Skip to Content

Scale difficulty with number of players?

5 replies [Last post]
Milostnik
Offline
Joined: 03/11/2017

Howdy ya'll.

Good news is I've had a great playtest and everyone really dug the game, but needs a little TLC.

THE MECHANIC:
Players push their luck with dice rolls. Each player gets 3 re-rolls.
If they re-roll they add +1 token next to the minotaur deck.

When the Minotaur's turn comes up, they flip over the topmost card and it has 2 numbers on it.

Number 1: Is the number of actions the players have to sacrifice to beat to stop that Minotaur from killing a pawn this turn

Number 2: If this number on the card is equal to or lower than the number of re-rolls used this turn, then the pawn is killed instantly (the players don't get to try to stop the Minotaur).

THE PROBLEM:
Playing with 2-4 players increases/decreased the number of re-rolls and the number of actions (as players are allowed to do 4 actions in their turn).

POTENTIAL SOLUTION:
I started toying with the idea of having different starting re-rolls, and number of actions for each player depending on the amount of people playing. This would also mean creating 3 different Minotaur decks so the actions and re-rolls are achievable to beat.

I.E 2 Players aren't trying to commit 6 of their actions to beat the minotaur, which a 4 player game could do quite easily.

I'm kinda scratching my head with this one - but would appreciate some advice if you are inclined.

Regards and cheers

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Have you thought about ...

Co-operative play??? Like two (2) players get "4" actions combined, so "2" each. Four (4) players get "1" action each (again combined). Three players is the odd choice out... But it's not unreasonable that a game is for 2 or 4 Players... That seems like a perfectly good "constraint".

This way you don't need to CHANGE "anything".

You leave the game as it is and the number of "Actions" stay the same. The only "downside" is that the game would be Players vs. The Minotaur. So you would have to have a common victory condition such that either the PLAYERS WIN or the Minotaur Wins (and everyone loses).

That's what I could come up with based on you OP.

I know it's not perfect... Because of the three (3) player scenario. Also you may want your game to be competitive where one player wins and the others lose. But to be real honest, I don't get the feeling that having a "co-op" game is unreasonable...

Your game seems to have a flavor of "Players Win" or "Minotaur Wins"... It seems logical that this could work.

But it's not perfect... Maybe someone else might share some other ideas.

Cheers!

Note: I used 4 points because that's what was in the OP. But it could be 4 points EACH for a total of 8 Action points among the players. So in a 4 player scenario, each player could get 2 Actions... That might be more in-line with what you are looking for.

Note #2: If you really want to bring in 3 Players... It's possible. Let's say there are 12 Action points in total. For two (2) Players = 6 each, for three (3) Players = 4 each, for four (4) players = 3 each.

Not sure if this will be 100% balanced in your game... But maybe it's worth examining in further detail...

Note #3: If you want better "Balance" you could state that in the 2 Player game, each Action requires TWO (2) Action points. So that would mean that the "6" becomes a "3" identical to your 4 Player scenario... Okay so in the 3 Player scenario there is an extra point (4 instead of 3). Not sure how you could mitigate around that... That's why I said the "Balancing was not 100%"... You're left with an extra AP per player in the three (3) player setting.

Another way is that different Actions require DIFFERENT points. This might make the game more fluid in that some actions require 2 Points and others only 1 Point. This would definitely go a long way in Balancing the 3 Player scenario.

Stormyknight1976
Offline
Joined: 04/08/2012
How about this idea

I would suggest the number 2 mechanic.

But remove the re-rolls. Just allow three rolls to match the equal or lower than the number on the card. Also instead of killing off the pawn, allow the player to move in defense or back up the added numbers on the die. This allows the Minotaur to move forward closer to the pawn target for the kill or by moving to another location on the board. This allows the Minotaur AI movement freely. This also gives the suspense of the action like in a fantasy movie.

So basically the pawn moves back or moves down another corridor that many spaces adding up the die or to lure the Minotaur closer to the other pawns on the board if any (pawn as bait).

The re-rolls term should be changed to Roll xD 1-3 times to match or equal or less than number on card.

This reminds me of the game Furkle. Players roll 5 or 6 d6’s. Numbers on the die that lands face up with a 1=100 points or a 5=50 points. To get on the score board, players must have 500 points to start with in one roll on first time or add up the number 5 on the d6’s. Players keep rolling the remaining die to get on the score board. The more rolls of 1 or 5 you can add and keep. But the more you roll, the chances are greater to lose all of the points you just rolled to keep. It’s a push your luck game.

The player that gets 5,000 points exact, wins. The game can go up to 10,000 points for longer games (optional).

So for your game, I would say, Roll Xd twice for a basic action. If the player chooses to roll a third time (which may slow the game down during action phases) then the greater the chances the Minotaur will attack on the third turn with out hesitation instead of planning ahead to another location for an ambush.

Just some ideas.

Stormyknight1976

Milostnik
Offline
Joined: 03/11/2017
Thanks for the suggestions!

Thanks for the suggestions!

The game is co-op. Sorry I forgot to mention.

kos
Offline
Joined: 01/17/2011
"Per player" penalties

One way to scale for number of players in a coop game is to apply penalties to all players.

E.g.
Number 1: 1 per player + 2
Number 2: 1 per player + 3

It's not perfectly balanced (in the mathematical sense) but at least it scales somewhat with more players.

Regards,
kos

DarkDream
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Thought About Drawing More Than One Card?

Have you thought of drawing more than one Minotaur card? For example, the cards could be balanced for two players, and then when you have 4 players you draw two cards and add up the first and second numbers?

As for three players, I am not sure how to go ahead and balance that. Maybe you can extend my thinking: how about drawing a number of Minotaur cards equal to the *number of players* and add up the numbers on all the cards. One card, in of itself, would have numbers for just one player (half the usual cost of a card balanced for two players).

It seems a little tedious drawing, for example in a four player game, four cards at the same time and adding them up, but you could make it more exciting by drawing *one* card at a time up to the number of players.

For example, players have committed 4 re-rolls and have 16 actions. The first card is drawn with the first number a 2 and the second number a 5. Ok, so far. The next card is drawn and it shows a 1 for the first number and a 9 for the second number. Players hold their breath for the third card which may put them over the re-roll limit. The card that is drawn is . . .

--DarkDream

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut