A short while ago, I decided that I was going to BENCH (and therefore stop working on) "Monster Keep" (MK). Why? Because "Crystal Heroes" (CH) is based on Medieval Fantasy and I felt that having MK with the same type of "theme" might be no good (too much repetition). Although CH is very different than MK, that aspect of the theme being similar had me thinking that there was little VALUE in the MK franchise.
But in the last couple of weeks, I have had RENEWED interest in MK. Basically I reviewed the cards and thought: "How neat they are!" The cards with their Tactics, Stats (Power, Skill and Magic), the cleverness of the MATH, etc... It all led me to re-believe in this small-footprint game.
Of course the MK design is NOT final.
There is still a LOT of work to be done especially fine-tuning details such as HOW to permit attacking, what are the values able to attack and determining the housekeeping and how attacking will affect it.
I will post back when I have MORE news about the design. In the present moment, I'm just doing some fine-tuning of MK to see where it can lead me.
Sincerely.
Comments
Question for you?
Would you be accepting of a Dice Randomizer for STATS: Strength & Stamina???
So in MK, I am thinking about using my "Dual Dice" which can allow for a combination of dice outcomes. For example:
1> You can have "A - B" which gives you a Coin Toss "1" or "0".
2> You can have "A + B" which gives you a standard D6 ("1" to "6").
3> You can have "A / B" which is what I want to use as STATS.
4> You can have "A x B" which is another value (which ATM is not of use).
The version that I am INTERESTED in is #3 ("A / B"). So you can have from ONE (1) to THREE (3) as values for "A" and ZERO (0) to THREE (3) as values for "B".
Why is this relevant???
Well if you ROLL 1D6 you get values like "3/3" or "2/1" for a SINGLE die. But if you COMBINE from 2 to 3 dice you can get all kinds of values from "3/0" to "9/9". And obviously a plentitude of different values when you roll those dice.
The question I ask of "YOU" is: "Do you feel like rolling STATS from dice too swing-y???"
Remember with 3D6: you can have "3/0" to "9/9"... That's some BIG variation.
What are your thoughts about this???
Regards.
Note #1: Each monster is rolled separately. But this is in NO way "similar" to "Magic: the Gathering" (MtG)... If a card does ZERO (0) Damage, it is removed during the "Formulation Round"... So you NEED to attack and deal damage if you are expected to SCORE "Points" towards your formula determined the Next to Last Round (prior to determining the Winner).
I'm going to work on a NEW prototype... Like the OP suggests, a different DAY, a different PROTOTYPE as I fine-tune details and try to figure out what works best.
Comments, Ideas, Feedback all welcomed. This is very much an "Open" design ATM...
Note #2: There is another use for the "Dual Dice" and that is:
5> You can have "A only" which gives you values ("1" to "3") of a D3.
Forgot to mention that outcome... ATM I am not interested in that outcome but it never-the-less is a possibility of the dice.
Here is a sample of the FIRST card in the Deck
This is my 17th Generation of this Card Template.
Right now (this version) has "To Hit"/"Damage" and a "RPS" icon. All values are hard-coded due to the nature of "Revised" Combat Mechanism.
It's very much a "Work-In-Progress" (WIP) and is in fluctuation as I have ADDED the STATS (that's NEW...) Before there was only ONE (1) VALUE (not two).
Any questions relevant to the previous "Question" (Above) feel free to ask. I'm not going to explain the entire card because that is beyond the scope of this thread...
But to explain the STATs on this card, it goes something like this:
1> "4" is the "To-Hit" dice value on 1D6.
2> "1" is the amount of Damage dealt successfully.
3> The unit is a Ranged unit because it uses dynamite to cause explosions.
So you ROLL 1D6 + 1D6 (Black), if you get a PAIR (1/6th) or roll 50% higher ("3" out of "6" outcomes = 50%), you deal 1 HP Damage. If you are facing a "Flying" unit, you would deal 2 HP Damage. And ULTIMATELY the Monster Tactic for this unit which is GREAT, deals 1P damage to ALL ADJACENT Monsters.
This means whomever you attack (successful or not), you can use the Instant Tactic and deal 2 to 3 additional Damage. He may be pretty WEAK but he's still useful.
Cheers.
Messing with MidJourney and here are the results...
Here is a SAMPLE of my "Collage"... Not too bad for 30 minutes of work to tweak all the rendering and get everything into detail. This demonstrates the contrast and similarities in terms of lighting and such. You obviously can click on the image to get a larger size for it.
Pretty neat for AI Generated Art! Cheers all...
For the FUN of it...
I made 15 different renderings/illustrations using MidJourney. Once you understand the basics and how to use the Discord BOT, it can be a bit hard sometimes with artifacts or incongruencies ... But then you have Photoshop to make all the bad details go-away! (Hahaha)
It's really neat how you can spend maybe 2 to 3 hours and have a dozen or more renderings/illustrations.
I can't imagine if they made a more POWERFUL AI than the current version (4.0) because it freaken AWESOME already!
Like I said, it's not "perfect" ... But it's pretty decent. Have no clue how it works... Would maybe like to read a news or wiki article about how MidJourney works. I've spend around $15,000 CAD in terms of producing ART assets for TradeWorlds and Crystal Heroes... So me making a dozen or so illustrations is very neat.
For sure this game will NOT be Politically Correct, you've got an Orc Shaman that is trying to light a cigarette! Hahaha! Like I said not 100% but AT LEAST 95%...
If you have an opinion, please feel free to share your thoughts on my generated art. Feel free to critique it all you want. I'm impressed with the AI Tool for sure. Very neat and usable once you figure out the Ins-and-Outs of the BOT.
Have a pleasant night everyone!
"Blockers" = ZERO (0)
I have the concept of a "Blocker" Monster which has a Damage Rating of ZERO (0)! I'm curious what people would think of such a Monster???
So it goes something like this:
Therefore I came to the conclusion that these cards are "Blockers" and the opponent CANNOT "Attack" them unless someone uses a Monster Tactic like +1 Damage Rating and then that opens up the field just a bit.
It's a bit of a BALANCING act... Since I am working with mechanics that work with MATHEMATICS and FORMULATION.
And with the "Dual Dice" (DD), you get some interesting effects like:
1> 1DD6 = "0" or "1" Damage Rating.
2> 2DD6 = "0", "1" or "2" Damage Rating.
3> 3DD6 = "0", "1", "2" or "3" Damage Rating.
So the STRONGER the Monster, the higher the "potential" Damage Rating can be. And if you remember "0" = Blocker; that means that a "3" Damage Rating Monster deals "3" damage to his/her opponent if it attacks a Monster with a Damage Rating GREATER than "0". A "0" means "invulnerable" ATM...
I'm still working on it... It's a bit CONFUSING ATM. We'll see how I can get it to work. I need to work on the "ATTACKING" mechanic.
I'll post an update when I get more news on HOW(?) this is all going to work. Very much a Work-In-Progress (WIP).
I'm still very unsure ... Maybe it should DEFINE the "Reach"???
I am thinking that values "0" to "3" = the REACH (as before). So "0" Level Monsters can ATTACK OTHER "0" Level Monsters and "3" Level Monsters can attack "3" Level Monsters... This was as it was BEFORE but used a "Static" (or predefined) value BEFORE.
The problem is what to do with Health and how to apply some KIND(?) of Combat to the ideas presented in THIS "Comment"...???
"Damage Factor" instead???
I am still thinking about this... And am a bit "unsure" as to HOW(?) to proceed.
What if the computation was: "STR - STA = Damage + 1"?
So the "Damage Factor" would be "1" to "4" and every Monster could attack given a basic attack of "1" to a BIG BEEFY "4" for some Level "3" Monsters...?
Some further examination:
1> For 1DD6: "1" or "2" Damage Factor.
2> For 2DD6: "1", "2", and "3" Damage Factor.
3> For 3DD6: "1", "2", "3" and "4" Damage Factor.
Each time you ATTACK you use ONE (1) Resource (be it Power, Skill or Magic). Given that each STAT is figured out from a die roll, that means Power Attacks go from "1" to "6" Attacks PLUS BONUSES... Based on a 1D6 die roll.
I really didn't LIKE the "0" outcome... Because it is "ambiguous". Damages are not offset from each other, no "1" Deals "1 Damage" to your opponent. If he has a Damage Factor of "3" ... Then he would deal "3" Damage to your Monster. So it is NOT "3 - 1 = 2 Damage", it is instead "3" AND "1". And it is a SINGLE "ATTACK" meaning it uses "1 Power" or "1 Skill" or "1 Magic".
Still working on it... Not 100% sure just yet.
If anyone has any comments/feedback/suggestions/ideas feel free to comment.
Brawn vs. Brains
Distancing myself (as one member explain it) from anything that REMOTLY FEELS like "Magic: the Gathering" (MtG) would be better for the end result. Why? Because MtG is a game in itself, I would not want to COPY any ASPECTS of their designs... It's very different from the GOALS that I am TRYING to achieve.
So it makes sense to think up other ALTERNATIVES to the thinking process involved in designing "Monster Keep" (MK).
And one of those aspects was the whole "Power/Toughness". I already knew that I didn't want this to be like MtG. But with "Dual Dice" (DD) it made sense to produce two (2) DIFFERENT STATS rather than only one (1).
However I AM a bit struggling as to WHAT(?) these stats are meant to mean???
One example is "Brawn" vs. "Brains". So a 6/6 = Deals 1 Damage. And a 3/2 = Deals 2 Damage...
Again this is one possible avenue... But I'm still very much is a REFLECTIVE frame of mind.
Same deal as always, if you have comments/feedback/suggestions/ideas feel free to comment.
Note #1: I'm kinda liking this... Why? Well Firstly if you have more "Brawn" than "Brains" it means you are plainly said to be STRONGER. And that goes well with the STATS of the DICE because a 3/3 or a 6/6 or a 9/9 are all BALANCED levels and each would deal "1 Damage".
If you dive a bit deeper, the "Brawn" stats go UP: like 2/1 or 5/4 or 8/7 and this means each of those Monsters would deal "2 Damage" (as we see they are ONLY SLIGHTLY "Brawn-ier" than the previous BALANCED Monsters.
In NO WAY do we see the opposite: "Brain-ier" than "Brawn-ier"... And so it's either BALANCED or "Brawn-ier"... ("2", "3" or "4" Damage Factor). It doesn't sound ILLOGICAL ... And it may be worth a playtest given that I have not FINALIZED 17th Generation prototype... It's still very much a LIVE project and I'm actively seeing where it may lead me!
Best.
Another alternative
"Power/Skill/Magic" as in the remainder of the game. And the computation go as follows:
Magic is the comparison between Power & Skill (A - B = C). And "C" can be a value of "0" or "1" (for 1DD6).
Let's do some samples rolls:
1> 1DD6 = "2/2" that means "2/2/0" as the PSM values.
2> 2DD6 = "3/3" + "1/0" = "4/3/1" as the PSM values.
3> 3DD6 = "3/2" + "1/0" + "1/1" = "5/3/2" as the PSM values.
This is making MORE SENSE... And is getting back to the "core" elements of the older prototypes...
Some OTHER scenarios (3DD6):
A> 3DD6 = "3/3" + "3/2" + "2/2" = "8/7/1" as the PSM values.
So far this ALL seems "logical" ... But then I'm left determining HOW to use these PSM values in some form of COMBAT/ATTACKING(?)
For the moment, this is my most "potential" method (PSM values) and it is great because it leans on the MK "design" and no other sources. But still I need to derive some kind of COMBAT mechanisms...
New combat mechanism...
Okay so after a LOT of thinking, I came to the conclusion that given another way of looking at COMBAT would help me determine what I needed. Here's my take-away:
1> Number of Attacks (1 to 3) and determine the Dice Count.
2> To Hit value per die (2 to 6) and varies per Monster.
3> Inflicted Damage (1 to 3) and again varies per Monster.
All of this will be DETERMINISTIC, meaning that the values for each Monster will be PRE-DEFINED! I will NOT use "Dual Dice" due to the headache of having to produce "custom" dice when many gamers ALREADY have dice of their own.
So for my "Goblin Sapper" we have: "3/5/1". The unit is basic and fairly WEAK. While this Monster may be FAST with 3 Attacks (or 3 dice), the "To Hit" value of "5" is very high... And lastly each "Hit" only deals "1 Damage".
This is a rather WEAK unit even if it may prove exciting when it come to RNG with the "3 Attacks" per attempt.
I will work on these EDITs tomorrow... As it took me a while to ELABORATE on what it is that I was looking for. I also am FAVORING the "Newer" method of using the "Arcane" Die (as a BONUS MODIFIER and not die substitution). This means more OPTIONS and attempts at "hacking down" the opposition.
More on this tomorrow! Cheers.
Revised Combat Mechanism...
So as I refine the Combat Mechanism, I went from something a bit too GENERIC to something more "tailored" to suit the needs of the game.
As of now, this is what combat looks like:
1> "To Hit" from 1 to 18 (where 1 is always a HIT and 18 with slim odds).
2> "Damage" from 1 to 3 and is determined by 1x "To Hit".
3> "Reach" from 1 to 3 and determines which targets may attack each other.
Given a Monster's PSM values (Power, Skill and Magic) determines how many dice get rolled PLUS one (1) Black die.
So, for example, if my Monster has 3P (3 Power), 1d6 + 1d6 (Black) are rolled. The primary 1d6 is compared to the "To Hit" and if it is greater or equal (>=) then you deal "Damage".
BUT for each matching value of the 1d6 (Black), so say I rolled 5/5. This means that you deal "Damage" + 1.
So if a Monster has a "To Hit" = 12 and has PSM values (3x) it means if I roll 3d6 = 4,4,4 and 1d6 (Black) = 4 ... Then that Monster deal "Damage" + 3!
Super fun and exciting with bonuses to make the die rolling exciting and not feel as if it is too boring. I've just rolled some sample dice and it's pretty decent as a Combat Mechanism.
For one thing, rolling 2 to 4 dice is more exciting and the odds of dealing a point of damage is much higher due to the Black die.
Again really EXCITING there are multiple ways to score "Damage", it's not boring at all. Even if you FAIL "To Hit", you can still deal damage with a Pair-of-dice!
I'm still not sure about the "Reach" value. More testing needs to be done to SEE if this value is required, should be customizable or just removed, IDK...
But again a much cleaner implementation and something more EXCITING that just rolling 1d6 and get "no damage"... That "Arcane" Die really adds some spicy flavor to rolls since you may deal damage even if you fail a roll.
Cheers all!
Rock-Paper-Scissors (RPS) instead of "Reach"
While the "Reach" had some measure of "reason", I think it would be much better to have an RPS system instead of "Reach" and it would work a bit like this:
+ Melee deals +1 Damage to Ranged
+ Ranged deals +1 Damage to Flying
+ Flying deals +1 Damage to Melee
So instead of a "Reach" VALUE (which could have been dynamic or hard-coded) there will be one of three SYMBOLS to indicated the RPS values. I was thinking that adding BONUSES is more "exciting" than restricting WHO can attack WHO. This is of course conditional to a successful attack!
If my "Ranged Gunman" attacks a "Flying Angel", the Damage is modified by adding "+1 Damage". If I roll and deal "1 Damage + 1" = "2 Damage" dealt.
Something along those lines. Doing 2x Damage is too much... +/- 1 Damage is more reasonable for my purposes and in MK.
Avoiding Power and Toughness
My understanding of the Dual Dice is that they're D6 with a diving line between the pips, so the possible outcomes are
* 1/0 (Difference of 1, Product of 0, B/A of 0)
* 1/1 (Difference of 0, Product of 1, B/A of 1)
* 2/1 (Difference of 1, Product of 2, B/A of 1/2)
* 2/2 (Difference of 0, Product of 4, B/A of 1)
* 3/2 (Difference of 1, Product of 6, B/A of 2/3)
* 3/3 (Difference of 0, Product of 9, B/A of 1)
Using A/B doesn't make sense unless you want to require a special case every time 1/0 comes up. The "Difference of 0" outcomes match precisely with the "B/A of 1" outcomes, and could also be called "doubles."
Since "A" is privileged over "B," the roll could be used directly to determine a standard and stretch attack. For example, a card with a nominal reach of 1 could do "A" damage at range 1 and "B" damage at reach 2.
The thing is, using dice to determine stats of cards is going to overwhelm the "design" of each card unless different cards use the stats differently. The trick is being able to admit a value of 0 to 9 in each stat, but with most of realized values bunching up around 1 or 2 (think "strength" in a superhero game).
Let's call the pip groupings A and B, and you've called the difference C. Call the product D.
Glass cannon: Melee B, Ranged D, Reach A, Defense C
Archer: Melee C, Ranged A, Reach D, Defense B
Brick: Melee A, Ranged B, Reach C, Defense D
Swashbuckler: Melee D, Ranged C, Reach B, Defense A
And so on. There's no direct use for A+B, but there can be actions that use the sum of any two stats (such as an active Parry maneuver that uses Melee+Defense).
Some use for the B/A would be nice, especially since like C it's distributed very differently than the A and B. The problem is that it has fractions and can't easily slot into one of the 0 to 9 stats.
I know you were leaning against custom dice in the game, but I think this might be a way to showcase them.
Edit: All 24 possible orderings of the stats...
* ABCD (Brick above)
* ABDC
* ACBD
* ACDB
* ADBC
* ADCB
* BACD
* BADC
* BCAD
* BCDA
* BDAC (Glass cannon above)
* BDCA
* CABD
* CADB (Archer above)
* CBAD
* CBDA
* CDAB
* CDBA
* DABC
* DACB
* DBAC
* DBCA
* DCAB
* DCBA (Swashbuckler above)
I really want to stick to regular D6s
Some of my thoughts...
A> A - B = Coin Toss (0 or 1).
This is very useful in games like Pokemon where for example, you flip 3 coins and for each Head you deal 10 Damage. So 3 Heads = 30 Damage. That's something that you may want to explore in your Super Heroes Game. Because you could have like flip 5 coins and deal up to 50 Damage. Pretty cool!
Or used as a Parry, "0" fails, "1" Blocks.
B> A x B = Damage dealt.
This makes me think of something like a Damage Factor which can be "0" miss or all the way up to "9" which is a super strong hit. Unfortunately it's not very uniform. If you deal with values like 10, 25, 50 or 100... Having values like 1, 2, 4, 6 or 9 not very good.
But using "A" only you can get 10, 20 or 30 and THEN multiply by "B", you get:
0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 60, 80, 90, 120, 180 and whooping 270... This feels VERY Pokemon-ish ... But could work in some cases where the values are in the range of 0 to 200+ "Damage".
C> A1 + A2 + A3 : B1 + B2 + B3 (Sum of A, Sum of B)
This is a bit in the flavor of "Power/Toughness". It's exciting because you ROLL 3DD6s. One die is never enough TBH. And that's why I went to a 2D6 system where there are more chances of success than failure. But the "Damage" levels are usually very low (1 to 3 Damage)... Because that's what MY game requires/needs.
In any case, that produces values like 3/3, 3/2, 1/1 up to 9/8 and 9/7 for example. But again you could MULTIPLY that by 10 (x 10) and get more bang for your buck!
This is just pure exploration ATM. I don't have a game for it and for the moment, I don't want to MAKE and SELL dice. I mean if someone else wanted to use them, I'd be glad to see if we can find a way to maybe do some profit sharing with the production. But I would probably need to be in the flavor of 6 dice per package (maybe 3 per player: white & black).
Selling 1 die at a time is a waste of everyone's time. But if I can put the logo on a nice black box with an foam insert for 6 dice and then place 3 white and 3 black dice ... Well maybe then we can retail them for $9.89 USD a piece.
Something like that makes 100% sense ... But ATM I don't have any game for this, nor do I know of anyone else interested in using them. I have a 3D file for the dice, in the event someone wants to use them... Like I said, if it all makes sense ... well then I have no problem doing business with anyone interested!
Note #1: And I've figured out a way of countering the 1/0 or 3DD6 = 3/0... Just ADD +1/+1 or start with 1/1 as a base. Then values go to 2/1 to 10/10. Again this is only for someone who might be interested in using Sum(a) : Sum(b)...
Note #2: If you use the Sums... And MULTIPLY by a FACTOR of 10x you will get 20/10 and up to 100/100. Pretty darn cool. The "A" could be NORMAL DEFENSE POINTS and the "B" could be WEAKER DEFENSE POINTS. Kinda like in an RPS but no bonuses only a WEAKENED stat. Like Superman = 100/80 (faced with Kryptonite)... Something like that.
Regular d6
You can still come up with derived stats for Nd6, though you lose the coin-flip one.
I’d want to wait until I have a chance to put them through Excel to get the real distributions, though, before recommending anything.
Yes, chucking a handful of dice is definitely better than rolling or two :)
Here's a sneak peek at the designs that I had made for the KS
I'm fine with sharing the DESIGNs that I had conceived for the FAILED KS. Here have a look at them. They look pretty SHARP IMHO!
Like I said ATM I don't have a game for them. But the dice are DEFINITELY NOT UGLY!!! Hahaha.
You can mix-and-match like 6 of one scheme, 3/3, 2/2/2 or 1/1/1/1/1/1.
But for games with 2-Players, I could picture 3 Dice White Scheme and 3 Dice Black Scheme.
Never got the KS since it wasn't SEXY enough. But the DICE are pretty looking!
Coin Toss (A - B) and Normal D6 (A + B)
If a game like Pokemon used both those two (2) features... It would be worthwhile to use the dice. Just that DUAL purpose makes the dice far better than having to flip a coin (IHMO). Then if the game requires NORMAL dice, you can use them as 3D6s (for example).
Every time I see them... I think: "Man those are some awesome dice!"
But nobody understood in the KS world. I got 20 Backers and needed somewhere around 200 ... So 10%. Not good. However I do agree that IF I had a GAME to go with the dice... Well then there could be a POINT to selling them.
Right now I don't. So these babies wait until some kind of NEW inspiration comes which make them useful for some purposes.
Also ...
I do have a "Expansion" idea for an OLDER game. The problem with it is that I would need to make a SEXY Rulebook explaining how the dice would work with the EXISTING game but make a difference in BONUS scoring.
It was like ADDING dice TOGETHER (A + B = normal D6s) would NOT affect the game.
BUT if one of the dice was a DUAL DICE, let's say BLACK, you would EARN +? ("A" Value: 1 to 3) for all BLACK dice in your tableau.
Because 1/1, 2/2 and 3/3 would respectively earn +1, +2 and +3 BONUSES for the other colored matched dice.
I asked the designer of the ORIGINAL game what were his thoughts. He replied that the game is "done", no more expansions for it. He said IF I offered the game at no cost, I could do it. So I would give away a FREE RULEBOOK and charge for my hardware. Could be worth it... Maybe.
But I need to find me a Graphic Designer with some mad cool skills and at a reasonable price. Have to find quality and cost!
Thinking of uses for them
They don't fit into my current WIP, but I can see plenty of fun things to do with them in another setting.
Coinflip: A - B
Pitiful: B
Bad: A
Okay: A + B
Wild: A * B
But to leverage the dice, you need to be using a lot of these so their multifunction nature makes sense. If all you use are Wild rolls, then just use custom d6 with that many pips on them.
"A" only = 1, 2, and 3 (1D3)
Sometimes in some games, you could use a 1D3 with 2x each outcome: 1, 1, 2, 2, 3 and 3 (on a six-sided die). Same goes with Dual Dice: "A" only.
So that's another GOOD USE of the dice.
Again it matters as to what is USEABLE in a game. So far I have three (3) very logical and understandable possibilities:
1> "A" only = 1D3 with outcomes 1, 2, and 3.
2> "A - B" = Coin toss with outcomes 0 or 1.
3> "A + B" = your normal average 1D6...
I guess I would need to design with the mindset that I MUST use Dual Dice and find as many APPLICATIONS of the dice that could be possible to be used.
Hmm... All about the game
I had another idea recently...
What if you have a "Super Power" which is "1 + 1 + 1" = 30 and "6 + 6 + 6" = 180 which is 3DD6 ("A + B"). That's under normal conditions.
Then you have a "Weakness" vs. some category of Villain...
And you rolled 3DD6 and multiplied by 10 (10x) "A"?! You would get "1 + 1 + 1" = 30 and "3 + 3 + 3" = 90.
That makes sense for HP (in say a Super Hero Game! LOL)
I'm going with "Pokemon", because then you could have a DAMAGE Ability which relies on THREE (3) Coin Toss Rolls (3DD6 = "A - B") and then multiply by 10 (10x) that amount and deduct DAMAGE.
But you would only have a "weakness"...
(Again this is NOT for your game... I'm just talking figuratively because I had the idea for a Super Heroes game called "Heroes United"... Yes I know there is a Marvel Movie series with the same name. It's a placeholder name for now.)
When you PLAY a card from your Hand to the Area of Play, you roll 3DD6 and get two (2) VALUES: one a normal HP value (30 to 180) and a weakened HP value (30 to 90)... You could use Dry Erase Markers to write down the two (2) values on the card itself.
Remember: "1 + 1 + 1" on "A" = "A + B" = 30 HP. So nothing below 30 HP... Even for a "weakness".
So you would with one series of dice rolls use "A" and "A + B" and also have "A - B" for coin-tosses when flipping for damage.
You could also have a BOOSTER like "+10" or "+20" which could TOP OFF a Super Hero or Villain at 200 HP. That's pretty neat TBH.
And then it would be 50 to 200 HP... That's pretty darn cool...
Like I said, I'm more thinking like "Pokemon" and instead of Counters you use a Dry Erase Marker.
Just some further thought in the process...
What I LIKE about this is ...
Who your STRONGEST "Super Hero" or "Super Villain" CHANGES at each time that character is DEPLOYED into the Area of Play. It makes for exciting RANDOMNESS which can alter HOW you play your characters.
Like if you know a "Super Hero" has 200 HP... You KNOW he is one of the strongest heroes you may use. But this is because it is PRE-DETERMINED. If that same Hero used "Dual Dice" and rolled a "3 + 6 + 4" = 130 HP well then he is not WEAK but NOT as Super Strong ... So he would be more like AVERAGE...
But it changes the whole dynamic ... Which Hero to face which Villain and the HPs make a real difference especially when there are ALSO "Weaknesses".
That's also something COOL to think about. Cheers!
For Monster Keep I think I will do the OPPOSITE!
So I was talking about a "Weakness" in terms of Health... And I had stated that I planned to use a RPS-3 to give bonuses and penalties. I've since done more evaluation and I am no longer going to give "penalties" ONLY "bonuses". Something like this:
Melee +1 -> Ranged +1 -> Flying +1 -> Melee
And this is because when you encounter some WEAKER "Ranged" Monsters versus a whole ARMY of "Melee" Monsters ... It would mean that penalties would make absolutely NO DAMAGE against their "weakness" counterpart. And so you would think: "Why do I play this Goblin Sapper because I know that against most Melee Monsters, it will deal 0 Damage...?"
That's a very VALID concern. And I really don't like it TBH!
Sure doing MORE DAMAGE is cool. Especially when we are dealing with 1 or 2 Damage points per attack... Adding a +1 at the end to deal "3" Damage is of value and exciting for most players.
But paying a PENALTY just isn't conducive for the Combat Mechanism that I have put in place here in these few comments.
Anyone interested, tell me what you think!
The way I see it (Thoughts on Combat and Dice rolling)
We all know that the VISUAL representation LOOKS like "Magic: the Gathering" (MtG). But the TRUTH is: this is a deception that I am employing. However I have noticed and @FrankM agrees ... Rolling 1D6 is NOT very interesting. Rolling a group of 3 or 4D6s is more SATISFYING and if there are BONUS rules to help deal MORE damage... Given low attacks all the better.
In the lower Attack Levels, you roll a MINIMUM 2D6s (One White and one Black). While this is NOT as satisfying as rolling more dice ... It's the basic amount and you can still maybe(?!) deal 1 or 2 Damage. Some Monsters at this Level will have 50% odds, so you have 1 in 2 chances of dealing damage. Not too bad TBH.
Anyways ... For people who don't like RNG, they won't like Dice Rolling either. But as far as STATs are concerned, MK is fully deterministic (as of Today).
Best!
Note #1: I have completed 50% of the cards templates which I will bring to Staples for color printing. It's like $0.25 a sheet and I have four (4) of them, two (2) copies (one for each player) which makes for a Grand Total of $2.00... And then I need to CUT the cards and playtest them and see what the conclusions are for the 17th Generation of the MK Cards...
Note #2: These are of course PROTOTYPE cards. They are not FINAL "renderings". They have the correct ART and LAYOUT ... But the template for final cards will be much more "artistic" and rendered.
Handfuls of Dice
Two RPG systems I remember had a way of putting lots of dice in the player's hand.
In World of Darkness, your dice pool was some stat (1-5) plus some skill (1-5), so you had two to ten d10s rolling for a check. The feat has a difficulty level, so dice that meet or exceed that level count as successes (e.g., damage done). It's a full-on RPG, so there are plenty of modifiers, special rules for 1s and 10s, etc. but the essence is chucking a bunch of dice.
The other is the HERO system, especially the Champions setting, where a player could be chucking 15d6 at a time. There were also rules for 1s and 6s, and they even had a "half-die" mechanism if your action didn't quite merit the next die.
If that's the experience you want, it has to be baked into the design at a low level. D&D went the opposite way: you usually roll one die, but it's an exotic die.
I think for most people, "more dice than craps" is sufficient, so if the player generally has 3 dice to throw, it'll seem like something significant. YAHTZEE!
You, as a designer, know that for any system that always rolls the same number of dice, the more dice the more the results will tend to cluster around the average. You don't want the player (naively) expecting to roll five 6's when the odds are truly remote without a reroll mechanic.
Good point!
And I think you make a VERY GOOD point here! I'm limiting the number of dice rolled to FOUR (4):
A> Three (3) White ones at MAXIMUM
B> And ALWAYS One (1) Black die.
Since most Monster do between 1 and 3 Damage, rolling the check (>=) for the White dice (or die) means you deal "X" Damage (as defined by the Monster) and then your Black die has a Value: for each White Die EQUAL (==) to the Black die, add +1 Damage.
So if 3DD6 = 4, 4, 4 = 12 To Hit (and your value was 10), you deal "X" Damage as defined by the Monster (let's say "2"). Then you check your Black die and find that it TOO was a "4"... you would do "2" "+3" Damage so FIVE (5) Damage. That's a LOT of damage for "1" or "2" Damage... You could literally KNOCK-OUT any Monster in play... Unless it's one of the mightiest ones!
Also when I talked about "Determinism", I WANTED to avoid one player rolling all "1s" and his opponent rolling all "3s" for Damage. It could be very bad outcome in some sense and it is due to RNG. That's another reason why I have decided on FIXED "stats"... Sure some cards may be less frequently chosen to play... And others may seem to have better odds... But I'm doing the BALANCING myself to ensure that Monster Tactics affect the outcome of the game too...
Lastly all this DAMAGE serves as a way to "knock-out" value used for LATER computation and formula composition. So IF I knock-out a "2" value, that means that you cannot USE the value of "2" when making your equation (for that operand and operator).
D&D and dice outcomes (how to avoid frustration)...
This is very true also... But ONE (1) die doesn't feel "satisfactory". It feels a bit "weak". Like sure you can roll 1D4 or 1D8 or 1D20 (for skill checks) but it's not as "nice" (in terms of dice rolling) than say rolling a pair of dice like in craps.
That's majorly WHY(?!) I introduced the 1D6 "Black" die. Not only does it add one die and make the lowest roll 2D6s, it also increases the odds of doing "Damage" which in MK is rather important. You don't want to be left with NO DAMAGE each and every time you roll the dice. That would be very annoying and completely unsatisfactory. So with POOR rolling results, you need to ensure that there are BONUSES to ENHANCE the dice rolling experience.
And this is obviously WHY(?!) I got rid of RPS-3 Penalties.
If it's already a CHORE to deal "1 Damage" you don't want it to be neutralized by "-1 Damage" when you combat a certain type of Monster. If "0 Damage" is the outcome of the computations ... Players will be like: "WTF do I use this Monster in my Deck if it yield 0 Damage???"
That's a valid concern. And yeah, the Monster Tactic could mediate this a little too... But you don't want dice rolls to be for nothing (so-to-speak). It can become frustrating, you roll and always get a negative outcome...
So I want to mitigate this with some RPS-3 BONUSES and some extra Dice Matching which will lead to SOME damage but not necessarily and excessive amount. I'm TRYING to balance things and make the game FUN and ENGAGING.
We'll have to wait and see until I finish the 17th Prototype and get it printed and cut and to the table to see what WORKS and what needs polishing.
Regards!
Last sheet to cut and place in the placeholder sleeves
I am almost done cutting the sheets for the 17th Generation Prototype. Of course the cards look cool with all the MidJourney Art (which is all good ATM). And I am of course trying to finalize this prototype and do some PLAYTESTING.
Probably tomorrow during the day... We're expecting HEAVY SNOWFALL at 1:30 AM in Montreal ... Probably 20 cm (from what the predictions say).
Anyhow since I will be "snowed-in", I will playtest the game with a few deck configurations and see if:
#1: The game is FUN and that the dice rolling is reasonable.
#2: See if the Monster Tactics live up to their expectations (on paper).
#3: What I would need as a ruleset to be able to compose a starting rulebook.
So I'll report back tomorrow night...
Cheers!
Hmm... All about the game
Well I definitely need to PLAYTEST "Monster Keep" (MK) further...! As of TODAY, the real issue is with WHO can ATTACK WHOM. It's a bit FREE-FOR-ALL and I really don't like this...
Because you start with THREE (3) Monsters. Figuring out who can attack whom is a bit tricky. But I did a computational analysis and it goes something like this:
1> 3 Attacks in Round #1.
2> 5 Attacks in Round #2.
3> 6 Attacks in Round #3.
That's 14 Attacks and combat situations. It's too much TBH. Right now there are an abundance of OPTIONS and clearly I need to RE-THINK some aspect about HOW I handle the Rounds.
IDK ATM and it's going to take some time to figure out... More on this next weekend (probably)... I'm going to take the WEEK to TRY to figure things out!
Let me clarify a bit...
Ok... So I made a BIG decision tonight:
Why?! Because it is MUCH more STRATEGIC and it is something that I have NEVER seen before. I've seen Taunt cards (in Hearthstone) and then I've seen Power/Toughness match-ups (in Magic: Arena) and then I have seen Lanes (in Gwent) ... Ultimately I feel like "REACH" is the combination of ALL three (3) and offers the MOST strategy for "Monster Keep" (MK).
So while the RPS-3 (Melee -> Ranged -> Flying -> Melee) was INTERESTING, it was NOT as "strategic" as the REACH Level is... Because it adds a level of TACT to the card game (MK).
I still have to WORK on it... And figure out how to HANDLE "Battles" and when a Monster becomes "Exhausted"... All of that is still on the table ATM. I'll see what @X3M thinks about "How to handle multiple attacks or when to exhaust..." He understood the card very rapidly ... So I'm positive he will have an opinion about "Exhausting" a Monster.
Some ideas:
#1: When you ATTACK, you roll until you are successful or decide to STOP.
#2: Because you ATTACKED ... You are "Exhausted" after a SUCCESS or a STOP.
#3: The opposing TARGET PAYS PSM to RETALIATE but does NOT "exhaust" until that Monster decides to ATTACK an opposing Monster.
OR
#3: The opposing TARGET gets "X" FREE attempts to RETALIATE and only "exhausts" if that Player chooses to ATTACK beyond "X + 1". "X" is equal to the amount of PSM spent by the opponent.
#4: If you DON'T ATTACK, you DON'T "Exhaust", are you susceptible to further ATTACKS?? (See what I mean... There is something to FIX with this method of attacking!)
If anyone wants to comment, please feel free to do so. I realize that without a detailed explanation some of this is hard to comprehend... But @X3M understood in 5 minutes of chatting (I know he's very bright and mechanically inclined)... So we'll see what he has as INPUT given some free time to think about it.
Again feel free to Ask Question/Post Feedback/Offer Suggestions/etc.
Furthermore...
I have been thinking about the "Exhausting" mechanic for a couple of days now. And while I do have some IDEAS, it is probably best as @X3M indicates to let the PLAYTESTS determine what is "better". Let me recap the options that I currently have to test:
1> When a Player ATTACKS, he rolls "X" time D6s until he is successful or decides to stop spending resources. In either case he is "Exhausted". He may or may not deal any "Damage", it depends on his rolls.
2> The opposing Player RETALIATES, he has ONE (1) FREE roll ... If he is successful, he is NOT "Exhausted" and deals the required amount of "Damage".
3> If however that ONE (1) FREE roll is UNSUCCESSFUL, the DEFENDING play may go on the "offensive" and ATTACK. It will cost PSM (Resources) to attack and it is similar to Point #1 with the exception that at the end of the ATTACK, BOTH Monsters will now be "Exhausted".
That is the el-cheapo method: only ONE (1) FREE roll.
A variant to this RULE is that how many ROLLS (call it "X") the ATTACKER choose to take (and in turn spend resources), the RETALIATION is allowed "X" FREE rolls... At "X + 1" the DEFENDER must spend his own PSM.
This is the more generous method: up to "X" FREE rolls.
And then there is a THIRD (3rd) method: to RETALIATE you must pay ONE (1) PSM (Resource) and roll up to "X" rolls. They don't cost as much, but you MUST have "skin in the game", so-to-speak.
I'm not sure which of the options is the BETTER one and will need to PLAYTEST all of these METHODS. We'll have to wait and see which is the better of these three (3) methods.
Personally I LIKE #3 better because it's a mix of #1 and #2... Yes you must PAY (with one resource) but you get as many ODDS as your opponent for only one resource...
I think that's pretty neat TBH. We'll have to wait and see... I just came back from the printer's and prepared my NEW version of the cards. I will spend the day cutting them...
Cheers all!
Skin in the game
This also introduces a push-your-luck element for the attacker... the more one invests in an attack, the more they risk in the counterattack.
I ran into a similar skin-in-the-game problem with Epic Battle. The original idea was that someone could use an indirect effect (heal somebody, debuff damage coming onto teammates, etc.) even if they weren't in a match-up. Quickly became a dominant strategy to keep those characters out of combat, and with a little bad luck could become very unbalancing. Requiring a character to bear risk of counterattack in order to use a power seems to have fixed it.
For MK, it means keeping some resources floating in reserve... unless one wants a high-risk-high-reward all-out attack. Should such a blitz fail to take out the target, the opponent's counter could be devastating.
Yeah that makes TOTAL sense!
The only difference is that every time you USE up a "Resource" to ATTACK, it ONLY "Exhausts" YOU (the ATTACKER). If you fail to ATTACK (because dice rolling can be sometimes "tricky") and decide to STOP... That still "Exhausts" YOU (the ATTACKER)... But in this SCENARIO, your opponent DEFENDS and CANNOT counter.
At least that is what I THINK(?) should be the correct method.
You are ALSO correct about the "Push-Your-Luck" mechanic (I didn't SEE IT!!!), in that you offer MORE opportunity for the opponent to land a SUCCESSFUL retaliation which in turn deals Damage to the ATTACKER. I LIKE IT!!!
As far as a RESERVES are concerned... This is yet another VALID point. If the LUCK is not in the "cards" (Hehehe), you should SAVE some "Resources" for a future round (#2 or #3).
The point to the PYL is unless you are SUCCESSFUL, there is no RETALIATION. So ATTACK/DEFEND (stop) or ATTACK/RETALIATE (success).
Do you see any problems with this STRATEGY???
Note #1: With the PYL there is a CHOKE-POINT. If you use up two (2) Resources (Power-Skill-Magic) ... Walking away doesn't COST you any DAMAGE... Where as, if you try again and are successful, the opponent gets to TRY to do damage to YOUR Monster.
So that CHOKE-POINT varies depending on the NATURE of the opponent. If you DEAL "3 Damage" and roll 3D6s (2 White + 1 Black) you can ULTIMATELY deal "5 Damage"!!! That's a LOT in a game where many of the Monsters have Four (4) or Five (5) Health Points (HP) and some have less (like 2 or 3).
But defending means that your opponent's TURN to ATTACK was unsuccessful and they PAID for it in terms of USED Resources. When it comes time for Player #2 turn, they can decide if they want to go on the OFFENSIVE or NOT.
Sure If "skin in the game" means that it costs you ONLY 1 Resource to COUNTER, then 1 or 2 TRIES ... Isn't the end of the World. "2" means you get ONE (1) additional TRY. "1" means NOTHING... Maybe this is the SMARTER STRATEGY...
Note #2: If you have "3" Monsters you can attack with vs. only ONE (1) opposing Monster... "1" ROLL STRATEGY is good because you get "3" TRIES to do damage... And if you want to be ON-PAR, then you could ATTACK ONCE (1) for each Monster (Gives you 3 rolls) and on the LAST Monster you can do it TWICE (2x) for a total of 4 Rolls vs. only 2 Rolls to COUNTER/RETALIATE!!
So you are AHEAD with more Monsters and FAILING comes NATURAL in terms of the ODDS.
I'm just thinking like a "Spike" ATM! (Would this be a VALID strategy - Hmmm?)
Not really an issue with this design
Again for MK this is not a real problem. Why?! Because most "Monster Damage" is 1 to 3 Damage... And then there is the Black die bonuses ... Which are like +1 to +3 Damage (depending on the Monster). The idea is to be able to deal some Damage and MESS with the Opponent's Tableau of cards (all six of them per game)!
Even though there are DEFAULT values like for the "Hooded Assassin" "x" "6 x 1".
He deals 1 Damage if you roll >= 6 using 2D6 + Black die.
But formulaically, he is a "x 6" multiplier. If you have mostly "3s" or "2s", a "6" is not bad. But if you want to use this as a more AGGRESSIVE value, you could do "6 x 2" = "12" ... "12" is good with "6", "4", "3" and "2" (and obviously "1" ... but that's a no-brainer).
So it depends what you want to use to build your EQUATION (or FORMULA) during the final Round of the game. Did all your attacks make it HARDER for your opponent to get close to the SCORING VALUE/TOTAL??? Or did you just have some fun rolling some dice and playing the earlier Rounds?!
However you are correct to point out that ANY player may want to conserve "Resources" (PSM values) for subsequent rounds... That's a bit of a BALACING ACT TBH. It all depends on how the opponent decides to play subsequent rounds...
But you are correct with your astute conclusions. It's always best to keep some resources as reserves for future Rounds... That's definitely a SMART "strategy" to go with. Figuring out when to SPEND and TRY vs. when to KEEP and WAIT... That's another part of the game itself too.
Tokens for PSM points?
But you are correct with your astute conclusions. It's always best to keep some resources as reserves for future Rounds... That's definitely a SMART "strategy" to go with. Figuring out when to SPEND and TRY vs. when to KEEP and WAIT... That's another part of the game itself too.
How does a player know how many PSM points they have available or used this round?
While it's probably something players can track in their heads, you might consider physical pools of "available" and "committed" points. Maybe P, S, and M are different colored bits or have distinct locations on a player's tableau. This way, the attacker has a visual reminder of just how many "X" they are pushing into an attack that could turn into a counterattack.
Yes I have a separate scorecard to "KEEP" this information!
Haha... Pun intended! Indeed I have a custom "scorecard" which stores the all of the resources, the Formula Goal and the associated dice that go with it. So yeah, the game has a Player's Aid to keep track of everything.
One Track for Power, one Track for Skill and one Track for Magic.
You can use ANY standard D6s as long as 3 are of ONE (1) Color and the 4th one is of another. I use 3 White + 1 Black. But you can use any variation you like...
That "scorecard" has gone through 14 Generations too... It's evolved with the game and ATM from 15 to 18... No variation or modifications has been necessary.
Is that what you meant with your suggestion???
Sliders vs tokens
One Track for Power, one Track for Skill and one Track for Magic.
You can use ANY standard D6s as long as 3 are of ONE (1) Color and the 4th one is of another. I use 3 White + 1 Black. But you can use any variation you like...
That's very close to what I had in mind, except using discrete tokens for each point (chits, aquarium beads, whatever) so you can toss them into a "committed" area that tracks how much your attack has powered up the potential counterattack.
Is that what you meant with your suggestion???
Well, my exact suggestion would require changing the tableau a bit, but there could be other ways to convey the same information that fit better with the components you have in mind.
Like I said, this is the 14 Generation of the Scorecard
The six (6) connected squares are there to help VISUALIZE "Adjacent/Connected" positions. So if you ATTACK 1st Row, 2nd Position... You can effectively TARGET 4 "Adjacent/Connected" Monsters.
You'll notice the DICE at the TOP and the Tracks in the Middle... As I mentioned. This is probably clearer now that I have offered a VISUAL. This also serves as a reminder about how to COMPUTE the Formulation (last Round). I've played with looser variants than "strict" ones which must follow a track.
In any case it serves MY purposes ATM.
Thoughts/Feedback/Comments all welcome... Simpler to SHOW you than to explain the STRATEGY behind the game.
Best!
Note #1: The scoring mechanism used to be SIMPLE: closest to a certain TOTAL (based on the 4 dice rolls). But while this is TRUE, in the event of a TIE, the player with the HIGHEST "6" VALUES (added up to the "Final Score") is declared the winner. That will happen very rarely ... But in playtests IT HAS HAPPENED. So from prior experience I know best to have a secondary mechanism to compute a VICTORY!
Note #2: It took MANY generations to get this Version. But as I mentioned in the last 5 Generations (14 to 18) NO CHANGES. That's probably because while I have playtested OTHER Generations, scoring was crystallized a while ago (probably around the 12th Generation). And then there were minor tweaks here-and-there... Until I landed up with the current version.
As you can see, I have opted for Dry-Erase Markers/Pens to keep track of all things "variable" (Haha - Pun intended!) So the Dice, the PSM Tracks, the Keep, the Final Score are pretty much everything that I need for MK...
I see @FrankM that you are using CLIPS, I find this too "awkward" even thought I do SELL a "Resource Tracker" that ALSO uses CLIPS. Cards with a UV Coating are usually safe to use Dry-Erase Markers/Pens... And of course you can use SLEEVES as ADDED "protection".
That's why my cards have "Check-Boxes" ... To tick-off whatever is used and tracked (like Health Points, Tactics and REACH).
Anyhow ... I'd rather include a PEN and sell the nice ones I found ONLINE. Than force players to use Bits/Tokens/Cubes/Clips and just write on the card itself. It's HONESTLY more intuitive!
Note #3: The 18th Generation has solidified the use of the REACH Level (instead of an RPS-3) and I've been working on PLAYABILITY and how the players should react when ATTACKING or DEFENDING or RETALIATING. And working on the FINE-TUNING ... What works, what is better, what needs attention, etc.
There is a LOT going on and @X3M has caught onto the concept very quickly. So my guess is that the game is sufficiently UNDERSTANDABLE and yet still have a bit of "thinking" required when playing. So simple rules (once you know them) but I have yet to PEN anything down (besides notes, ideas and some rules).
The WOW Factor is there, NOW I need to ensure the FUN Factor is also there.
And that means generally playable by anyone, perfected by masters to make the most wise of choices in building their Micro Deck and knowing which Monsters to play in response to their opponent.
More on that in the next few days as I get to cutting my 18th Generation Prototype! Hopefully it's ALMOST as GOOD as it gets!
Looks nice!
Tiebreaker 9. If that number is tied, the player whose great-grandchildren travel to more countries is the winner.
Tiebreaker 10. If that number is tied, or the finalists share the same great-grandchildren, then whoever ate more cookies during the weight-loss competition back in Tiebreaker 4 wins.
Tiebreaker 11. If that number is tied, acquire the game expansion pack "Pistols at Ten Paces"…
As you can see, I have opted for Dry-Erase Markers/Pens to keep track of all things "variable" (Haha - Pun intended!) So the Dice, the PSM Tracks, the Keep, the Final Score are pretty much everything that I need for MK...
I see @FrankM that you are using CLIPS, I find this too "awkward" even thought I do SELL a "Resource Tracker" that ALSO uses CLIPS. Cards with a UV Coating are usually safe to use Dry-Erase Markers/Pens... And of course you can use SLEEVES as ADDED "protection".
That's why my cards have "Check-Boxes" ... To tick-off whatever is used and tracked (like Health Points, Tactics and REACH).
Anyhow ... I'd rather include a PEN and sell the nice ones I found ONLINE. Than force players to use Bits/Tokens/Cubes/Clips and just write on the card itself. It's HONESTLY more intuitive!
Note #3: The 18th Generation has solidified the use of the REACH Level (instead of an RPS-3) and I've been working on PLAYABILITY and how the players should react when ATTACKING or DEFENDING or RETALIATING. And working on the FINE-TUNING ... What works, what is better, what needs attention, etc.
There is a LOT going on and @X3M has caught onto the concept very quickly. So my guess is that the game is sufficiently UNDERSTANDABLE and yet still have a bit of "thinking" required when playing. So simple rules (once you know them) but I have yet to PEN anything down (besides notes, ideas and some rules).
The WOW Factor is there, NOW I need to ensure the FUN Factor is also there.
And that means generally playable by anyone, perfected by masters to make the most wise of choices in building their Micro Deck and knowing which Monsters to play in response to their opponent.
More on that in the next few days as I get to cutting my 18th Generation Prototype! Hopefully it's ALMOST as GOOD as it gets!
Using a pen and checkboxes can already store the info I was worried about: use slashes for available resources, and complete the X on each one committed to an attack. Once the attack and counterattack are resolved, erase the X's.
You are exactly correct!
Yes I use a SLASH to identify each Resource (PSM Values). So Tick each box and then a SLASH where the value limit is. It's still a WIP ... But I think I have figured some things out given this is 14th Generation and 18th Generation cards.
I have to cut the cards (I printed them at Staples... OMG have the prices for simple printing gone up! $0.52 a color page - Wow!) I will work on this later today (and maybe tomorrow ...) depending how long it takes. Usually takes a GOOD 2 Hours to take care of.
I really like your "Tiebreaker" ideas! Hehehe. Anything below 4 is probably acceptable. Once you get to 4 ... Things start to get a bit hazy!! Hahaha...
I also have a BLANK card which you can write and erase ... So that could easily be used as a temporary reference when doing COMBAT. But I do still have some details to examine (always something that's not 100% right...)
Flip / Flop
I'm also not 100% sure about the "Arcane" die. In the past it was supposed to be used as a die REPLACEMENT. Meaning if you had a dice with a LOWER value that the Black "Arcane" die, you could swap those two.
For example #1: 5, 4, 2 (White) + 4 Black. You could do 5, 4, 4 instead by swapping the "2" for the "4".
But I had an alternate option which is a BOOSTER.
For example #2: 5, 4, 2 (White) + 4 Black. You could get 5, 4, 6 instead by adding the "4" to the "2".
In the first case, the values mean that at MOST you could get 18 Resource Points. In the second case, the values mean that you could get up to 24 Resource Points.
I'm still not sure which is the better method. More playtesting needs to be done on that from too! Generally speaking we're talking about something that could WIN/LOSE a game if you have that "extra" bit of Resources. TBD.
Note #1: Because it seems to change every DAY... TODAY I get the impression that version #2 (BOOSTER) is the better choice. And how it looks is like this:
Example #3: 5, 4, 2 (White) + 4 Black. You could get 8, 2, 5 instead by adding the "4" to the "4". Making your Power stronger because many of the Monster have Power values...
6 + 6 = 12 maximum limit... But usually you don't want this as there are Tactics which can affect the Resources and a +1 Magic could be beneficial (for example...)
Of course this depends on your cards in play and what you need to WIN the game! So there are ways to boost the Resources other than initially rolling for them.
Note #2: I presently had thought of another variation which would be like BOOSTER (#2) but you could divide up the value of the Black die (Arcane Die) among the other three PSM Values. But I think I LIKE the All-or-nothing approach of "choosing" how to use the Black die.
Otherwise what's the point of rolling dice if you're always try to get the number of the Beast! Haha. I definitely think that choosing ONE (1) die over the other and choosing which die that is lends to more STRATEGY.
For better or worst you select where the Arcane die will make an influence and then you choose which PSM Values you want for the duration of the game. Makes 100% sense to me.
Thoughts???
The visuals are FREE!
Here is the REVISED "template" for prototyping. I have not yet had the chance to render the card... Because I am still ACTIVELY "playtesting" so "Monster Keep" (MK) is indeed a WIP ATM.
This version is the one with the flexible REACH Level (1 to 3) and you can see this by the empty starburst which will allow you to mark the desired level as you see fit during the game.
The other change is that instead of using "/" which gave the impression that it is either a DIVISION operation or "Power/Toughness" like in MagicA. And it is neither of those. You rolls 2D6 + 1 Black die and must get a 9+ To-Hit and deal 1 HP of Damage...
Yes the Grim Caretaker is WEAK but he is a PLUS ("+") operator. He is VERY weak with only "2 HP" but he's a "10" (9 + 1) which means he works well with "5", "2" and "1" value Monsters.
PLUS he has a passive Tactic of reducing the opponent Mana Pool by -1 Magic. That's ONE (1) less try using the Magic Resource (for ATTACKING).
Arrow?
Maybe 9 → 1 or 9+ → 1 to relate the target number with the damage?
A strange monster could even have two of these stacked (in smaller print) if you want less of an all-or-nothing outcome:
10+ → 2
7+ → 1
That's actually the SCORING on the card.
So "9 + 1" = +10 Points (or +11 Points and even +12 Points) if you still have the 2nd HP position available and it has NOT been "knocked-out". That's on the HP Bar above. In addition to Subtraction = "-", Multiplication = "x" and Division = "/" and Exponent = "^".
This is in no part coincidence. It's a MATH game at the lowest level.
You win not by BATTLING but by construction the BEST Formula AFTER BATTLING!
Your suggestion makes me think about "Crystal Heroes" (CH) you can have multiple paths to choose and how you choose affect the outcome of a specific Game Tile.
I've HARDCODED values such that the OPERATIONS are easier to work with. Thing like "9 + 1" = "10"... "10" is divisible by "1", "2" and "5" easily.
It also depends HOW(?) you build your Micro Deck too. Which ever cards are the most compatible in terms of VALUES and OPERATIONS. This is NEW to the 18th Generation. Much cleaner and more precise, less confusion and still a LOT of flexibility.
Also ...
The player closest to the the PSM-A Values (Total added together) which means a Value between 4 and 24 Points determines the WINNER. If both players are identical in Points, then we add up the Points on the Scorecard (Raw points) and the player with the HIGHEST score is declared the winner.
It's challenging because you need to BALANCE between high points and trying to get as close to the Total Points as possible. So that could mean subtraction or division operators to lower the scoring. Those operator usually are lower on the point total because it's like /4 or /3 or /2 (for example) or -4 or -5 or -6 (2nd example)...
If there is no clear winner, then the game is a TIE and player must play another game.
Plus
This is in no part coincidence. It's a MATH game at the lowest level.
Ah, I see. I knew there was a "+ type" but I thought that was the circled-plus symbol in the lower left.
You are correct AGAIN!
Yes indeed the "circle" PLUS ("+") Type is also relevant. Meaning that part of the formula is the MATH in the rounded box (which is "+", "-", "/", "x" or "^") and of course the result of that operation will be tagged with the OPERATOR.
So yes, it is BOTH as you have dully noted! So a "9 + 1" = "10" and that is a "+10" value in terms of the operator. PLUS and MINUS can be starter OPERATIONS. Meaning they don't need an OPERAND on the LHS. So "+10" = "10" and "-10" = "-10"...
This all stems from the FACT that in Generation #15, there was only ONE (1) VALUE and I needed SMALLER values/numbers. Otherwise the Formula would be way too complicated to compute. Like a "+10" "- 5" = "5" and then a "5 / 5" = 1... you can see it dwindles down to next to nothing but the Formula is between "4" and "24"... So it's important to dwindle down TOO HIGH numbers!
I need to CUT and playtest Generation 18... And see how close opponents are to the Formula Point Goal.
But yes, you understood correctly: there are "2" OPERANDS and the reason was to make the values smaller and lower the overall Formulaic goal.
A general comment about Formulation
(-6 - 4)^ 2 = 100 / 5 = 20 (and then you have 2 more OPERANDS to help compute a total between 4 and 24)... Maybe 20 / 2 = 10 + 4 = "14" somewhere in the MIDDLE (for example).
Points total = 6 + 4 + 2 + 5 + 2 + 4 = 33 Points!
Points are secondary to the "14" equation which can probably be tweaked. This is just figurative... And for illustration purposed ONLY.
Something to see how the results are different yet use the same numbers...
Best!
It takes about ~2 hours to cut 36 cards properly
I will complete the second batch (Player #2) this evening (or what is left of the day and later afterwards...) One thing I am realizing is that the starburst while cool looking ... Isn't the greatest for writing "in it". The space is very narrow. Not a big complaint, but something to fix in the final template which will be in full color and rendered. TBD.
I may need to go to a CIRCLE or SQUARE... Again TBD. It's not the end of the World for the Prototype... I can easily write elsewhere on the card too (since there is white area on the prototype template).
One of my ideas is SQUARES mean INPUT. So instead of a ROUNDED shape, I could use a SQUARE and you would know that this means an AREA where you can use your Dry-Erase Marker/Pen.
That sounds like a GOOD IDEA TBH. Keep everything CONSISTENT all along the design of the template and for final input (Rendered Template).
Sincerely.
Done... Finally all 72 cards from the "core" decks
What I wanted to ADD is that for the next couple hours I will be RE-EDITING the REACH Element to be a SQUARE. I've decided that to keep things clear and concise with players and all things you can WRITE in (be it ticks or numbers) they should all have a unified shape to relate where you CAN and CANNOT write.
In any event, it's 8:30 PM EST... In an hour, I have time to do ONE (1) Playtest with the 18th Generation prototype. And report back my issues, problems, fixes and general compatibility and overall FUN play.
I expect things to be smoother this time around. But I will see what it will take to ensure that the game is FUN and engaging.
Maybe I'll post about this TOMORROW... Seeing as today I spent like 5 hours cutting cards and now I'm about to do 2 more hours of EDITING templates (for the Square boxes instead of Sunbursts) as explained above. It makes sense, just will take TIME to make it all happen.