Skip to Content

Social deduction card game about office drama

28 replies [Last post]
HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015

Hi All

I had my first play test of my game, GOSSIP, on Friday night. I'd love to get yalls feedback on it. I will explain the game here and then provide links to the rules and a print-n-play version of the game.

OVERVIEW OF GAME
GOSSIP is a social deduction card game in which players take on the role of coworkers spreading gossip (gossips) or coworkers trying to identify the gossip-spreaders (friendlies).

The gossips win by lowering office morale to zero. The friendlies win by identifying the gossips before morale runs out.

Each player is dealt a secret rumor card which identifies you as a gossip or a friendly. In addition, each player is dealt a position card which defines your position in the social fabric of your corporation. The positions include the office flirt, the networker, the prankster, the slacker, and the manager. They all have unique abilities (except the manager, who has no abilities).

To play the game, players must travel to various parts of the office to "do stuff." There are four locations (which trigger in this order):
1st: the boss's office is where you go to hide from accusations (or to exchange a card in your hand for a new one)
2nd: the cubicle is where you go to draw a card
3rd: the water cooler is where you go to spread or quash gossip
4th: HR is where you go to make an accusation

The traveling is done via location cards. Each player selects one of their four location cards, and then simultaneously reveals it (i.e. like Junta).

The primary resource in GOSSIP is the gossip cards. Gossip cards have abilities on them (for instance "Play this if you are the water cooler to...") which can be played from your hand. They also have a gossip value. Gossip values are numbers which are used to spread gossip at the water cooler or support an accusation. The values range from -2 to +2.

The key mechanic is the use of a secret ballot voting system. For instance, when spreading gossip at HR, each player may play up to one card face down. In addition, two cards are added to the gossip pile at random. The cards are then shuffled and revealed. If the value is less than zero, morale decreases. If the value is greater than zero, morale increases. A similar thing happens with accusations except that 2 cards are not added from the gossip deck.

There are other nuances in the game including what happens when you accidentally accuse a friendly, way for a friendly to reveal him or herself, etc. and these are all explained in the rules.

One struggle I am having is with the starting morale value. But I'm also wondering if there are ways to 'break' the game that I am not seeing yet. Either way, I am hopeful one of you might have a look and point out the obvious (or not so obvious).

LINKS

Rules: http://handsomegames.wix.com/gossip#!rules/c1rzs
PnP: https://static.wixstatic.com/ugd/70855f_8e726a4614de4dfbaefce67e259ef877...

Zag24
Offline
Joined: 03/02/2014
Interesting. I like hidden

Interesting. I like hidden role games and have played a few of them. This does have some interesting aspects to it.

Do the gossips know who each other are? I guess there's no reason for them to.

When someone makes an accusation, everyone votes, right? As a gossip, it seems that making accusations is pretty profitable as long as I can convince people I have a credible reason to do it. Either the good people spend their positive cards on voting, or we get a quick -2 morale, which takes a pretty big bite out of a starting value of 7.

Do people have to vote? I know that they have to add a card to the rumor mill when they are at the water cooler, so forcing them to spend a card on a vote could possibly help me trap someone into playing negative at the water cooler when they didn't want to. Conversely, a good person should, then, never go to the water cooler without 2 positive cards in hand, which restricts them significantly.

HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
Zag24 wrote:Do the gossips

Zag24 wrote:
Do the gossips know who each other are? I guess there's no reason for them to.

Nope! The rumor cards (the cards which identify you as either a gossip or a friendly) are dealt face down to each player.

Zag24 wrote:
When someone makes an accusation, everyone votes, right?

Almost!

Any player who is not a revealed gossip may vote provided they have a card in their hand. This means that revealed friendlies can vote, too.

Zag24 wrote:
As a gossip, it seems that making accusations is pretty profitable as long as I can convince people I have a credible reason to do it. Either the good people spend their positive cards on voting, or we get a quick -2 morale, which takes a pretty big bite out of a starting value of 7.

Exactly! And you mentioned a good point about convincing others. That's one thing that makes the game not so easily broken. For instance, accusations on turn 1 shouldn't make sense. At best you have a 38% chance of picking the right person. Then you have to convince people to go along with it b/c if they submit cards and you're wrong, it should slant heavily in favor of the gossips. And of course, if someone tries that on turn one, it *should* get voted down, and then the accuser should be accused *next* turn. Etc. So there's some self-policing there.

But your point is a good one. It's a very strong play for a gossip to accuse a friendly, get it voted through, and then convince everybody your actions were logical enough to not get yourself accused next turn!

In our play test, we had some lovely (and hilarious) back and forth over moments like these.

Zag24 wrote:
Do people have to vote? I know that they have to add a card to the rumor mill when they are at the water cooler, so forcing them to spend a card on a vote could possibly help me trap someone into playing negative at the water cooler when they didn't want to. Conversely, a good person should, then, never go to the water cooler without 2 positive cards in hand, which restricts them significantly.

There are very few times were players are forced to make an action. Voting is no exception. Players have the option to vote, just as they have the option to play cards at the water cooler. The rules generally state that a player "may" do something and/or use the language "up to one card" suggesting that no cards may be played.

Some examples:
- you can go to the water cooler and not play anything (for instance, the Networker may go to exchange a card in his hand with another player; or the office flirt may go to peak at a card in someone's hand. The office flirt could, then, slow down a gossip who went to the water cooler with 1 card even if she, herself, has non)
- you can abstain from voting
- you can go to HR and not make an accusation
- you can go to the manager's office and not exchange a card (though this will look uber suspicious)

Thank you so much for your feedback. I am going to Kickstart this game eventually, but you are more than welcome to try out the print-n-play version!

Zag24
Offline
Joined: 03/02/2014
Thanks. I guess that makes

Thanks. I guess that makes sense, though I'm not sure I agree with abstaining from a vote. I had assumed that you had to participate in the gossip at the water cooler to provide cover for people making a negative move, but I guess you always have the two random entries in there to cover it.

I was also thinking that using separate cards to represent the current morale feels a little odd. I'd rather just have a bar with the numbers 1-9 and some indicator. (This is not a huge deal, though -- barely more than a quirk.)

Considering the "chatting" action, you say: "If the sum of all gossip values is 4 or greater, the active player may reveal their rumor card. This is an important ability for the friendlies."

I have two changes to suggest, here. First, rather than the active player being the one whose role is revealed, how about the first player who played a card at the water cooler? This means that, at least, the person is someone with some skin in the game.

Since there is never a reason for a friendly not to reveal, then it is pretty crippling for a gossip to happen to be the active player when this happens. This means that a gossip REALLY wants to go gossip when he's the active player, in order to toss in a negative card. However, that makes a meta-game issue that the friendlies are best off if they all agree not to go to the water cooler whenever they are the active player. The above rule change completely eliminates this meta-gaming.

The second idea is that rather than revealing his card to everyone, he only reveals it to one other person, which makes it a lot less crippling. Even if you're a gossip, you can reveal to one person and then counter-accuse when he accuses you. It at least buys you another turn to be able to muck things up.

This could make for a lot of hilarity in larger games, where there are multiple gossips. You reveal to me, and I see that you're a gossip and tell everyone. Of course, the other friendlies don't know whom to trust, but then I get a chance to reveal in order to prove it. However, I accidentally pick the other gossip, who then accuses me, as well.

HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
First, thanks so much for

First, thanks so much for your feedback. It's really helpful and means a lot that you would take the time to help me out here.

Zag24 wrote:
I'm not sure I agree with abstaining from a vote.

Do you mean during an accusation at HR? If so, abstaining makes sense (to me) here since it's possible to have gossip cards that don't let you vote in the direction you want. For instance, if you want to have the accused person reveal their card but you only have negative gossip cards, you shouldn't be forced to throw one. And this is important because the distribution of negative positive cards is about 60/40 in favor of negative cards. So some players will be forced to abstain in that instance (and that makes it a little easier I think for gossips to stay hidden).

If you are talking about at the water cooler (which your clarification suggested even though the water cooler technically isn't a "vote" but sure, it's the same mechanic so whatever), I think it adds a strategic element. For instance, on a final turn or something you could go to the cooler, claiming to be a good guy (but actually be a gossip), and have only positive cards. You don't play a card, morale goes down. You laugh and win. Etc.

As a friendly, you probably always want to play a gossip card at the water cooler. Maybe you could argue the Networker with his card exchanging ability could go to the water cooler to STOP a suspected, but not revealed gossip, from playing a card by exchanging it.

Zag24 wrote:
I was also thinking that using separate cards to represent the current morale feels a little odd.

The morale tracker has been a thorn in my side... The only thing I'm sure of is that morale needs to be easily visible by all players. It might give something away if someone on the far end of a table asks you what the morale is. I wanted cards with giant numbers on them for that reason. But I very much dislike that it takes up 5 cards in my tuck box...

Zag24 wrote:
Considering the "chatting" action, you say: "If the sum of all gossip values is 4 or greater, the active player may reveal their rumor card. This is an important ability for the friendlies."

I have two changes to suggest, here. First, rather than the active player being the one whose role is revealed, how about the first player who played a card at the water cooler? This means that, at least, the person is someone with some skin in the game.

I need to clarify that rule: the active player must also be at the water cooler. Does that address your issues with the reveal ability?

It's very strategic to me: a gossip could lie about "only having negative cards" to get out of going to the water cooler when he/she is the active player. Further, the gossip might want to go to the water cooler when someone is playing overly "friendly" etc.

Zag24 wrote:
that makes a meta-game issue that the friendlies are best off if they all agree not to go to the water cooler whenever they are the active player.

Could you elaborate on this a little more? Under the current rules (which I clarified above where the active player must also be at the water cooler), *every* friendly should be incentivized to go to the cooler when they are the active player (since that is the only time they can reveal themselves).

Zag24 wrote:
The second idea is that rather than revealing his card to everyone, he only reveals it to one other person, which makes it a lot less crippling.

One of the issues in GOSSIP is that the cards are stacked against the friendlies. That fact plus the fact that morale decreases each turn means that the friendlies need a way to turn the tide. That's what the reveal is all about. If you can somehow convince enough people to put enough positive cards such that you can reveal yourself, the friendlies can get an edge. Regardless of the number of players in a game, there are more friendlies than gossips, so this is an achievable feat.

I think showing your card to another player adds an awesome amount of fun to the game though and I am right now thinking of ways in which this could happen.

As an aside: the office flirt's original ability was that she could look at a player's Rumor card, but that turned out to be too powerful (suggesting that seeing another player's rumor card might be an overpowered part of the game... but the jury's still out on this!).

Perhaps I can modify some of the gossip card abilities such that one or two of them allow you to show your card to another player under some circumstances.

Looking forward to hearing back from you.

Thanks again for the insights! I hope you keep them coming!

Zag24
Offline
Joined: 03/02/2014
I did only just skim the

I did only just skim the rules, but I thought that the active player was just the one who plays first. He MUST go to the water cooler? What if he wants to make an accusation?

I do, however, like to have a situation where a person is forced to participate in chatting, since it gives gossips a chance to lament their poor luck in having only negative cards that they just had to play.

I agree that the ability to look at another player's Rumor card is too powerful for the flirt. But, since anyone can change out their gossip cards, perhaps it is not too powerful for the flirt to see all of a person's gossip cards (rather than just one). Perhaps you could balance this by allowing a person to exchange all his gossip cards when visiting the boss.

Re the meta-game issue: I hadn't realized that the active player was forced to go to the water cooler. If he weren't, but he is still the one who must reveal his rumor card on a +4 water cooler result, then the best approach for the friendlies is to agree that no one should go to the cooler on their own turn as active player. With this agreement (which the gossip must agree to, as well, or be the obvious sore thumb), it maximizes the chance that the friendlies will force the gossip to reveal, since only friendlies will be voting.

I still think that a rumor card reveal to everyone, even for a friendly to do it, is too powerful and takes too much uncertainty (i.e. the fun) out of the game. Revealing only to one other person will add to the drama, while still giving some boost to the friendlies. As it is, people become fully revealed when there is a vote against them, and that's enough.

HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
Hmm I think I was too

Hmm I think I was too confusing. Let me clarify the active player thing.

The active player is simply the person who gets priority that turn. Each turn, the active player becomes the person to the left of active player from the previous turn (like poker). The active player has priority over every other player. The player to the left of the active player has priority over everybody to his left, etc. So if several people try to go to the boss's office, priority goes to the active player then proceeds clockwise.

The rule with the water cooler should have said that "if the active player is at the water cooler and the result is 4 or more, he/she can reveal their gossip card."

The only potential issue with showing another player a card rather than revealing, is that the game might slant too much towards gossips. For instance, you could, as a gossip, play the game as if you were a friendly and *eventually* the gossips will win as the cards eventually stack up against you. That is, morale decreases by 1 each turn. You can't keep up with that given that 60% of the cards are negative.

But I actually don't mind that. It just means that I need a way for the friendlies to make progress. I think showing other players your card might not be progress enough.

Put another way, if every person played as a friendly, it still might take a long time before the gossips are found without some sort of mechanic whereby a friendly can announce who they are.

The showing of a rumor card in itself, though, is potentially hilarious - and I'm still thinking of ways to incorporate it.

But keep this going! I'd love to hear more about your idea. How do you see a game progressing if "everybody plays like a friendly" under your rule change idea?

Zag24
Offline
Joined: 03/02/2014
HandsomeGames wrote:The rule

HandsomeGames wrote:
The rule with the water cooler should have said that "if the active player is at the water cooler and the result is 4 or more, he/she can reveal their gossip card."

Ok. Now that makes more sense. However, I do think that you could just say that the first person to play a card at the water cooler may reveal if the result is 4+. If the active player wants to be that person, he can be, but if he wants to go somewhere else, there's still a chance for a reveal. This is more important if the reveal is only to one other person, as I'm advocating.

I'll make one more pitch: I think it's more powerful for the friendlies than you think. In a 5-player game, A reveals to B, who confirms A is friendly. Then B reveals to C. If C is friendly, he now knows he can trust B, which means he can trust A, as well. And A knows that there is only 1 gossip in a 5-player game, so he also knows to trust both B and C (or B, at least -- C could still be a gossip, but B can't be because that means C isn't and would reveal him). Even in a 6-player game, he knows he would have to get awfully unlucky for both B and C to be gossips.

Also, the friendlies have information from the voting. Even though there are two random cards on a water cooler action, an unlucky gossip could get caught if he's the only one voting and all three cards turn up negative.

Have you played Avalon or Nosferatu? Those games are all about just figuring out who the evil people are, and you can often do it on surprisingly thin clues, once you can put a few of them together.

HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
Avalon, yes. Nosferatu, no.

Avalon, yes. Nosferatu, no. I've also played other traitor games (Shadows over Camelot, Battlestar Galactica, etc.) where I learned the value of just a little bit of information.

I think I'm sold on the showing of the card. I've reduced the water cooler gossip requirement from 4+ to 3+ which I think is a commensurate with the amount of difficulty given the now not-so-strong reward of showing another player rather than revealing.

I've also nixed the Reveal ability altogether. The premise of the game is inference with limited information. Showing the card plays on that theme a lot more than the powerful "reveal" ability.

Thanks so much for the help! If you have more ideas, I'd love to hear them!

The rules have been uptaed on the GOSSIP website:
http://handsomegames.wix.com/gossip

Zag24
Offline
Joined: 03/02/2014
I thought of some other

I thought of some other powers you might use.

Flirt: can force someone to join them at the water cooler and chat. (i.e. their victim must put in a card for the water cooler chat. They can't target the same person twice in a row.) OR, can force someone NOT to go to the water cooler, but they must not go, either.

Secretary: If at the water cooler, may look at one of the two random cards.

Snoop (What you had as the flirt's power): If at the water cooler, can look at one of another person's cards before cards are played.

Big shot: May play two cards at the water cooler, but only if he shows one of the two to everyone as it is played.

Tool: When gaining a card for working at his desk, draws two cards and chooses which one to keep.

Suck-up: When replacing cards in the manager's office, discards one, then draws two and chooses which one to keep. OR Discards three and draws and keeps two.

Executive: May play two cards on a vote.

HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
I love these. I don't think I

I love these. I don't think I can use the word "secretary" these days. You get funny looks. Like calling a parking enforcement official a meter-maid.

I think I'm going to mull through these. I may offer them as stretch goals on the KS campaign for now as I've already gone through the painstaking (but enjoyable) process of balancing the characters I have currently.

But I love these ideas.

HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
Welp, the Kickstarter is

Welp, the Kickstarter is live. Had to kick off 2016 with some sorta bang.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1486838180/gossip

I cannot thank you enough for your support. $6k to go to see this game come to life.

Thanks again, mate!

Zag24
Offline
Joined: 03/02/2014
I'm in!

I'm in for a set. Good luck!

HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
Luck, I will need. Thank you

Luck, I will need.

Thank you kindly for you pledge!

HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
You should have received an

You should have received an update from Kickstarter, but just informing you that I've done away with the superfluous art assets and cut my pledge goal down from 6k to 1k.

I've also reduced the duration to 15 days.

radioactivemouse
radioactivemouse's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/08/2013
What happened?

I was about to back your project, but it says you cancelled it. What's up?

I Will Never Gr...
I Will Never Grow Up Gaming's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2015
radioactivemouse wrote:I was

radioactivemouse wrote:
I was about to back your project, but it says you cancelled it. What's up?

Shows up fine for me when I go look.

Paul, one suggestion if I may .. when running a Kickstarter you need to make frequent updates to keep people in the loop. Let your backers know what's going on, what's being planned, any changes that are made. I notice right now you've made massive changes to the campaign but there is no update message!

Another suggestion while I'm at it .. "Ships anywhere in the world" but when you pledge you have to select your country and are hit with added cost. You should have mentioned added shipping costs somewhere, either in the reward tier or on the campaign page (with a little chart showing shipping costs to various countries/regions). I wasn't expecting to see +$5 shipping to the US and +$10 shipping to the rest of the world .. for a card game at $15, this feels excessive.

Like Radioactivemouse, I wasn't enamoured with the "upgraded" art assets for stretch goals, for all the same reasons.

HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
Which part is excessive? The

Which part is excessive? The cheapest shipping I found is going to cost me $3.95 domestic. International shipping can easily cost over $10. This is according to the USPS. In addition to USPS, I've checked 3 additional large mail couriers (all more expensive).

Because the tuckbox protrudes more than 1/2" in either direction, I can't throw it in a bubble mailer.

Re: updates, I hear you. And an update is going out today. Also, my last project had several updates in 4 days and the last one explained what was going on (I thought - I'll double check).

Re: canceled project, I can't change the pledge goal of an existing project so I had to cancel and relaunch. The new project link is here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1486838180/gossip-a-social-deductio...

I Will Never Gr...
I Will Never Grow Up Gaming's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2015
HandsomeGames wrote:Which

HandsomeGames wrote:
Which part is excessive? The cheapest shipping I found is going to cost me $3.95 domestic. International shipping can easily cost over $10. This is according to the USPS. In addition to USPS, I've checked 3 additional large mail couriers (all more expensive).

Because the tuckbox protrudes more than 1/2" in either direction, I can't throw it in a bubble mailer.

The $10 shipping is what feels excessive. It's a generic feeling tbh. People are used to "free" or dirt cheap shipping because most creators add the excess into the price of the game itself (it's a marketing ploy of course, but it is what people are used to so it generally works out).

What are the box dimensions and weight btw?

I ask because I regularly send 1-3 pound packages in the 6x4x4 inch all the way up to 12x6x6 inch size for $10-15 (Canadian, which = about $7 US right now) through a high volume UPS Commercial account (2 day delivery with tracking) to anywhere in North America. Worldwide is of course more.

Where is your game being manufactured (China, US, elsewhere)?

Have you considered fulfillment services? They often ship a LOT cheaper than you can through USPS because of volume discounts.

HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
Answers

I Will Never Grow Up Gaming wrote:
What are the box dimensions and weight btw?

Dimensions: 3.60 x 2.35 x 1.72 in
Weight: 6.5oz

I Will Never Grow Up Gaming wrote:
I ask because I regularly send 1-3 pound packages in the 6x4x4 inch all the way up to 12x6x6 inch size for $10-15 (Canadian, which = about $7 US right now) through a high volume UPS Commercial account (2 day delivery with tracking) to anywhere in North America. Worldwide is of course more.

I've found shipping for $3.95 domestic. International shipping is in the $11-$13 range. According to USPS.

I Will Never Grow Up Gaming wrote:
Where is your game being manufactured (China, US, elsewhere)?

Depends on the success of the Kickstarter. If I get fewer than 300ish backers (which it's looking like), then my game will be entirely manufactured and shipped from The Game Crafter. Not ideal in terms of manufacturing costs but unless I get a lot of backers I cannot make use of the economies of scale offered through some other manufacturers.

I Will Never Grow Up Gaming wrote:
Have you considered fulfillment services? They often ship a LOT cheaper than you can through USPS because of volume discounts.

I'm using TGC's fulfillment service. I've briefly looked into Amazon's FBA service, but not much else because those services aren't important to me until / unless I get several hundred backers - which doesn't look likely right now.

I Will Never Gr...
I Will Never Grow Up Gaming's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2015
One more question .. how many

One more question .. how many cards come in this game?

HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
I Will Never Grow Up Gaming

I Will Never Grow Up Gaming wrote:
One more question .. how many cards come in this game?

104

I Will Never Gr...
I Will Never Grow Up Gaming's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2015
HandsomeGames wrote:I Will

HandsomeGames wrote:
I Will Never Grow Up Gaming wrote:
What are the box dimensions and weight btw?

Dimensions: 3.60 x 2.35 x 1.72 in
Weight: 6.5oz

I Will Never Grow Up Gaming wrote:
I ask because I regularly send 1-3 pound packages in the 6x4x4 inch all the way up to 12x6x6 inch size for $10-15 (Canadian, which = about $7 US right now) through a high volume UPS Commercial account (2 day delivery with tracking) to anywhere in North America. Worldwide is of course more.

I've found shipping for $3.95 domestic. International shipping is in the $11-$13 range. According to USPS.

I Will Never Grow Up Gaming wrote:
Where is your game being manufactured (China, US, elsewhere)?

Depends on the success of the Kickstarter. If I get fewer than 300ish backers (which it's looking like), then my game will be entirely manufactured and shipped from The Game Crafter. Not ideal in terms of manufacturing costs but unless I get a lot of backers I cannot make use of the economies of scale offered through some other manufacturers.

Have you contacted Wingo Games? They have regularly quoted me on quantities of 500 and are quite responsive. I have a feeling that even 500 copies of a 108 card deck + rules + tuckbox would be cheaper that way than even as few as 100 (for "bulk pricing") going through The Game Crafter or one of the other POD services like them.

Quote:

I Will Never Grow Up Gaming wrote:
Have you considered fulfillment services? They often ship a LOT cheaper than you can through USPS because of volume discounts.

I'm using TGC's fulfillment service. I've briefly looked into Amazon's FBA service, but not much else because those services aren't important to me until / unless I get several hundred backers - which doesn't look likely right now.

You might consider checking out and contacting Ship Naked. For your size game their rates are $5 in the US and $7 to the rest of the world. They work with Kickstarters all the time too. Yes, the US price is $1 +/- more than doing it yourself .. but you don't have to do the work either and the international shipping is cheaper.

HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
I saw Ship Naked but it

I saw Ship Naked but it looked suspicious, tbh. For instance, suppose my game weighs 7oz. Using their shipping calculator for 7oz, the numbers are right as you say: $5 for US, $7 for international.

But their site also says the following:

Ship Naked wrote:
We recommend adding half a pound to a full pound of weight for a sturdy box and packing material ...
Once you get over a pound of total package weight, carriers round weight up to the next pound...

So it appears my 7oz game is shipping at the 2lb level. I.e. $9 US and $18 Int'l.

Have you had worked with them?

I Will Never Gr...
I Will Never Grow Up Gaming's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2015
HandsomeGames wrote:I saw

HandsomeGames wrote:
I saw Ship Naked but it looked suspicious, tbh. For instance, suppose my game weighs 7oz. Using their shipping calculator for 7oz, the numbers are right as you say: $5 for US, $7 for international.

But their site also says the following:

Ship Naked wrote:
We recommend adding half a pound to a full pound of weight for a sturdy box and packing material ...
Once you get over a pound of total package weight, carriers round weight up to the next pound...

So it appears my 7oz game is shipping at the 2lb level. I.e. $9 US and $18 Int'l.

Have you had worked with them?

I have not worked with them yet, but I've heard nothing but good things about them.

I would email or them and ask though. I find it unlikely that your 7oz card game is going to be shipping at the 2 pound rate, but they would be able to tell you in more detail for sure.

It never hurts to have options available right?

HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
As expected, their customer

As expected, their customer service has been great so far. Prompt responses from a seemingly literate person. I may have low standards...

Once the Kickstarter ends, I'll reach out to them for a quote.

Have you had any experience with MakePlayingCards.com?

Zag24
Offline
Joined: 03/02/2014
HandsomeGames wrote:Have you

HandsomeGames wrote:
Have you had any experience with MakePlayingCards.com?

I used them to make prototypes before I came up with a process for making satisfactory ones myself. (nanDeck, my own printer, card stock, and a guillotine paper cutter). Their quality was good and stuff arrived on time. I don't think they are that competitive on price for large runs, but I haven't really looked into it, and you can make that judgement for yourself.

I Will Never Gr...
I Will Never Grow Up Gaming's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2015
HandsomeGames wrote:As

HandsomeGames wrote:
As expected, their customer service has been great so far. Prompt responses from a seemingly literate person. I may have low standards...

Once the Kickstarter ends, I'll reach out to them for a quote.

Have you had any experience with MakePlayingCards.com?

Makeplayingcards is great, but only competetive if you are doing small runs. Once you hit the 500 mark youre better to go with a (for lack of a better word) proper manufacturer

HandsomeGames
HandsomeGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
Thank you all for your

Thank you all for your support.

The Kickstarter funded successfully!

We're excited to get Gossip shipped out and begin work on our next game(s).

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut