|
OtspIII posted:Is it even really that far gone? I feel like a graphic designer and a super careful clarity pass over the rulebook could actually fix a ton of what BL posted. A lot of poo poo like "Pass" being classified as a mandatory action seems like it could be made massively less confusing with very minor rules alterations. I think there needs to be at least some major terminology changes. "Pass" needs to change to "Call end of phase," either dice exhaust or card exhaust needs to be changed to a different word, the dice faces need to have better descriptors of their sides than "power" and "class" if they're sticking with bloop/object/animal, and so on. The problem is, even if you fix everything wrong with A*S*H*E*S: (vomit sound) Rise of the Phoenixborn, you still just end up with... Magic with dice, mandatory Planeswalkers, and a slower version of Netrunner's turn system. Even Richard Garfield admitted that Magic wasn't that good for the time; that's why he created Netrunner. All the other things that aren't Plaid Hat's renowned obsession with dice are just ripped from other games-- even the "you lose life when you can't draw anymore" is stolen from Hearthstone. poo poo, the game's Hearthstone with variable phase order. Anyway, it's been done better 20 years ago. If you want to make a card game about dueling mages, your absolute first step should be to ask yourself, "Why am I wasting my time on something that's going to be ignored in favor of Magic?" Then your second step should be, "How can I make this nowhere near confusable with Magic?" Summoner Wars had unit movement and spellbooks. Tash Kalar is effectively Go updated to 2015. Mage Knight is basically a console RPG. It's like the 2010 deckbuilder rush, except it's been going on for 20 years.
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 02:28 |
|
|
Broken Loose posted:If you want to make a card game about dueling mages, your absolute first step should be to ask yourself, "Why am I wasting my time on something that's going to be ignored in favor of Magic?" I disagree with this only in spirit... not in defense of ASHES. I'd like to see someone re-do Magic as a non-randomized thing. I love LCGs because of the fixed price and I like Magic, if the two could mix I'd be super happy. Not that Netrunner and Conquest are failing in any way, both are fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
sicarius posted:I disagree with this only in spirit... not in defense of ASHES. I'd like to see someone re-do Magic as a non-randomized thing. I love LCGs because of the fixed price and I like Magic, if the two could mix I'd be super happy. Not that Netrunner and Conquest are failing in any way, both are fantastic. I don't disagree with you! I don't think Magic is a particularly good game, even for its time, but it is a phenomenally successful game to the point where I have to describe completely unMagiclike games (like Dominion) using Magic terminology to get people to be interested in or understand how to play them. I'm of the belief that Android: Netrunner would have been a flop if Garfield didn't make the original Netrunner and its cult following. Magic is just an unstoppable behemoth that rules game stores.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
sicarius posted:I disagree with this only in spirit... not in defense of ASHES. I'd like to see someone re-do Magic as a non-randomized thing. I love LCGs because of the fixed price and I like Magic, if the two could mix I'd be super happy. Not that Netrunner and Conquest are failing in any way, both are fantastic. Aren't you describing Mage Wars? Or are the dice to random for you?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
The best thing Magic: The Gathering gave the world of gaming is a perfect example of clear, precise rules that leave no room for misunderstanding once you are familiar with the terminology. Unfortunately, basically nobody follows their example and we still have lovely manuals and card texts galore.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
Broken Loose posted:I don't disagree with you! I don't think Magic is a particularly good game, even for its time, but it is a phenomenally successful game to the point where I have to describe completely unMagiclike games (like Dominion) using Magic terminology to get people to be interested in or understand how to play them. I'm of the belief that Android: Netrunner would have been a flop if Garfield didn't make the original Netrunner and its cult following. Magic is just an unstoppable behemoth that rules game stores. I hate that stores HAVE to have Magic to keep the lights on. Everywhere I go despises the game, the players, the support required, dealing with Wizards, everything. Almost every game after Magic has been better than Magic in some way... but something about Magic makes it so alluring. Rutibex posted:Aren't you describing Mage Wars? Or are the dice to random for you? I like Mage Wars, but I find it nothing like Magic. The board, tactical maneuvering, no random draws, etc. It's similar, and I like it a great deal, but it's far less portable than a single longbox of cards. Honestly, I'd like a game that rips off Magic's cube system to come out. I love cube drafting (it's my only Magic exposure anymore) and someone could easily rip that off to make a drafting/battling game. Chomp8645 posted:The best thing Magic: The Gathering gave the world of gaming is a perfect example of clear, precise rules that leave no room for misunderstanding once you are familiar with the terminology. To be fair, it wasn't always this way. It took eternities for Magic to get that way, and people still screw it up constantly. There are only a handful of games that have been around as long (L5R, basically) and most of them, for their mechanics, are equally sound. sicarius fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:The best thing Magic: The Gathering gave the world of gaming is a perfect example of clear, precise rules that leave no room for misunderstanding once you are familiar with the terminology. The Magic rules didn't just happen, there's a team of people employed full time who are responsible for managing them. Nobody else has the resources to do that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
Just played King of Tokyo, two people were sitting out of it for well over half an hour bored out of their skulls and the game ended because the guy in Tokyo rolled four attack die while I repeatedly haemorrhaged health outside of Tokyo due to chronic inability to roll more than 1-2 health die a turn and got stuck in a unstable losing equilibrium due to whim of the dice. Basically, the game's poo poo and I'm going to flip it for something better at the next opportunity.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
Netrunner would be a flop if it had a dueling wizards theme. Hell, Netrunner would be a flop if it didn't have such an awesome theme. Replace the Corp with a castle and the runner with invaders, and it would be already forgotten. I see the garbage Netrunner players are putting up with and wonder why they are doing that to themselves. Then I get blinded by the theme and want to play Netrunner. Ashes would have an uphill battle if it were renamed, rethemed, the wording was changed, the deck building was retooled, and the rules streamlined.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
Poopy Palpy posted:The Magic rules didn't just happen, there's a team of people employed full time who are responsible for managing them. Nobody else has the resources to do that. True, but over this much time there have been lessons learned and mistakes that should never be repeated. With Magic for example they establish optional actions very clearly. If something reads "after X, do Y" then Y is mandatory (assuming X occurred). If it reads "after X, you may do Y" then Y is optional. It's very simple and clear. And yet somehow today we still see boneheads writing manuals with poo poo like "after X, do Y" and then 20 pages later in a totally unrelated section they sneak in "TIP: The player may choose not to do Y after X!" It doesn't take a dedicated team of writers to avoid basic garbage like that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
What's the problem people have with Netrunner, just the very questionable wording of the cards and rules?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
That's pretty much it, but it is pretty frustrating.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:What's the problem people have with Netrunner, just the very questionable wording of the cards and rules? I have no problems with that - they're trying to get creative and it's causing issues, I get it. The problems I see most people having with it are that, well, the design space is shrinking rapidly and the "meta" of the game is almost set in stone right now. It's definitely a challenge to get out of.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:Just played King of Tokyo, two people were sitting out of it for well over half an hour bored out of their skulls and the game ended because the guy in Tokyo rolled four attack die while I repeatedly haemorrhaged health outside of Tokyo due to chronic inability to roll more than 1-2 health die a turn and got stuck in a unstable losing equilibrium due to whim of the dice. This sounds like you were missing some rules.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
sicarius posted:I hate that stores HAVE to have Magic to keep the lights on. Everywhere I go despises the game, the players, the support required, dealing with Wizards, everything. Almost every game after Magic has been better than Magic in some way... but something about Magic makes it so alluring. The game was lightning in a bottle for a number of reasons. The first, as has been stated, is its extreme portability. A deck of cards can fit in the pockets of looser jeans, and hell can easily fit in a backpack/purse/other bag. The game can be taken anywhere and can be played on a whim. Second, losing almost never feels like it is your fault. A few games do this, but the way magic has its variance systems in place gives every player the ability to blame a loss on their deck, or the matchup, or the opponent getting a god-hand rather than on their own play mistakes. This helps protect fragile egos to keep them in the game. Third, winning ALWAYS feels like it was through your own work. Even when the matchup is actually skewed heavily in your favor, the ability to gently caress up and lose exists. You still have to make the correct decisions, albeit easy decisions, to capitalize on that variance. So, players always feel like they earned the win, even when variance actually did screw their opponent out of the game. Fourth, Magic is designed to resonate emotionally with players, no matter why they play: The storyline and characters for lore nerds. Big splashy creatures and crazy random effects for people who like the theater of gaming. Cards that reduce variance and advance the gamestate in your favor for people only concerned with winning. Not only that, a great deal of money is spent to get great artwork to make things eye-catching and interesting. Fifth, people like collecting rare poo poo. Remember Beanie Babies in the 90's? Or hell people who collect stamps or coins, people like collecting rare unique poo poo, and magic has that in spades, with older cards and artificially engineered into the game with "Mythic Rare" cards. Sixth, and probably most importantly Magic unknowingly utilized (and now knowingly utilizes) the micro-transaction model, long before cell phone gaming was even a thing. A board game costs what 20, 30, 40, 100 dollars? A pack of magic cards costs 4 bux. 15 brand shiny new cards to look at and play with, so what if they are crap, its only 4 bux, people spend 4 bux on a whim all the time. Now just because it might take you 100 packs to get anything of value, doesn't mean squat, it provides immediate pleasure. Mind you, this is all my opinion, but essentially, magic spent a lot of money to figure out what people game for, and tries to satisfy as many player groups at once as possible, even if not as fully as other games might. This combined with the most predatory of monetization schemes imaginable leads to a broadly appealing game, that addicts enough players to ensure they will always return.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:What's the problem people have with Netrunner, just the very questionable wording of the cards and rules? The wording makes certain interactions unclear, the rulings sometimes contradict the wording, the rulings can only be obtained by a private email from the lead designer (or from the RukasuFox twitter), and the same question can receive different rulings depending on the phase of the week and on whether the lead designer is capable of reading and writing coherently today. The writing on the cards actually isn't bad, only a proportionately tiny set of interactions are at all ambiguous. But the ruling system, or lack thereof, is abysmal. They've also made some decisions that have no explanation other than "Magic does it this way, so we're going to do it the opposite way!" For example, if a Magic spell costs X and deals X damage, and another effect increases the cost by 1, it now costs X+1 to deal X damage. Under Netrunner's rulings, it would cost X+1 to deal X+1 damage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
Rusty Kettle posted:see the garbage Netrunner players are putting up with and wonder why they are doing that to themselves. It's not that bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
I've made the mistake of assuming cards in King of Tokyo mean what they say and that different wordings must have different meanings, because of Richard Garfield's Magic background. In particular, "each turn" might mean "each of your turns" or "each player's turn".
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:The wording makes certain interactions unclear, the rulings sometimes contradict the wording, the rulings can only be obtained by a private email from the lead designer (or from the RukasuFox twitter), and the same question can receive different rulings depending on the phase of the week and on whether the lead designer is capable of reading and writing coherently today. It's worth noting that while the ruling system is this bad, this is a tiny fraction of the Netrunner experience. Most players, even competitive ones, have never run into these weird fringe cases and are completely unaffected by them. It's one of those things where looking at the noisiest elements from the outside does not accurately reflect what's going on inside. The main problem is that Netrunner is FFG's first really big success as a competitive experience and they were not prepared to handle it. rchandra posted:I've made the mistake of assuming cards in King of Tokyo mean what they say and that different wordings must have different meanings, because of Richard Garfield's Magic background. In particular, "each turn" might mean "each of your turns" or "each player's turn". I don't think Richard Garfield is responsible for the tight rules templating of Magic. admanb fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
Texibus posted:Yeah I read the rules for it, but just immediately knew I couldn't talk three others into it. Go to boardgamearena, say goodbye to your free time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
1 on 1 duels end quickly with the person inside Tokyo either dying or getting a point victory. Of course, the cards are so swingly that they may be automatically healing themselves, buying things, selling things cheaper than they bought them, and piling through the deck.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
sonatinas posted:It's not that bad. I dunno. It's pretty bad. At this point, I cannot recommend Netrunner to anyone who doesn't want to read faqs, forums and tweets for hours. Try explaining why sharpshooter doesn't work like Fairie to a new player, or why Kati Jones and shell Corporation work the same despite different wordings. There are reasons for these things and dozens of other weird interactions and wordings, but they are a pain in the rear end. Only people who invested hundreds of dollars into the game give a poo poo. StashAugustine posted:What's the problem people have with Netrunner, just the very questionable wording of the cards and rules? I don't think the meta is too bad, but it certainly is hard to be creative and competitive. There are strong archetypes and straying from those is asking to lose. Combine this with an abundance of silver bullets, and you can end up playing the most elaborate game of rock paper scissors. I am also convinced that there is little to no playtesting. It is arguable whether there are overpowered cards/identities, but I seriously doubt everyone played the IT department the same way and didn't have any objections or confusion to its wording.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
I never use cards in King of Tokyo; when I do, I die before I get to use them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:Just played King of Tokyo, two people were sitting out of it for well over half an hour bored out of their skulls and the game ended because the guy in Tokyo rolled four attack die while I repeatedly haemorrhaged health outside of Tokyo due to chronic inability to roll more than 1-2 health die a turn and got stuck in a unstable losing equilibrium due to whim of the dice. I played King of New York recently and loved it. Sure it's a luck based dice fest of a game but that can be refreshing, especially after having to endure a 6 hour session of Cavernia that felt like it lasted twice that long.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
Rusty Kettle posted:I dunno. It's pretty bad. At this point, I cannot recommend Netrunner to anyone who doesn't want to read faqs, forums and tweets for hours. Try explaining why sharpshooter doesn't work like Fairie to a new player, or why Kati Jones and shell Corporation work the same despite different wordings. There are reasons for these things and dozens of other weird interactions and wordings, but they are a pain in the rear end. Only people who invested hundreds of dollars into the game give a poo poo. Uhm.... Kati and Shell Corp are worded exactly the same (except for the card name). There are only a few "decisions" or interactions that are actually confusing, and they almost never come up in casual play. It's not all that bad. The meta is getting bad - and your later point about silver bullets is dead on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
Rusty Kettle posted:I dunno. It's pretty bad. At this point, I cannot recommend Netrunner to anyone who doesn't want to read faqs, forums and tweets for hours. Try explaining why sharpshooter doesn't work like Fairie to a new player, or why Kati Jones and shell Corporation work the same despite different wordings. There are reasons for these things and dozens of other weird interactions and wordings, but they are a pain in the rear end. Only people who invested hundreds of dollars into the game give a poo poo. Maybe you should take this to the netrunner thread.The interactions aren't as bad as perceived. IT Dept is not even an issue anymore.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
drat Dirty Ape posted:I played King of New York recently and loved it. Sure it's a luck based dice fest of a game but that can be refreshing, especially after having to endure a 6 hour session of Cavernia that felt like it lasted twice that long. How can a single Caverna game take six hours?  I played 6-player Caverna once and it took slightly under three hours. That was with a couple of notoriously slow players, too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
sicarius posted:Uhm.... Kati and Shell Corp are worded exactly the same (except for the card name). There are only a few "decisions" or interactions that are actually confusing, and they almost never come up in casual play. It's not all that bad. The meta is getting bad - and your later point about silver bullets is dead on. This is pedantic, and feel free to make fun of me, but the removal of 'from the bank' is troublesome. If Kati didn't have 'from the bank' it would be assumed and I wouldn't have an issue. But they have different wordings, implying different meanings. Dumb as poo poo. Ctrl+c, ctrl+v would have been great but they changed it for some reason. But you are right, in casual play, everyone is nice and forgiving. But it is quickly getting worse. Edit: You are right. Any further whining on my part will be in the Netrunner thread.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
Rusty Kettle posted:This is pedantic, and feel free to make fun of me, but the removal of 'from the bank' is troublesome. If Kati didn't have 'from the bank' it would be assumed and I wouldn't have an issue. But they have different wordings, implying different meanings. Dumb as poo poo. Ctrl+c, ctrl+v would have been great but they changed it for some reason. I feel that the problem is Kati saying "from the bank" in the first place. What is the bank? There isn't one. Whether they should have cleaned this templating up or left it in its troublesome state is something I have more mixed feelings about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
Ojetor posted:How can a single Caverna game take six hours? Let me tell you about the 3-hour game of Tragedy Looper that we endured when we let our AP guy be the Mastermind.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
The last time I played Galaxy Trucker our AP guy was first in line for rounds 2 and 3, so made all decisions for those rounds. You wouldn't think it would take long to decide if you want to lose 2 flight days to get some cargo from an abandoned space station when you are already 6 days ahead, but welp.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
A couple pages ago I asked about Arkham Horror and Eldritch Horror, and the consensus was that both suck somewhat, but Eldritch sucks less. Then someone asked why I wanted to look into these games. So maybe I'll post that and you guys will have an alternate suggestion! I'm looking for a more narrative-style game. One where there's a story, rather than a puzzle to solve. Most of my games are of the puzzle sort. At their heart, the games I have today are trying to solve for the most points or territory, or to outmatch your opponent, or whatever. I love me some tight, crunch mechanics, but I've been wanting something more in the way of theme or narrative. I'm willing to sacrifice a bit of that puzzle-solving aspect for a good, solid theme. I'm totally okay if the mechanics are a bit iffy. An unwinnable scenario isn't the end of the world. I just want a game that tells a story. The big limiter here is that it must work with 2 p layers, as my primary game-buddy is my 11 year old son. Edit: He's way into "scary" things right now. Like I'm also on a hunt to find horror movies that would fit into a PG-13 rating, as he's outgrown things like "Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark" and "Goosebumps". ConfusedUs fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:The big limiter here is that it must work with 2 p layers, as my primary game-buddy is my 11 year old son. Claustrophobia Claustrophobia CLAUSTROPHOBIA He will find the theme super-slick and it's easy to play, very evocative, very thematic, has scenarios with narrative.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
Wargames 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:A couple pages ago I asked about Arkham Horror and Eldritch Horror, and the consensus was that both suck somewhat, but Eldritch sucks less. I'm a lot softer on Eldritch Horror than other people here, and while I don't think it's a masterclass of mechanical design, the mechanical hiccups are waaaaay overblown if you are literate and have some competency in reading comprehension. Yes, the dice can screw you over (although you can steal a rule from the Mountains of Madness expansion and introduce Focus tokens, which let you reroll a die) and yes, the mythos deck will definitely screw you over, but I still enjoy the struggle, and it's not the end of the world (I mean, it is in a thematic sense) if you just surrender to the GOO after it flips and you're on like Mystery 2. One caveat, though. The base game often doesn't have enough encounter cards, so you'll typically recycle a lot of the encounters, especially the cities since a lot of people will be parked in one. Ditto research and mystery cards. Forsaken Lore adds a poo poo ton of all of those, though, and really helps flesh out the "narrative." But your son should have a blast if he likes those kinds of stories and narratives, and you won't be hating life and lamenting on the sacrifices you have to make for him. It's not like you're playing Munchkin with him.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
Earth Reborn
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:A couple pages ago I asked about Arkham Horror and Eldritch Horror, and the consensus was that both suck somewhat, but Eldritch sucks less. I don't know how it would work with two players, but Tales of the Arabian Nights is by far the best theme game out there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:A couple pages ago I asked about Arkham Horror and Eldritch Horror, and the consensus was that both suck somewhat, but Eldritch sucks less. Im gonna recommend LotR LCG and Legendary Encounters: Alien although the latter features some gore. Maybe Arcadia Quest but only if you like trolling each other. Also, Claustrophobia or Imperial Assault seem like good options.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
Madmarker posted:I don't know how it would work with two players, but Tales of the Arabian Nights is by far the best theme game out there. Sorry but "Spreadsheet: The Game of Indexes" isn't really my cup of tea.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 02:28 |
|
|
sicarius posted:I hate that stores HAVE to have Magic to keep the lights on. Everywhere I go despises the game, the players, the support required, dealing with Wizards, everything. Almost every game after Magic has been better than Magic in some way... but something about Magic makes it so alluring. On the contrary, Wizards is incredibly supportive of stores. For practically all of their product lines they will bend over backwards to ensure you get customers in and playing their games whether it's D&D Encounters or their regional tracking system that makes setting up major events effortless. I'll tell you what's a huge waste of time, loving Games Workshop. GW is tolerated only because no other miniatures wargame has really eclipsed its popularity. You have no idea how much I wish Infinity or Warmachines were more popular than anything GW puts out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:06
|
|
