Playing around with playing order in a card game

Here's a pretty simple idea, but (like Seo's) might not be appropriate.

When a player attacks, he places his attack card face up in front of the person he attacked. Players are allowed to attack only players without a face-up attack card showing.

When the last attack card gets played, the last person attacked becomes the new starting attacker, all used attack cards are placed in the discard pile, and the new round begins.

Mark

Doh! You're right, assuming that the player who gets attacked is the next attacker. I was thinking about it a bit differently. The starting player attacks someone. Play proceeds clockwise, with each player attacking in turn. You can only attack someone who hasn't already been attacked. When the last person plays his attack card, the person attacked last in the round becomes the new starting player.

This way, no one can be left out of the circle. The order of attackers is known, but the order of defenders is (mostly) unknown.

Mark

If I remember correctly from your game description, your idea was that the first player would have an advantage each round because they possibly could attack TWICE. For example for 4 players the attacks might go A attacks B, B attacks C, C attacks A, A attacks D. This would also leave D without an attack however, and I don't know if that was your intention.

With 5-6 players, I could see it getting confusing trying to remember who hasn't been attacked yet. Seo's solution seems to be a good one.

As for your turn order problem, why not have the last person to be attacked start the next round? The problem with this approach is that it might result in the same player starting the round multiple times in a row. However, as long as there is not an advantage in going first, this really doesn't matter so you will have to answer that question.

In the game Citadels, the same player can continue to select the King each round and therefore get the first pick. However, this is counteracted because the player HAS to pick the King to go first each time. Also, if he picks the King TOO much, the other players will get fed up and eventually assassinate him. So, if you can come up with a counterbalance for going first each round, that could be a solution.

Good Luck,
Mark

Yummy! Pass the salt!

I like this game! The fight mechanic is solid, and I like the liar aspect.
What's wrong with ganging up on the weak pirate? Food is food, and the scurvy swabs have little honor amongst themselves. Besides, I have an idea that could help, if you didn't have that rule :) ...

At the start of each turn, each pirate simultaneously displays an attack item. In a modified rock-paper-scissors fashion, pair up the attacker/defender fights. Highest card attacks first. Here is an example:

Assume Shoot beats Slash, Slash beats Bash and Bash beats Shoot. Exception, two of a kind beats a single type.
For 2 players, best card goes first.
For 3 players, 3 of a kind is a draw. Go again.
For 3 players, a pair gangs up on the odd card.
For 3 players, 3 different types = shoot goes first, slash second, bash third
For 4 players, high two face each other using 2-player resolution. Low two face each other like-wise.
For 5 players, high two face each other, while the low three face each other. If the low three have a three of a kind, however, they get to gang up on the highest card holder only. That might be too much, so maybe just the top two from the bottom three gang up on the top card holder, while the second highest card holder can attack the lowest card holder.
For six players, have two sets of three: top three and bottom three.

All this is just to determine who attacks first. Here is the gotcha: the card used to detrmine your turn order can not be used for the fight at any time this turn!

Shooters always go first when all three types are present. Shooter cards should not go into the island pile, because bullets are expendable. (Unless I misread the island rules.)

Mitch