Seeking Play-Testers

Normally, I'd have more to say, but seeing as how you don't want to go into the mechanics for this thoroughly tested final version, that saves me a lot of time. So, my only real question is, are you sure you want to do a zombie game? If so, why would anyone pick this game over the dozens of other zombie games? There are quality offerings with excellent components at both the high and low price point ranges, and zombie aficionados favor the components you'd see in Zombicide or Student Bodies over playing cards and poker chips. Wrong approach to entering a supersaturated market.

No, no, don't dump it. I'm suggesting changing the theme. Really, I'm in the same boat. I love zombies, and the frustrating thing is that I started a novel about them back when it was still a fringe culture thing, thinking "There's really no point in writing this. Who the hell would want to read a book about zombies?" Then suddenly zombies were the new Beatles and before I could even think to finish it, the fad became done to death . . . and then undeath twice over, even if it still persists. I'm still toying with the idea of completing it, because it fits a relatively unexplored niche, that being a realistic model for zombie pathology and epidemiology. My goal was to do with zombies what Richard Mattheson did for vampires with I Am Legend. The vast majority of zombie media is super unrealistic fantasy that defies natural law as much as fiction about werewolves or spatula monsters, and the few attempts made to apply science have been hodgepodge and uninformed at best. My mother-in-law bought me a book about zombies written by a doctor, and I was terrified at first that he had beaten me to the punch, but damned if I don't love doctors for being overspecialized. The guy was no epidemiologist, and the book completely trope. I think I am rambling. I like zombies. Grrr.

Think of it this way. The reason why there are a bazillion zombie games is that it is a lazy shortcut for encapsulating certain themes. What are zombies? Fear of death. Fear of infirmity. Fear of disease. Disease on a macrobiotic scale. A social equalizer. A wish fulfillment fantasy. A vehicle for social commentary. They are scary monsters, but any specific monster is geared to realize particular fears and desires. A vampire is scary because it drinks your blood, but it also lives forever, which makes the premise desirable. A werewolf eats your face, but becoming one frees you of social mores and inhibitions. The spatula monster cuts your throat but he also makes you pancakes. What makes monsters so compelling is that there is always a quality that makes us wish that they really did exist. That's why zombies caught on so well during a time of economic depression, while mummies can't catch a break. For most people, zombies are apocalyptic wish fulfillment, which is why watching a zombie movie is like being handed a questionnaire that reads, "What would you have done differently in the protagonist's situation."

How this applies to you is that once you realize what themes appeal to you with the zombie genre and which ones you have incorporated into your game, you can start to formulate a theme that is distinct from your competitors. The mechanic for throwing your companion out as a distraction, for example, works just as well with just about any monster as an antagonist, be it the Mangler or a Minecraft Creeper. You may be able to formulate an antagonist that captures what is so enticing for you about zombies without having to throw your hat into the zombie game ring. Yours could be the dead rising as wraiths, which possess the dead, sick, and infirm, making them very much like, but not quite, zombies.

Also, take a look at FFG's Chaos Marauders for an example of a long game board that fits into a tiny box. The original GW version came in a much larger box, but FFG did a great job of boiling it down into a small box format, which you may want to emulate. In my opinion, ditch the poker cards and chips for custom components. I feel like those components could maybe work for 45+, but most of your zombie game players are 16 to 35. It's a much more visual crowd, attracted to loud noises and shiny objects, much like . . . *gasp*.

Here's my pitch: Trail of the Wendigo. A Native American gets separated from his people in winter during the Trail of Tears. Same essential game, but the protagonist is hounded by wendigo, people transformed into monsters by the consumption of human flesh -- but still not zombies. Written right, it is both a zombie game and an evocative take on a terrible event in American history. It requires a little sensitivity, since you don't want to malign the memory of people who suffered through a death march. Added to that, the stereotype of the "noble savage" still persists in U.S. culture. For example, even though Mohawk literally translates in Algonquin as "flesh-eater" on account of their fearsome reputation for cannibalizing the remains of their tortured enemies, the public perception of "Indians" tends toward the Disney-esque. So, the companion should be willing to sacrifice himself rather than being thrown under the bus.

This is essentially a solo game. There is no interaction between the players, so the "multiplayer" aspect is only to see who scored the most. Solo games are a viable market segment, but I think you need to go one way or the other: either market it as a solo game, or change the rules to make it truly multiplayer. Currently it loses out on both sides.

The rules are fairly simple, although the expression of them could be cleaned up. Examples:
- The number of players and the multiplayer nature of the game is not explained until page 4 (and even then, only tangentially). This explanation should be on page 1.
- The option to shoot a red card before it spreads is not clear until you get to the next page.
- The first bullet point of the Red card explanation made it sound like the infection could chain if you turn another Red card, but then 3 bullet points later it gives the correct explanation.

Soulfinger already addressed that point, so I won't go into detail. As a Zombie game with generic components, there's practically no chance of commercial (i.e. financial) success. However, you could use the generic components to your advantage if you want to advertise it as a free print-n-play game, because most people already have the components they need. If your definition of success is "Lots of people played my game and had fun", then you have a chance of success under a print-n-play model. Additionally, or alternatively, you could go with a POD printer like thegamecrafter if you want to make a pretty version to share with friends.

Again, depending on what you see as the strengths of this game and how you want to present it, you could reduce the component list to a single poker deck. This would increase the portability and accessibility, while reducing the visual appeal. So it's a trade off.
- 21 cards form the Road.
- Deal cards to yourself face up as health until you have XX total health. Discard health cards when you take damage (where you must discard card(s) of equal or higher value to the amount of damage that you took).
- Deal yourself 6 ammo cards face down, and flip them when you take a shot.
- Use spare cards as counters for the equipment.
Whether you wanted to go down the minimization route such as this, or going down the full prettiness route (with a game board, custom counters, custom cards, etc) is entirely up to you and where you see the game going. But mechanically, it makes little difference.

Some comments on game play:

There are some game balance issues in the selection of resources. The most obvious one is that there is a best resource. I haven't done the maths to figure out which one, but a simple spreadsheet calculation would reveal it. The point is that once you know which resource is the best, there is no reason to take anything else. Thus this decision is "solvable" -- making it a non-decision.

(Edit: Text about unbalanced points removed because I misread the rules. Move along, nothing to see here.)

Finally, I want to echo Soulfinger's comment:

There are some issues to address, and some decisions to be made about where you see the game going, but don't dump it. Keep going!

All the best with this game and your other games.

Regards,
kos

Your fantasy idea got me thinking that one way of retaining the zombie theme is to set it in a different time. How about a soldier trying to get back to a friendly trench during WWI while avoiding ghouls/zombies in non-man's land? Similar deal with the Crimean War. Escaping plague zombies during the black death, and so on. Ultimately, emphasize the timeframe over the undead aspect.