I have been recently looking through my unpainted minis. Since many are long forgotten projects, I have been viewing rulebooks to see if I am inspired. My biggest unfinished projects are:
Quar. Samurai. Greek. 70YW/ECW. Weird War II. Infinity. Confrontation 3 (fantasy). These all have 50-100 minis to complete.
I'm looking for impetus to get them on the table - so I'm building terrain, sourcing and printing rule-books. While browsing these genres I came across Mortal Gods. Greek skirmish. Mythic expansions. Good reviews. Sounds interesting; then I notice custom dice.
I hate custom dice.
1) "You can do more stuff with custom dice"
Maybe. I can't think of too many examples off the top of my head where I went "Man, I'm glad I'm using these expensive custom dice instead of those damn ordinary d6s."
When I see custom dice, I tend to assume gimmick/laziness/chasing extra profits.
You can do a lot with even the most basic basic d6. You can roll two d6 and create a bell curve. Or you can throw buckets of d6 with a certain number scoring a hit - say 4+. Or what about crits? Maybe a 6+ counts as two hits? Maybe heavier weapons crit on a 5+? Lighter weapons hit on a 3+ but still crit on a 6+? Maybe you can compare the stats - if stats are equal, 4+, if greater /less could be 3+ or 5+? Or you can add a dice roll to a stat and compare to a target number? Or maybe a contested roll using a range of methods where the defender can try out-roll the attacker...
....And that's ignoring the fact that d4, d8, d10, d12 and d20 are readily available thanks to the inexplicable popularity of D&D. Yeah D&D is a clunky, bad RPG. *Bangs sacred cow with stick*
Point is, I tend to regard game designers who need special dice to make their game work as lacking in basic problem solving and mathematics.
2) Symbols or custom dice are not always more intuitive either. Looking at Bloodbowl dice reminded me of how I wished they just had words instead of exclamation mark explosion, explosion, explosion skull, skull and arrow. Which symbols did Block and Dodge effect again? It's be just as easy to have a chart that says:
1 = attacker falls over
2 = both attacker and defender falls over unless either have block
3,4 = defender is pushed back
5 = defender is falls over unless he has dodge
6 = defender falls over
Voila! No special dice required. I just saved you $37. I could memorize what the numbers do just as easily as the explosion or skull symbols or combo thereof.
Card Mechanics - a tricky balancing act
Card mechanics can be thematic (in a cowboy game, for example). Just like pulling Go pebbles from a bag might be a fun way to do samurai initiative...
In the Savage Worlds RPG (I've been looking at it for the baseline of a horror Western skirmish game) cards are simply drawn and randomly assigned to heroes or groups to ensure a completely random activation.
That's kind of a waste. Is using cards even needed? It's using cards for the sake of using cards. Even then, it's kinda cluttering; if you're putting down a card for each mini/squad - where are all these playing cards being put on the table?
And do we really want truly random activation anyway? I prefer controllable risk. Where you are always uncertain, but you can take steps to "massage" the odds in your favour. How could cards play along with this idea of controllable risk?
Maybe each player has a colour (red or black suit) and can choose the mini they activate when their colour comes up. Maybe some cards like Aces or Jokers have an additional effect; boosting stats, allowing re-rolls, or ending the current turn - whatever.
Maybe a poker hand where each player hold 5 cards and plays them to see who activates a mini next. Maybe only some cards (2?) are visible and others (3?) are hidden.
Maybe heroes activate on face cards AND number cards whereas grunts only activate on number cards.
Maybe a player can skip an activation and swap out some/all of his cards.
A strength of cards is the ability to add on extra effects. I.e. activating on a queen of diamonds might be +2 defence, but a queen of spades +2 attack. You can kinda weave interesting events and variables into the cards as it's like rolling 4 uniquely different 13-sided dice.
There's lots more obviously, but if you are going to use cards, make sure you are getting use out of them....but wait:
....on the flip side, even good, 'cool' card mechanic risks becoming the 'whole game' (or the main focus of the game). You don't want to turn your fire-and-maneuver wargame into an abstract Magic clone.
This applies to using cards to resolve combat too.
I kinda like the idea that each player has a deck of cards and thus has the same amount of "luck" i.e. each player has 4 Aces, 4 Kings, 4 Queens etc - that may come out at different times, favouring one or the other; but overall it's not like one player rolling nothing but 6s all game and his opponent rolling nothing but 1s. The total value of each hand is random, yet equivalent overall. Once you've pulled your lowest cards your bad luck is over and things will likely "even out." I like predictable randomness.
But is drawing and showing cards quicker or slower, mechanically, than tossing a dice? I suspect usually the latter. Does cards really add anything to the game? Or does it add too much to the game?
I dislike boardgames but my wife loves them. Ironically, I do most of the reviewing and purchasing (and some test playing) as I tend to be able to quickly identify the key mechanics and gauge how it will play (and whether my wife will like it).
I notice many popular board games have simple rules but complex decisions. In Courtesans, you play 3 cards, giving one to an opponent, keeping one, and placing one out on the table in a way to influence the value of your hand. There is only 3 decisions in your turn - simples! - but they have a strong effect and there is quite a lot going on as you meddle with your opponents' plans.
A wargame has decisions too, like: Where do I go? Who do I attack? Who do I avoid? Adding a complete fleshed out card game on top of this risks detracting from those decisions (or giving decision fatigue) and making the card game aspect paramount.
Some boardgames have several things going on - perhaps in Sagrada you need to know what stones to collect AND then arrange them for maximum scoring. Sometimes there are two strategies or areas you are working on to achieve success. Sometimes a boardgame has too much going on and these tend to be those that eat up an entire evening(s) - and not necessarily being more fun or tactical than a shorter game with more basic choices/mechanics.
Too complex a card mechanic (be it for initiative or resolving combats) also risks bogging/slowing a game down by layering card complexity on top of the wargame's innate complexity.
It's kinda dammned if you do, dammned if you don't. If the cards effect little or the purpose could be accomplished by other means - the question is why bother? If the card mechanics are interesting, deep, engaging and strategic they risk taking over or bogging down the game. Cards could add a thematic layer to say a Wild West game, but they straddle a tricky divide.
Note I'm talking ordinary, readily available playing cards here. Custom cards, like custom dice, can just get stuffed. Go play Magic or similar CCG if you want to exchange colourful pieces of cardboard for large amounts of money.
Are the cards actually needed? Or are they just for the sake of a gimmick?
Do the cards add something to the game that the usual dice do not easily allow? (i.e. using the suits to trigger ingame effects, some sort of bluffing or minigame, allowing better luck management etc)
How much time/complexity do the cards add?
Is it pulling too much emphasis from the main combat/maneuver?
Is it a naked cashgrab "custom deck" for $30 each?
While cards do have their applications, I tend to be very skeptical when they appear in a game...
No comments:
Post a Comment