I'm making a board game with darts. This game Round Ground originally was intended to be a strategy game. The only random factor was a dart throwing skill of the players. The map is divided into hexagons capturing which gives the players different advantages, such as armies, additional throws of the dart and such. Targeting the right hexagons in a specific order was the strategic part of the game.
Recently I decided to add playing cards to the game, some of which will include quests and rewards. Getting these playing cards is possible by attacking certain hexagons, but the players never know what card they are going to get next. It means that these cards are a new and quite huge random factor in the game.
That's why I'm afraid that many people can claim Round Ground too luck based and it might lose fans. I'm also very indecisive myself because I prefer games with a low random chance.
On the other hand, adding cards makes sense because Round Ground is already a very american-style game (as an opposite to euro-style game); it has a military theme (technologies vs. magic), not very simple rules etc. I play-tested the game with cards a few time and it seems like the players liked this new feature.
If you find the cards add too much randomization, then weaken all the card abilities. You'll know when the cards swing too wildly. If one player using skill hits that one sweet spot, and the other players congratulate them on the great shot, that's good. But if they draw a card and read what it does and all the other players cry out "What?!!" Then rethink it. Is it offering them too much of a foot hold? In the end Darts is a game of skill. Providing a random measure to allow lesser skilled players to compete, while the skilled players still feel they can own the game with skill, then you've got a balanced game.
The quick answer to your question is: not necessarily.
Now, if you bill your game as chockfull of strategy-and-tactics, only to upset the apple cart at the end by rolling some dice to see who wins, then yes, of course, the audience is going to boo and throw things.
Does the luck angle improve the game enough to counteract the bluenoses who will scoff at turning a card to help their lie?
Thinking of Agricola, it has the "family" game w/o cards and the regular game with. The cards in Agricola give the game a lot of replay value, however players very familiar with the game tend to start to do things to lessen the effects of the cards. (Drafting, etc...) I have read of several players who finally resort to the "family" game feeling that it is far more skillful/tactical w/o the cards.
With this in mind, a game such as you are describing may benefit from having the cards because it helps to open the game to those who don't have the same skill level in darts as those they are playing with. However as skill increases the need to rely on cards may likely diminish.
Having cards that are included w/ skill levels of the players that can gradually be weaned out of the deck as skill increases may do a lot to broaden your audience.
On the dart board,is it colored? Or just certain hexes that pertain to the cards to be picked up by the players?
What about adding flavor text to the hexes that corrispond to the cards to be pcked and flipped?
What about blind shots? One part of your game ends up in a cavern or a dark area of ghe game world. By blinding all the players with a dark blind folds, this may make up the difference of getting the next treasure card or trap card or whatever. After everyone has had their darts thrown, Everyone has exited the dark area and sees what they have obtained for the next round or area to go through to get new advice on where to go next?
You or and outside judge or dungeon mastr story teller can put an area with new objects the players can throw at but in the blind fol stage.
May add something unique or make everything seem more complicated.
Any pros and cons to my suggestion. Just something that came up to me.