Skip to Content

Mechanics that represent fatigue?

19 replies [Last post]
Tim Edwards
Tim Edwards's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/30/2015

I'm trying to make a Muay Thai themed card game. Very early on, I decided that a feature of it should be the wise (or risky) management of energy. For a long time I've been working under the assumption that something similar to the below mechanic would be part of the game:

You shed cards into a personal pool as you fight.
Those cards (let's say Energy Cards?) have face values - probably 1-9
High value cards generally get you better results
You can pick used cards back up from your personal pool and bring them back into your hand
Your ability to pick up used cards is dependent on the number of cards you have in your hand
Hence, if I have 6 cards left in my hand, I can pick up used cards to the total face value of no more than 6

I don't know if that's an original idea or not? Thematically, I like it. It seems to have strategic potential. In play-testing...hmmmmm...some not-ideal things

a) choosing which cards to pick up and recombine with existing cards in your hand has a strategic feel, but...picking up cards isn't as exciting as throwing them down. and it's kind of a pain in the bum to have to do it. it makes things slow and avoiding getting gassed (playing too many high cards that your hand is permanently depleted) feels like a chore rather than a cool bit of realism.
b) it introduces a memory-game element for your opponent. if you concentrate, you can start to get a picture of your opponent's hand. Concentrating on memory-related things isn't fun for me. I dislike games that involve memory

My questions are, what do you make of this mechanic as an idea? Can it be improved? Are there other games that simulate stamina management?

Thanks VERY much for your advice. I am starting to feel that abandoning what I imagined would be a central part of the game might be a good move, but before I do...any thoughts? Cheers! :)

PS: I should add that I'm happy to think outside the box and take a completely different approach. My relationship with the idea above idea is starting to feel a bit...strained.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I have something similar...

Let me explain my "mechanic" and maybe it *might* give you some ideas to work with (or maybe not...):

Each "Grimoire" has ten (10) cards with two (2x) copies of values 1 thru 5.

During the course of the game, players may use FIVE (5) cards to cast spells and FIVE (5) cards for life points.

Here's the deal:

A> A 1 life point card only grants 1 HP and it only allows you to choose ONE (1) Word for your spell casting purposes! The best approach is to use a very short word which can easily be casted... or combined with other words from the other Wizards.

B> A 5 life point card grants 5 HP! A lot of health. But it similarly has a very powerful spell aspect too: it allows you to specify FIVE (5) Words for spell casting. Giving you much flexibility when choosing to make spells.

So you need to choose which five (5) cards are for health and which five (5) cards are for spells. Dividing the two equally results in 15 HP and 15 Words (pretty good balance). That's one approach and the results can be tailored as needed (as per the monster being fought).

Anyway this is how Spell card work and it's sort of "similar" to your idea of "fatigue" (In your case you SHED cards, in my case you CHOOSE how to use the cards).

I don't know if this helps... or hinders. But hopefully it can illustrate different ways of handling "Health" in a certain manner (Yes — in your case it is fatigue)...

Tim Edwards
Tim Edwards's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/30/2015
questccg wrote:Let me explain

questccg wrote:
Let me explain my "mechanic" and maybe it *might* give you some ideas to work with (or maybe not...):

Each "Grimoire" has ten (10) cards with two (2x) copies of values 1 thru 5.

During the course of the game, players may use FIVE (5) cards to cast spells and FIVE (5) cards for life points.

Here's the deal:

A> A 1 life point card only grants 1 HP and it only allows you to choose ONE (1) Word for your spell casting purposes! The best approach is to use a very short word which can easily be casted... or combined with other words from the other Wizards.

B> A 5 life point card grants 5 HP! A lot of health. But it similarly has a very powerful spell aspect too: it allows you to specify FIVE (5) Words for spell casting. Giving you much flexibility when choosing to make spells.

So you need to choose which five (5) cards are for health and which five (5) cards are for spells. Dividing the two equally results in 15 HP and 15 Words (pretty good balance). That's one approach and the results can be tailored as needed (as per the monster being fought).

Anyway this is how Spell card work and it's sort of "similar" to your idea of "fatigue" (In your case you SHED cards, in my case you CHOOSE how to use the cards).

I don't know if this helps... or hinders. But hopefully it can illustrate different ways of handling "Health" in a certain manner (Yes — in your case it is fatigue)...

Thanks for that Quest. It IS different, but at this point...thinking along the same lines has got me nowhere so it's refreshing to be encouraged to take a fresh approach.

I'm prepared to go beyond only cards as components too at this point.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
You might want to consider something simple

Instead of a bunch of cards, why not a simple "Track" with "0" to "X".

When you SHED a card (your own choice), the Track moves to the RIGHT by the value indicated on the card.

When an opponent PLAYS a card, the Track moves to the LEFT by the value indicated on his card.

Cards require you to have a minimum level (of this Track, call it the Readiness Track — for lack of a better term).

This is a bit of a Fatigue mechanic and is pretty simple too... Let me know what you think!

Cheers!

P.S.: I'm sure we can come up with alternatives too. This was so simple that I thought you might have already dismissed the idea.

Notes: You may want to SHED from the DECK "blindly" so as to NOT know what cards you use until they ARE used (for Readiness). This is like a double-edged sword. Sometimes you may shed a card you would want in your hand. But once you shed it, it is no longer possible to recover it.

Could it be a "Stamina" Track...

Back to the SHEDDING... Each card has a VALUE which gets added to your "Stamina" Track... Some weaker cards are only +1, while other STRONGER cards are like +5! You risk using either of these cards by sheer randomization...

You can have an Ability like "Perception" which allows you to "check" the next card on the deck to see what it would be that you are shedding. But this would come at some cost to the player...

Bunch of interesting and cool stuff!

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Other cool ideas are...

Instead of SIMPLY "discarding" the cards when you SHED... They can go into the opponent's HAND. Maybe this is also a possibility. It depends if your game allows cards to be "inter-mixed".

If it does this could set up an interesting dynamic:

  • Do you give the opponent the advantage or do you require it for your own "Stamina" Level and risk shedding the card.

This is obviously in the case where you have "Perception" and can verify the topmost card of the deck.

You can also make that "dialogue" partly Blind. What I mean, is when you DRAW the card to be SHED, you give the card to your opponent (not knowing what it is...) He in turn must state the "value" of the card (again a value of +1 to +X) and you don't get to see that card...

He can lie and use deception to his advantage. But YOU can call him out if you think that he is lying and then you earn the card + the "Stamina" boost... If you said he lied and he told the truth, you lose the "Stamina" boost as a penalty (for example).

So many directions you can go with this...

Hope you find something that you may like. Cheers!

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I'm not sure if you can "inter-mix"...

But I really *like* the whole "shed a card" to the opponent and play a little "mind game" to see if he is telling the Truth or lying. Giving you the opportunity to Gain a card (if he lied and you guessed correctly).

I think this "mechanic" kind of "predicting/reading" could ADD a nice dimension to the whole *shedding*.

Again I'm not sure your game will allow this... Because I read somewhere where it said shedding allows your opponent to figure out the TYPE of deck you have constructed. Which in this case leads to NO SHARING of cards.

If the whole process/game was built around randomized decks ... that takes out the whole "Deck Construction" you were seeking to achieve with the Deck Types... You might be able to TRY on-the-fly "Deck BUILDING" in which you draft cards from the central market (which could be shared).

IDK — I'm just hypothesizing because I don't know all the details and how much of the game you want to reconsider.

My opinion ... IF it doesn't FEEL "right" ... there is still time to design and think up NEW ideas that work better in the context of the game and what you want to achieve. But sometimes it takes GOALS to figure out what to do with the DESIGN.

Like IF you want CARD SHARING (Inter-mixing) that removes the whole "Deck Construction" aspect... Your option is to go with "Deck Building" on-the-fly (as I have stated). If you don't really like the sharing concept ... well then you can keep your "Deck Construction" mechanic.

It's all about figuring out what YOU want the game to PLAY like.

Perhaps since it's a battle game, on-the-fly "Deck Building" would be not too bad since you draft the card that you want into your deck, etc.

Note: My advice would be ... Try to picture how you want the players to play the game. The mechanics like Card Drafting, Hand Management, Action Points (APs), Take That, Deck/Pool Building, Dice Rolling could all be valid to your game (I am basing this on a template of most "collectible" card games)...

Then you need to INJECT your own "flavor" and find some kind of NEAT way of one aspect of the game. This could be your "Hook" ... Why would I play? Because of "... this ..." and it is very novel/different from most other battle/duel card games.

let-off studios
let-off studios's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/07/2011
Forced Discard, Limited Draw

Tim Edwards wrote:
a) choosing which cards to pick up and recombine with existing cards in your hand has a strategic feel, but...picking up cards isn't as exciting as throwing them down. and it's kind of a pain in the bum to have to do it. it makes things slow and avoiding getting gassed (playing too many high cards that your hand is permanently depleted) feels like a chore rather than a cool bit of realism.
b) it introduces a memory-game element for your opponent. if you concentrate, you can start to get a picture of your opponent's hand. Concentrating on memory-related things isn't fun for me. I dislike games that involve memory
[...]
My questions are, what do you make of this mechanic as an idea? Can it be improved? Are there other games that simulate stamina management?
This reminds me of the time I attempted to re-work the dice game 15 Love (a bizarre tennis game) into a card game. Here are a couple things I can offer up as suggestions for your card-management mechanics while keeping it streamlined - and removing the math from re-drawing discarded cards.

  • Players can play more than one card on a turn (I think you have this already, based on what I've read in this and your previous posts). Once played, they are discarded face-down.
  • Once a player's draw pile is exhausted, shuffle all discards to create a new draw pile.
  • Players have a set number of cards they may draw at the start/end of their turn, independent of the number of cards they may draw. So there may be situations where a player may have fewer cards in hand than their opponent. The only reason this happens, however, is because they played more cards in previous turns.
  • Incentivize playing low-numbered cards by treating a single card as one part of a combination of attacks. Any card played must be a higher number than a card played previously in the same round. So instead of adding them together (cards 2 + 4 = 6 total), they have to be dealt with individually (card 2, then card 4). Targeted players must match up cards from their hand to the cards of their attacker.
  • Some successful attacks cause targets to discard a card, or the attacker to pick a card at random, or withdraw/freeze a card at random from the discard, or in the case of devastating attacks reduce the number of cards the target player can draw back to their hand - either temporarily or permanently.

Not sure how much text you want on the cards to indicate special attacks or effects, but I think it can all be interesting. It can be used to simulate the back-and-forth of fighters parrying and attacking, of reducing stamina/choices, as well as fighters conserving their strength to recover or summon a devastating combo of repeated assaults.

It also allows for players to choose how they want to approach each round of attacks. They may want to have some low- or mid-strength cards that start off a combo, and then finish with a 7 or 8. Maybe an attacker continually sends out low numbers to draw out the higher numbers of the target player, so that they can unload a 7 and an 8 in the same round to really damage their target.

With some of the strategies implemented above, you will be able to:
- incentivize the play of lower-number cards,
- reduce the "memory" component of the game,
- reduce math into quickly-resolved number-to-number comparisons instead of pace-draining calculations,
- allow for varied styles of play, even from one phase of the game to the next.

Hopefully some of the ideas above will turn out useful for you, Tim. :)

For more info on 15 Love, have a look here:
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/10420/15-love

Tim Edwards
Tim Edwards's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/30/2015
Thank you Quest and Let-Off

Thank you Quest and Let-Off Studios both for your amazing advice! :)

You've both given me tonnes of great ideas to think about.

Stamina track:

A stamina track of some kind could definitely work. I hadn't thought about a track although I had reckoned on a comparative system to avoid BOTH players being knackered and have a slow, limited game. One player should always be at max capacity. There's a sub-battle to be that player. Anyway, yes. Attack Cards could have 2 features. A Stamina Requirement and a Stamina Cost? Could get lots of variety there. If not a track, Stamina Chits might also work. But the advantage of your track is that it easily covers the comparative-stamina idea.

Card sharing:

I can absolutely recognise how intermixing cards opens up huge vistas of potential. Early on, I had decided to go with a deck construction system and so (as you mentioned) discounted the possibility of intermixing. However, about a month ago I decided that deck construction was causing me more problems than it was worth, and got rid of it. That freed me up a lot, but it seems that I forgot that card sharing was back on the agenda! So thanks for reminding me. I'm a fan of that idea and there are actually some Muay Thai-ish thematic reasons why it would make sense (it has to do with how when someone throws a strike, they can generally expect the same kind of strike to come back at them...)

Guessing, Lying, Bluffing:

I really like that idea. It's been appearing and disappearing in some guise or other throughout this process. Oddly enough, only this afternoon I was in Waterstones looking at a children's card game "Gangsta Granny" (looks like a sort of Liar Dice with cards) and was thinking - perhaps bluffs and double bluffs should play a more central part that any previous ideas I'd had. Good one!

Taking turns/ producing higher values:

I like it very much. It's more dynamic than just comparing discrete bids. I wonder if there can be a Cribbage-like thing going on too? (the first phase, where players are taking turns and gaining points back and forth as they go.) I always felt that part of Cribbage felt like a fight.

Text on cards:

Definitely an option that I'm open to. I'd originally envisaged text with plenty of unique special results, but since then have been bouncing back and forth between simple vs complex cards.

Let-Off, I was really interested in this:

"Players have a set number of cards they may draw at the start/end of their turn, independent of the number of cards they may draw."

But...is there a typo there? If there isn't, please explain it to me because I've read that about 20 times and I still don't understand! Sorry!!! :)

Anyway, thank you guys for ALL those stimulating ideas (not only the ones I've mentioned here). They're all hugely appreciated and have really helped.

let-off studios
let-off studios's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/07/2011
Draw and Play

Tim Edwards wrote:
Let-Off, I was really interested in this:

"Players have a set number of cards they may draw at the start/end of their turn, independent of the number of cards they may draw."

But...is there a typo there? If there isn't, please explain it to me because I've read that about 20 times and I still don't understand! Sorry!!! :)

Hahaha! Yes, there is. It should have read:

"Players have a set number of cards they may draw at the start/end of their turn, independent of the number of cards they may play."

Also, I was unsure of when you allowed players to draw cards - at the beginning of their turn, at the end of their turn, or at some other time - so that's what the "start/end" is all about.

Sorry for the confusion. Totally my fault. Didn't have enough coffee at the time to catch my own typo. :)

Tim Edwards
Tim Edwards's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/30/2015
let-off studios wrote:Tim

let-off studios wrote:
Tim Edwards wrote:
Let-Off, I was really interested in this:

"Players have a set number of cards they may draw at the start/end of their turn, independent of the number of cards they may draw."

But...is there a typo there? If there isn't, please explain it to me because I've read that about 20 times and I still don't understand! Sorry!!! :)

Hahaha! Yes, there is. It should have read:

"Players have a set number of cards they may draw at the start/end of their turn, independent of the number of cards they may play."

Also, I was unsure of when you allowed players to draw cards - at the beginning of their turn, at the end of their turn, or at some other time - so that's what the "start/end" is all about.

Sorry for the confusion. Totally my fault. Didn't have enough coffee at the time to catch my own typo. :)

Ah, thank you! :)

Yes, that's a really nice idea. You've given me a lot to mull over for which I really am grateful. I had a look at 15 Love, by the way. I had to read the text on the front of the box about 20 times too! It's magnificently bizarre blurb. Loved it!

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Just a quick comment

I'm glad you "removed" the constraint of having "Deck Construction". From my experience ... it's GOOD for those well-known games like Magic: the Gathering, Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh! ... but even for those game sometimes the "mechanic" fails.

Specifically introducing NEW players is a complete "nightmare". I had a friend who had a friend (let's call him Nick) that enjoyed collecting Yu-Gi-Oh! cards. Well one day he decided that he was going to build two (2) Decks and bring them over to my friend's apartment to play. I "tried" to play... but because I knew NOTHING about how the deck was built, what was the deck's "strategy", I eventually lost to Nick... and that was because he managed to use his deck's "strategy" against me.

Bottom line: Deck Construction is a real pain in my opinion.

New players are struggling to understand the basics of the game, let alone figure out how underlying cards form a more general strategy to how to use the cards in the Deck.

So congratulations about REMOVING "Deck Construction"! I applaud you (Seriously)!

But having said this... "Card Drafting" via "Deck/Pool Building" could be a viable option ... and is easier to master than "Deck Construction". Why? Because "Deck Construction" requires knowledge about an ENTIRE "Card Collection" and requires hours of offline (outside of game) thinking into how to choose cards for a Deck.

However with "Card Drafting" (using "Deck/Pool Building") you can have a common market with let's say five (5) visibly "exposed" cards. Of course new players will take more TIME "reading" and evaluating which cards they want to DRAFT into their Deck... But that's the IDEA: NEW players can learn on-the-fly.

Also creating a "master strategy" is HARDER since not all cards may be available for you to DRAFT. Your opponent may take a card you needed for your deck and you therefore cannot have COMPLETE control over the decks much like you have in "Deck Construction".

Anyhow... the point I wanted to make is that you still have options for "Card Drafting" that would allow the game to be more "flexible" than just "Your Cards" and "My Cards". "Deck Building" allows more control than simply drawing cards or simple Hand Management... You might be even capable of using a Bidding mechanic and add "cost" to use "combat techniques" some more expensive but potentially stronger forms of attack, some less expensive making the more basic in the duel process.

I don't want to be the sponsor of "Deck Building"... I'm just saying the option is available to you and thematically it could be even with bidding making it seem like some "Master" is teaching players how to duel and that both players are engaged in some form of sparring. Learning the better moves may do more damage, but at the same time you need easier techniques which require less "stamina"(?) in order to be able to battle each turn...

Cheers and I look forward to seeing what your design goals are and how you plan to foresee this game/duel being played!

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I may have a "Hook" for you

questccg wrote:
...Then you need to INJECT your own "flavor" and find some kind of NEAT way of one aspect of the game. This could be your "Hook" ... Why would I play? Because of "... this ..." and it is very novel/different from most other battle/duel card games.

The idea stems from some more thoughts. Let me explain:

Generally speaking you are fighters being taught by a Master on how to duel via some sparring. The Master will teach you all kinds of "techniques" and "moves", however the ultimate victor will be the one that uses that knowledge to the best of his/her abilities.

What does this mean? (And here comes your HOOK)

The "learning period" where the Master teaches is comprised of TWELVE (12) distinct rounds where the Master offers his expertise to the both players. And at the end of the 12th round, the Master will let both duelist complete the sparring to determine which player gains the Master's Favor and wins the duel.

In English please...?

So the IDEA is this (and I have not seen it EVER used anywhere):

During the "drafting" phase, players can purchase "3" cards per turn for a total duration of 12 rounds (both player's turns). That means EACH "Deck" will be comprised of 36 cards. Once both players reach that 12th round and have ENOUGH cards... The "Master" will not teach them more "techniques" or "moves", both player must use what they have learnt and spar to ultimately defeat their opponent.

So the HOOK is: Deck/Pool Building is done during the first 12 rounds. And then players finish the duel to the bitter end!

This SOUNDS to me AMAZING for a BATTLE game (Fighting).

I think it would be UNIQUE, matching the THEME and overall a great way to MANAGE the game.

(BTW if you don't like it... that's fine too. I still think it's an AMAZING idea/concept. Never seen anything like it in DUEL/Battle games...)

Note: The OVERALL "Deck" could be comprised of 100 cards. You would each get 36 (x2 = 72 cards) which is about 3/4 of the total deck adding HUGE replayability through the restriction mechanic as described above.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Almost forgot

questccg wrote:
...So the HOOK is: Deck/Pool Building is done during the first 12 rounds. And then players finish the duel to the bitter end!

Deck of 6 cards (which are identical to BOTH players). Forgot you needed some cards to ensure you have cards to play with at the very beginning of the game.

And your starting Hand could be five (5) cards which could GROW given some "technique" cards that give you bonus cards (+1 each)...

(Sorry — Forgot about that!)

Note #1: And that whole SHEDDING concept/mechanic ... could still WORK!!! You've got 36 cards to win the battle... Some "techniques" you play down in your Play Area (like "knowledge" cards) which customize your character with some additional abilities. And when you BATTLE, the opponent can play cards to weaken the opponent (and discard some of those "knowledge" cards)!

Note #2: If you build up to a Deck of 36 cards (after the continuous drafting) but all the while SHEDDING cards to attack your opponent, sound to me like REAL FATIGUE!!! (LOL) You're learning and fighting at the same time... Something rather unique (I'd say)!

Note #3: The starting Deck of 6 cards (common to both players) could be "Moves" that require 0 Stamina... Forms of Basic Attacks and Defensive Counters. To WIN, you would need to reduce your opponent's Stamina (a track) = 0 or less...

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Some last minute thoughts!

questccg wrote:
The OVERALL "Deck" could be comprised of 100 cards. You would each get 36 (x2 = 72 cards) which is about 3/4 of the total deck adding HUGE replayability through the restriction mechanic as described above.

Imagine that each "technique" and "move" card has four (4) copies in total. That means all you need to design 25 cards:

  • 15 "move" cards about combat. 5 types of direct attacks, 5 types of counters and 5 types of "technique" suppression.

  • 10 "technique" cards about character personalization. These are like ability bonuses. For example "+1 Hand limit increase". They act like knowledge and with 4 of this card... You can expect both players to try to draft 2 each.

Not too bad if I do say so myself.

I've given you plenty to think about. But more so I hope to inspire you with some of these ideas.

Cheers Tim!

wob
Offline
Joined: 06/09/2017
hi. it looks like the other

hi. it looks like the other posters pretty much have you covered with ideas but here was my version.
each turn a boxer can play N cards (this could be a standard or a place to add differences in character decks) as the bout progresses this number is reduced (indicated by your stamina track, a token stack etc). obviously if this gets too low you will be limited on the size of your combo. to increase your stamina you need to block (or some other term, maybe dance like ali? or rest) this opens you up to attacks from your opponent (still allow basic "0 level" moves like "roll with punch").
as a side point the memory aspect of your game, i think, is unavoidable. any game where players have a pool of cards that get revealed can be turned into a memory test. some people will naturally count cards and there isnt really a way to stop them. not even casinos can prove you are doing it (unless your doing it outloud) they can only suspect you if you win to much (but they also dont need to prove it to ban you)

Tim Edwards
Tim Edwards's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/30/2015
questccg wrote:questccg

questccg wrote:
questccg wrote:
...Then you need to INJECT your own "flavor" and find some kind of NEAT way of one aspect of the game. This could be your "Hook" ... Why would I play? Because of "... this ..." and it is very novel/different from most other battle/duel card games.

The idea stems from some more thoughts. Let me explain:

> Generally speaking you are fighters being taught by a Master on how to duel via some sparring. The Master will teach you all kinds of "techniques" and "moves", however the ultimate victor will be the one that uses that knowledge to the best of his/her abilities.

What does this mean? (And here comes your HOOK)

The "learning period" where the Master teaches is comprised of TWELVE (12) distinct rounds where the Master offers his expertise to the both players. And at the end of the 12th round, the Master will let both duelist complete the sparring to determine which player gains the Master's Favor and wins the duel.

In English please...?

So the IDEA is this (and I have not seen it EVER used anywhere):

During the "drafting" phase, players can purchase "3" cards per turn for a total duration of 12 rounds (both player's turns). That means EACH "Deck" will be comprised of 36 cards. Once both players reach that 12th round and have ENOUGH cards... The "Master" will not teach them more "techniques" or "moves", both player must use what they have learnt and spar to ultimately defeat their opponent.

So the HOOK is: Deck/Pool Building is done during the first 12 rounds. And then players finish the duel to the bitter end!

This SOUNDS to me AMAZING for a BATTLE game (Fighting).

I think it would be UNIQUE, matching the THEME and overall a great way to MANAGE the game.

(BTW if you don't like it... that's fine too. I still think it's an AMAZING idea/concept. Never seen anything like it in DUEL/Battle games...)

Note: The OVERALL "Deck" could be comprised of 100 cards. You would each get 36 (x2 = 72 cards) which is about 3/4 of the total deck adding HUGE replayability through the restriction mechanic as described above.

Thanks Quest! A training phase where part of the game is to actually build the deck prior to fighting is something that had crossed my mind but I hadn't given it much thought. Now with all the other ideas you and others have given me, it looks like it should definitely be back on the table (literally).

Funnily enough, prior to settling for Muay Thai ,I had wondered about a Kung Fu theme that would/ might have seen characters move around a board visiting masters of different styles and picking up techniques. The game would end in a tournament between the players. But on the way, you may have to fight bandits etc...you don't want to lose those fights - but you may also want to keep your most deadly techniques a secret from the others...

With the Muay Thai theme a period of competitive training in the gym could be great. After all, they say that training is the real fight. The fighters just enter the ring to find out who won. (actually, I don't know if "they" say that...but I've said it before...pretentiously. :)

This weekend I'm going to read all these ideas over. You and others have given me fantastic guidance. Cheers loads!

Tim Edwards
Tim Edwards's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/30/2015
wob wrote:hi. it looks like

wob wrote:
hi. it looks like the other posters pretty much have you covered with ideas but here was my version.
each turn a boxer can play N cards (this could be a standard or a place to add differences in character decks) as the bout progresses this number is reduced (indicated by your stamina track, a token stack etc). obviously if this gets too low you will be limited on the size of your combo. to increase your stamina you need to block (or some other term, maybe dance like ali? or rest) this opens you up to attacks from your opponent (still allow basic "0 level" moves like "roll with punch").
as a side point the memory aspect of your game, i think, is unavoidable. any game where players have a pool of cards that get revealed can be turned into a memory test. some people will naturally count cards and there isnt really a way to stop them. not even casinos can prove you are doing it (unless your doing it outloud) they can only suspect you if you win to much (but they also dont need to prove it to ban you)

Hi wob,

Yup. I take your point about memory. Almost all classic trick taking games expect you to keep track of what's gone out. Perhaps I shouldn't worry about it.

I have to say, I really like the idea of a token stack for stamina. I'll probably be using token stacks for other things (points, cut damage, KO damage) so it seems attractive to stay with chits as far as possible. Moreover, thematically (or rather atmospherically) there's something 'right' about tokens. Gambling is a big part of Muay Thai culture. Losing and gaining stacks of tokens as the cards go down has the right *feel* to it, I think.

By the way, which do you prefer:

a) reducing the number of cards you can hold, or
b) keeping hand size the same with the limitation coming from the requirements the cards make on your slowly depleting stamina (stack/track)?

I'm instinctively drawn to B now, although I've been assuming a diminishing hand size ever since I started thinking about this project.

Cheers!

let-off studios
let-off studios's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/07/2011
Useful Tokens

Tim Edwards wrote:
I have to say, I really like the idea of a token stack for stamina. I'll probably be using token stacks for other things (points, cut damage, KO damage) so it seems attractive to stay with chits as far as possible. Moreover, thematically (or rather atmospherically) there's something 'right' about tokens. Gambling is a big part of Muay Thai culture. Losing and gaining stacks of tokens as the cards go down has the right *feel* to it, I think.
If you're looking for some excellent stackable tokens, I suggest these from Hand2Mind:
https://www.hand2mind.com/item/stacking-counters-set-of-500/2775

I highly recommend these. They take Sharpie/permanent marker as well as stickers quite well. You should be able to mark your tokens for their various functions, so that players aren't confused as to what's what and they stay stacked most of the time unless around the clumsiest of players (or in my case, designers...).

Tim Edwards
Tim Edwards's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/30/2015
let-off studios wrote:Tim

let-off studios wrote:
Tim Edwards wrote:
I have to say, I really like the idea of a token stack for stamina. I'll probably be using token stacks for other things (points, cut damage, KO damage) so it seems attractive to stay with chits as far as possible. Moreover, thematically (or rather atmospherically) there's something 'right' about tokens. Gambling is a big part of Muay Thai culture. Losing and gaining stacks of tokens as the cards go down has the right *feel* to it, I think.
If you're looking for some excellent stackable tokens, I suggest these from Hand2Mind:
https://www.hand2mind.com/item/stacking-counters-set-of-500/2775

I highly recommend these. They take Sharpie/permanent marker as well as stickers quite well. You should be able to mark your tokens for their various functions, so that players aren't confused as to what's what and they stay stacked most of the time unless around the clumsiest of players (or in my case, designers...).

Oh, I really love those! I was imagining Poker chits, but those are much better. For one thing, the exact count of the stacks would be so immediately visible - they'd look like health bars in a video game! Nice one :)

Tim Edwards
Tim Edwards's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/30/2015
https://www.dhgate.com/produc

https://www.dhgate.com/product/wooden-cloud-computation-bead-rainbow-cou...

This is expensive but could be cool. Also, I wonder if anyone has ever used an abacus as a game component?

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut