First real post here.
How do you guys feel about a dice+cards combat system?
The way it works is this:
You draw cards in the draw phase. It is like the bidding part of dune/rex without the bidding. The cards can be offensive, defensive or let you do things during other phases (additional movement).
As for combat I was thinking a modified risk system. same base 3 offensive, 2 defensive dice but you can play cards that you determine before the role to add die or subtract them from your opponent. Also possibly re-rolls and other things.
I didn't want it to be as much of a 1 and out thing as Rex but not as random as Risk. Any ideas would be very welcome.
It depends on how they interact. For example:
A) Suppose you have a game where players draw cards, and some of those require players to roll dice to "activate" the cards.
B) Suppose you have a game where you roll dice to move around a board and some spaces give you a card.
C) Suppose you have a game where you somehow get cards which you can play to influence a contest decided with dice (like your game. :) ).
Case 'A' is my least favorite, because you have two randomizing agents the simultaneously feed into a single result, and it's probably an powerful result because the designers had to reduce the chances of success.
Case 'B' is OK, because the interaction of the two random systems is somewhat incidental (I'm thinking of "Chance" and "Community Chest"). Going around the board is the important thing. If you happen to get a card, good for you. If the cards had a major impact on the game, I would dislike this system as much as 'A'.
Case 'C' can be interesting and fun, especially if the systems introduce randomness on different scales. For instance, if the cards represent "strategic" options, and the dice are tactical, you can have a blast this way (example: Memoir '44). I might not always be able to play a card, but when I do, it influences all the dice in a particular contest. As pappy used to say about hush puppies: "Them's good eatin'!"
It sounds like you're headed in the direction of 'C'. I'd be interested in hearing more about the design as it comes along.
One other thing about your post caught my eye:
> I didn't want it to be ... as random as Risk
Risk's dicing system doesn't seem that random to me (unless the armies are small). So, I'm interested in what you mean by randomness (unless you're talking about exchanging the Risk cards for armies, which *is* ridiculous!). I'm also curious as to the "way" in which it's random, and why the strategic randomness of the cards you're suggesting is "less random" or "better random."
I'm not picking nits, here -- your design sounds like a lot of fun -- I'm just curious about your definitions and lines of thought.
I how like the strategy of choosing to play a card can augment the randomness of dice combat. I've come up with examples for two ways of doing this:
(1) You can use a Random-Action-Result model where players roll dice and then decide which cards to play in response to them. This has a more euro style to it. An example could be both players roll dice and depending on what you roll allows you to use cards to varying effectiveness (like a 6 makes a Destroy Card do extra damage or a Block card more effective).
(2) You can have cards and dice affect different aspects of the battle that determine the overall outcome. For instance, cards could affect directly controllable aspects like attacking and blocking or maneuvering, while dice could allow for unexpected variations like terrain, weather, or critical success. Another incarnation could be to have cards represent a rock-paper-scissors style attack maneuver and dice determining the relative power of the attack. This way a player who plays a "rock" card will have a diminished effect against a player who plays a "paper" card.
There are other ways to do things but these are two that just popped into my head from previous discussions.
You are doing dice rolls against other dice. That seems random to me. The part i like is the 3v2 part. That makes you have to work for it. Thanks for the great feedback.
As for how the cards work exactly is:
-You draw cards in the draw phase (these can either effect combat or other aspects of the game). You have a hand size of 4 (that may change).
-You can play the cards whenever the cards say you can (i.e. before combat, after combat, movement phase, etc).
-Combat cards will have either plus die for you, minus die for other player, re-roll lowest,etc).
I am hoping that this will make the combat more strategy based while leaving a smaller amount up to chance.
There will also be village building in this. And they will also effect combat slightly. I was thinking +1 die for defender on the first combat with a village to represent getting through the wall.
Thanks for indulging my curiosity. I see what you mean. Risk dice are pretty interesting, mathematically. As much as I dislike the other mechanics in that game, the dicing system works pretty well.
Sounds like you've got a good handle on your design. Should be pretty fun. Hope you get to playtest it soon and you post some results.
I have all the commander cards typed up and most of the draw cards and turn cards. I am going to the GTS trade show in a couple weeks and hope i can have a mock-up done by then. I have a big group here in NC and a group in Atlanta and i want to get feedback from them all. Thanks again for the help.