Skip to Content

Deck construction restrictions?

5 replies [Last post]
Evil ColSanders
Evil ColSanders's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/08/2010

So I've had Dungeon Brawl in the works for a while now, I've been reconstructing the deck construction as well as the cards for them and I need some input.

A deck is 20 cards. Hand size is 7. Deck construction read: "max 2 copies of every card except armor and weapons which was max 5 of the same card and up to 8 cards total of armor and 5 cards total for weapons." Confusing, right? Looking at it now, it looks like I'm forcing players to play a certain way and taking away choice, but in doing so, forcing balance.

So I just changed names on weapons and armor but made them do the same thing so I can write "max 2 copies of every card". I'm now worried with the change, everyone will just take as much armor as possible then fill the holes to fill 20 cards because the point of the game is to be the one with the least amount of damage at the end of the game. What do I do to prevent this?

One idea was implementing a point cost to all the cards while still enforcing the 20 card deck standard. This seems overly technical for something I want to be more fast and easy. I don't need players doing math before the game even starts. Also, if I were a player, I would pay whatever cost to get as much armor as I could and once again fill the rest of the 20 card deck with low cost attacks. Another was putting a hard cap on armor: No more than half your deck can be armor. Then reduce hand size to 6, or even 5. If I went this route, armor would be prioritized even more due to the need to protect oneself. Going back to the cap of 8 armor cards seems reasonable.

Can you think of anything else? Or are one of these decent enough?

Stormyknight1976
Offline
Joined: 04/08/2012
Point system

For armor points.
Go by two points each for each armor card in hand. Players will have to strategize the combat during game play by also trying to max out armor for less damage.
Pretty much like slap jack. Players attack combo cards while trying to keep up with armor cards for less damage.

Stormy.

Zag24
Offline
Joined: 03/02/2014
Rather than specific armor

Rather than specific armor cards (or, perhaps, in addition to) have some amount of armor on other cards. So a great sword is a big damage weapon, but also gives 2 points of armor. A main gauche is a smallish damage, but gives 4 points. etc. This means that if your opponents are all going for max armor strategy, you will cream them with a big damage strategy, since the small amount of armor you get from the big damage items is enough to counter their pathetic attacks, but their huge armor still sometimes lets your biggest attacks get partially through.

Supafrieke
Supafrieke's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/22/2015
Zag24 wrote:Rather than

Zag24 wrote:
Rather than specific armor cards (or, perhaps, in addition to) have some amount of armor on other cards. So a great sword is a big damage weapon, but also gives 2 points of armor. A main gauche is a smallish damage, but gives 4 points. etc. This means that if your opponents are all going for max armor strategy, you will cream them with a big damage strategy, since the small amount of armor you get from the big damage items is enough to counter their pathetic attacks, but their huge armor still sometimes lets your biggest attacks get partially through.

Above is pretty good... or make lots of dual purpose cards. A card works only as armor if played one way, or rotated 180 and played, only as a weapon. This way the player has to choose during play how to "spend" a card.

Casamyr
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
I like this idea. It makes

I like this idea. It makes deck construction even deeper and adds deeper decision making.

Evil ColSanders
Evil ColSanders's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/08/2010
Yeah. I enjoy that idea as

Yeah. I enjoy that idea as well. What about ranged weapons and spells? I'd assume they'd just deal more damage and no armor, right?

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut