cards you need to have more of that card in a deck like 2 to 3 copies of the SAME card.

You do this obviously so that you can HAVE the card when you need it. And in many cases this is EARLY in the game.

My advice to you is like @Fri suggests allow for some "cards" to be duplicated and/or allow having multiple copies with-in one Player Deck. I can't stress how "important" this is to building solid Game Decks and making the game more "accessible". This can obviously create VALUE for some of the cards. A different type of economy, maybe a bit pay-to-play because some of the more "valuable" common cards could be more sought after and this creates a DEMAND for certain cards upping their value and the sales price of those cards.

The Bottom Line: allow multiples of cards in a Player's Deck.

Figure out your limit (in my game it will be three) and maybe make some cards UNIQUE (maximum one per Deck) and that should help build an economy for the game and make for more interesting matches!

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut