In the following GDS Showdown (http://www.bgdf.com/forum/game-design/game-design-showdown/gds-november-...), we presented a very "unique" component: Wooden Game Tiles.
Although there was limited participation, the general direction of the games in the contest did not satisfy the intended direction of this "component". Even if I shelved the concept for many months... I have been thinking about re-introducing that component for a NEW design.
I call it "SpellMasters".
As of now, the "tile" component (without a board - I have recently rid myself of a large 18" x 18" board) would be the primary component of the game. I am thinking about scaling down the tile size from 1 1/2" to only 0.75". But rather than only have a "limited" supply of tiles, each player would have a bag filled with "game tiles".
I am trying to re-introduce the Wizards from "Elemental: Schools of Magic" and game tiles from "Titan".
So far I have thought about designing a FIVE (5) player CO-OP game in which each player plays a specific type of Wizard:
- Conjuror (Red): summons minions to fight with.
- Sorcerer (Green): uses words of power and scrolls.
- Enchanter (Blue): bless or curse from magic locked within items.
- Elementalist (Black): channels elemental magic from Earth-Water-Fire.
- Thaumaturge (White): performs miraculous acts of magic.
Now this game will be a "dungeon crawler" with my Legendary "Game Tiles"... And might make the use of a 30 second timer when drawing tiles from a bag.
I'm still trying to figure out HOW to make the game CO-OP with the various Wizards.
For now this is just an "Introduction" post - I'll follow-up with more information as it comes!
Cheers.
![Syndicate content](/misc/feed.png "Comments for \"SpellMasters: "Tiles" of change\""){kind=small}
Comments
This sounds awesome
And bonus points for introducing me to the term "Thaumaturge".
IMO there can never be too many co-op games. Why? Because it's not a mechanic, gimmick, or theme. Every combination of those three elements out there and yet to be devised can be purposed as a traditional versus or a co-op just by changing the objective and devising some heavy hitting AI (which really is a lot of fun to do).
Since I am new on these forums, I guess I should dig back and familiarize myself with these legendary game tiles you speak of but so far just based on "wizards" and "co-op" I am already pretty stoked.
WW
More on the tiles
The prototypes for the Wooden Game Tiles were designed by a Swiss Toy Maker.
The original game called "Titan" was to build upon these tiles. But we could not get any "traction" in terms of the design.
The different wizards from "Elemental: Schools of Magic" are a bit refined. In Elemental I had the "Illusionist". But I realized there are only a limited amount of "illusions". I replaced this by the "Elementalist" and use a RPS-3: Rock, Paper, Scissors mechanic.
I have a "partial" Dungeon-Crawl mechanic... in how I want the board to grow.
There is still a LOT of work to be done at the "Wizards"-level.
Like say in a 2 Player game, one player plays the "Conjuror" because this is probably the most needed role to have in a game - and a Thaumaturge (which can do things like bless and heal - as part of Miracle working).
So now you need to delve with these two (2) Wizards and there needs to be a combat-type mechanic (baddies - AI), maybe Quests (missions) and Loot (special rewards that go beyond your Wizard's Deck).
Since it's CO-OP, you don't need to HIDE your cards - so we can MAYBE have a "Card Drafting" mechanic where you choose which cards you want to ADD to your hand/configuration. I'm thinking 8 cards should be your hand: 3 start cards and 5 extra cards.
Some cards are "re-usable" (Permanents) and others a use-once (Temporal). I figure a 30 card Deck per Wizard should suffice. And maybe make this a Deck-Construction where each Player can customize his Deck for a game of "SpellMasters"... A "Collectible" aspect that ties in with the TILES - could be kind of cool... IDK Yet.
I really LIKE "Game Sets"
This is perhaps one of the MOST controversial points about game:
1. Would "Board Gamers" be willing to ADOPT a Single Player Game Set model?
If for example the game requires 100 Game Tiles per player, 30 Card Player Deck... Doing this for FIVE (5) players means 500 Game Tiles and 150 Cards. It's BIG and UGLY. The cost of the game is prohibitive IMO.
But this same game, broken down into "Each-Player" Game Sets could maybe retail for a more affordable price.
And then there is the COMMONS Deck: Encounters, Quests and Loot.
I still need to work on this and see what I can come up with. Maybe 60 cards, 20 of each and the game ends when ONE (1) of these piles becomes EMPTY. Tentative Victory Condition.
These are still EARLY ideas... More to come, so stay tuned!
As a designer you have to set
As a designer you have to set certain boundaries to yourself when it comes to components. Number of cards should be optimized for printing, overall weight of the box has to be considered etc. And tiles tend to be heavy.
And you're also stepping into the same trap with "1 player game, but you can play with more if you buy multiple copies". This can be fixed by having a common pile of tiles and special powers based on your class instead of having a completely separate set of tiles for each one.
I still don't understand the "stigma"
I, personally, have no problem with "1 Player Game Sets". And I don't see the "stigma" attached to this concept.
To me, it feels 100% natural to be able to, in my own time, construct a 30 card Deck for a game that I will play with friends.
Also it doesn't bother me to bring my own bag of tiles, deck and play with other players a common game (using some common cards - say a deck of 60 cards).
I think this is a question of "Game Culture".
Maybe no game has done this VERY WELL. I perhaps feel like IF my Game does a good job of making a FUN/Interactive Game Set game - well then WHY NOT?
So what, Board Gamers FEEL like they should have enough "out-of-the-box" to play a game. Who cares that Magic: The Gathering players will not play the game because all they do is play Magic. I'm tailoring my games to gamers who want innovative and fun game to play - without concern of FORMAT. Maybe this is a subcategory of a subcategory.
And you suggestion of using a common pool of tiles is NOT feasible. This is not how the game was designed to work. Each player has his OWN tiles and he may share tiles with his fellow players (CO-OP) when the time is needed. Players play the game together - and there is therefore no hidden information.
questccg wrote:I,
I, personally, have no problem with "1 Player Game Sets". And I don't see the "stigma" attached to this concept.
But you're not going to sell your game to yourself, right? You want as wider market as possible.
Maybe no game has done this VERY WELL. I perhaps feel like IF my Game does a good job of making a FUN/Interactive Game Set game - well then WHY NOT?
Problem is that most likely no-one will know if your game is good or not. If the pricing model is un-appealing, you will not succeed, regardless of the quality of the game.
So what, Board Gamers FEEL like they should have enough "out-of-the-box" to play a game. Who cares that Magic: The Gathering players will not play the game because all they do is play Magic.
Forget about magic the gathering :) It's completely unique beast. Both gameplay-wise and in the sense of marketing.
What WoTC can get away with, you won't.
I'm tailoring my games to gamers who want innovative and fun game to play - without concern of FORMAT. Maybe this is a subcategory of a subcategory.
Again, first you need to sell your game (be it to the publisher or to a crowd on KS). Only after you sell your game it will actually matter how good it is.
And you suggestion of using a common pool of tiles is NOT feasible. This is not how the game was designed to work. Each player has his OWN tiles and he may share tiles with his fellow players (CO-OP) when the time is needed. Players play the game together - and there is therefore no hidden information.
I know that it's not designed that way. That's exactly why I suggest you re-design it ;)
You can't ignore the financial part of making the game while designing it. If you do, you will have a hard time pitching it.
You've already seen exactly that happening to Trade wars.
P.S:
I`m really trying to help here.
Money is of no concern
This game will focus on creating a "playable" prototype. It may cost $200 to produce one - but it will be totally awesome.
I'm not making THIS game so that it becomes publishable.
Like you said, Wooden Game Tiles are expensive to produce. Add brass inlays and the cost is "exorbitant". I don't even know if it would be cheaper using Plastic Game Tiles...
But one thing for certain, with this game I want to create a "Heirloom" quality product. Something "expensive" and unique. More of a work of art than a board game... Since there is NO board, maybe we should just call it a game.
And players will "dress up" in robes with hats to play this Wizards game! :) LOL; a play on words there...!
P.S.: I know you are trying to help - but this game is not meant for a Publisher... If I get a working prototype - that will be awesome. Now that I am a part of a Game Community - I can conduct game sessions with them ... and see what they think about having their own game tile bag with a constructed deck!
Dude, yeah this...
Make a one off - break the rules of format. Challenge the game culture. Innovation is its own reward.
Worst case scenario is you spent a bunch of money and only you and a few people want to play. I bet we all spend $200 or more on stuff that doesn't NEARLY have the return on investment than making your own novel board game would have. You take your family to Disneyland, you're out hundreds of bucks and your kids dig you for a week or two before they want to go to Disney World. But that, too, is a fine investment in something that makes you grow - so why not this?
And of course the upside is you sell a trunkload of all your other games, you're now mentioned in the same sentence as Knizia, Selinker, Garfield...(substitute your favorite rockstar designer here) and a publisher really DOES want to put out your Piece de Resistance. WIN-WIN.
Do it. I'll play.
Ok "WW" - I'll just do it (Nike!)
So the "Adventure Pack" (Core) is a single Tuck Box with 60 cards: 20 Encounters, 20 Quests and 20 Loot cards. Simple nice format and runs all the AI from there.
Each player has five (5) FATE dice and one (1) custom "Event" dice. Next each player has a Deck of 30 cards which are tailored to one of the five Wizards in the game. You choose who you want to be (what kind of Wizard).
All this seems cool and very feasible. Nothing overly expensive and all within the realm of reason.
The LAST component to the game is the "Bag of Wooden Game Tiles". Each player has his OWN bag of 100 Game Tiles. For the prototype I will probably use 0.75" x 0.75" shards. The Tiles are the color of the Wizard chosen.
This is the ONLY component that is "out-of-whack".
I will think about it some more... But to me it sounds like you BUY an "Adventure Pack" and then set out on the adventurer using your Wizard's Game Set (one for each player).
I can playtest this pretty easy - because my Gaming Group will want to alternate between Wizards (to see how each one plays). And this ADDS HUGE re-play value! Plus if I want another "Adventure", I simply need to create a single 60 card deck with new cards ... more replayability!
@ElKobold: Maybe I can streamline it...
Right now I'm not sure HOW many tiles need to be in each Player's Bag. One of the valid points is since this is a CO-OP game, you can talk among the players and see what tiles can be used to earn NEW cards.
That's part of the mechanic: you use tiles to acquire cards from your deck.
You start the game with THREE (3) cards per Wizard. Those a "permanent" cards since you can re-use them. Some are "permanent" but most are "temporal" and can only be used once and then discarded.
I was thinking about using FATE "Tokens" that each player starts with THREE (3) tokens and can use them for different actions. Like if you use another player's Tile, you would give that player 1 Token.
"Shared Knowledge" = 1 Token: allows you to use another Wizard's Tile(s).
Or if you want to take a card from your discard, you could pay the Thaumaturge 1 Token to "restore" the card from your discard pile (obviously that means one player must be a Thaumaturge)...
"Restoration" = 1 Token: allows you to retrieve a card from your Discard pile.
It's like a form of limited currency ... that allows CO-OP but gives a benefit to the player you are using his/her skill.
This would mean each Wizard would need to have his own special skill(s)...
More thoughts to come ... while I develop this concept further.
Using a COMMON bag of Tiles
Well @ElKobold (Arty) you've got me thinking ...
Because I imagined that what if every Wizard had their own set of tiles ... and use a COMMON bag of tiles too.
Just thinking about "after-market" opportunities. Like you have common tiles which have no Mana crystals - and then you can have your OWN "stash" of Mana generating tiles (that have Swarovski crystals).
It allows each player to "invest" as much as they want to...
But then again: Do I even WANT to go into an "after-market" sales strategy???
Notes: Cardstock Shards - should do the trick for the prototype (and be less expensive). They also are better since it's impossible to cheat with. I may want to use wooden components with Swarovski crystals - but this could lead to cheating (because you can feel for the crystals...)
IDK - Yet. Got to think some more.
Maybe I can make a "Elitist Edition" which is make with Wood and Swarovski Crystals... But have a retail-ready version using paper shards (inexpensive).