|
Explicitly not allow leading questions? Have someone yell "Objection!" and whoever is the "judge" for the round decides to sustain or overrule it.
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2012 04:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 18:20 |
|
|
Not that it was a bad post, but he did mention Aye in his post. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2012 15:45
|
|
|
modig posted:This makes me think you could have a competitive version of the game. One player is the prosector, one is the witness. The prosecutor describes the crime scene with their evidence (word cards, probably from a limited suset) and their version of what happened. The witness describes the same crime scene (possibly with more words) in a way that explains it all with no crime, or someone else doing the crime. Then of course the judge fits in well. It may be best as a theme card like cowboy. That was kind of my thought process, yeah. Maybe have a Phoenix Wright themed game with that sort of gameplay.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2012 16:45
|
|
|
What's stopping you from just using hidden orders a la Game of Thrones or the like? You put down your player marker to denote where you were last seen (like, say, Frozen Synapse, which is a video game of course), and then spread some orders out that allow you to go in various ways. Each order token has a "this is what I will do if I see an enemy" sort of thing on it, and if you put down "snipe" and someone manages to close to the same space as you and puts down "smash face with shovel", obviously they're going to win/do better.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2013 14:36
|
|
|
The only reason I suggested attack commands is that which weapon you have out, and whether you're zoomed in or not, can make a huge difference in a clash. Maybe if you're switching weapons, you put that card down underneath your movement card? And, if a weapon has zoom, zoom in or zoom out? Nothing like sniping someone across the room only to get knifed in the back, after all.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2013 14:46
|
|
|
I swear, knifing a sniper in the back is the second-most fun part of FPS's. The most fun, of course, is sniping, but it unfortunately leas to the second-most way too often! So yeah, the action queue, with weapon switching and then some sort of resolution phase wherein you check line of sight, guns fire, knifers knife, spinners spin, and so on. Feels like it would be a lot of bluffing and not as much action, if designed wrong, though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2013 17:02
|
|
|
Sarx posted:At Gen Con I got to be a judge for Cards Against Humanity's Tabletop Deathmatch competition, where I was brought on to provide the perspective of a retailer and it really re-inspired me to get my designs to completion, so hopefully I will be an active participant in this thread from here on out. Most games seem to have 3-6, often starting at 3 and going up as you get more.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
I'm laughing so hard on the inside (at work). Brilliant. Make it. Do it. Sell it for 10 bucks a pop/poop.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Link? I love reading old mafia games. At least, the good ones.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
Yup, is correct. I used to read lots of mafia games, stopped when there got to be way too many at all times.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Feels a bit like the computer game (playable both solo vs AI and duel against a player) Frozen Synapse. Have you played/seen it?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
Casnorf posted:I'm working on a little project, sort of a challenge that I've set for myself. I wanted to see how well I could divorce game mechanics from theme, and let the mechanics of the result evoke a theme. To that end, I wanted to see what the folks of this thread thought what themes, if any, are suggested by what mechanics. Are you thinking in the vein of Tekopo's "Tigris and Euphrates is one of the most thematic games I know"?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2014 12:03
|
|
|
As my example was trying to say, you're sure not exploring in T&E! You're helping construct a story of how civilizations built, warred, and were torn apart.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2014 01:38
|
|
|
Poison Mushroom posted:The closest thing you've got to a parallel right now is actually Stratego. Which, while definitely showing its age, is still a decent game for what it is, which is a fog of war tactical game.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
Patchistory does that too, and in a more grand scale, so you might want to look at it too.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
CodfishCartographer posted:Random mechanic idea: I wonder how the opposite of a deckbuilder would work. Deckwhittler? Deckthinner? Basically instead of starting with a small deck and adding more and more cards to it, starting with a big deck and then removing cards from it as the game goes on to refine what it does. Not sure if this would be interesting in trying to make sure your deck does what it needs to do as it gets smaller and smaller, or if it would just feel lovely as you lose more and more options. ...bullshit? 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Anniversary posted:Never mind. Not that it's a strict comparison, but the concept of starting with many, trying to get rid of all your cards, while losing options as you go. I mean, Uno, too, there's a bunch of card games using that idea, I feel.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
Hmmm. So the 18xx games are a strong contender for "doesn't have variable setup", right? I'm trying to think of games that aren't abstracts that qualify.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
Kashuno posted:So I guess maybe if I explain my game a bit more you guys might be able to find a place to provide variability. Play takes place over two phases: a worker placement phase and a player combat phase. In the first phase, workers are placed to either strengthen the warrior or forge weapons and armor. Then, in the second phase, all players enter free for all gladiatorial combat attempting to kill each other. I'm not really sure where to add variability. Hmmm. Sounds a bit like Dungeon Lords with a bit more direct competition? DL has variability in the stuff you acquire (only a few things are available in a given turn, so which order they come out in), the dudes coming to beat you up (probably not applicable here) and the combat phase has a bit of variability in the form of spells that will be cast if enough wizards are attacking you, and you can look at which ones are coming with a specific action. So, just from your description, if the forging uses specific items, you could have a limited selection available each turn and so which order they come in will change, you could have events that will affect the combat (so, say, this round has a lion which will attack the gladiator with the least health, this round has rain that affects stamina in a certain way so you can plan for them)...
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 21:57
|
|
|
Sounds a little bit like 500 rummy, just in terms of the "pick up everything from the stack" stuff. Sounds pretty amusing, too!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
Kashuno posted:I think the first lesson is huge. I've been working on a player combat game for a bit now and I had been constantly trying to remove the whole setting yourself up/proper positioning aspect of it (the downtime) to make it more and more combat focused, but then it just became a mess. Having some breathing time and pacing in a game really adds to the overall experience. I mean, take some games where there's a resolution phase, like dungeon lords. Everyone secretly chooses their orders, which is exciting because it's your major decision points...and then you just place your dudes down in order with no decisions, then choose to take the actions which, other than monsters and rooms is mostly "yeah I'm gonna take this action that I'm on". But the secret choosing part depends wholeheartedly on the resolution mechanic! Basically I'm agreeing and it's pretty cool!
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:So I was thinking about Snake Oil and how the scoring system is poo poo because it's so easily broken by anyone playing to win and dependent on turn order. It takes the scoring from a game like Apples 2 Apples or CAH but doesn't account for the fact that anonymity is the only thing that makes those games' scoring systems "fair," though even in those games nobody plays to win. Are you chinese? No one I know has ever heard of Big 2 except chinese people. (it's actually fabulous with scoring, makes you really decide on that tipping point where you go for "getting rid of some of your hand" vs "trying to go out")
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
I think my wife learned it without those rules, so it's just each round winner gets points and losers lose points, first to some score wins.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2017 15:51
|
|
|
Dancer posted:A long long time ago I saw a description somewhere of a "risk-like" where you had some playing cards arranged in a grid, in alternate horizontal/vertical orientations. Players could only attack in the two directions the card was pointing (and there were some other relevant details that I couldn't possibly remember). To be fancy, you might even extend the concept to a hex grid. Since you don't have area-to-area attacking (at least not currently), maybe this could translate to some scoring synergy instead. Fields of Fire? 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2017 14:15
|
|
|
So the ways I can think of to convert resources to points: Agricola: buy improvements, build up a personal board of stuff A Feast for Odin: build boats, buildings, some cards let you convert resources to stuff Keyflower: have some buildings that are worth points, more points if you get certain resources, flip them using resources for more points Marco Polo: contracts for resources -> points, some buildings let you convert them, worth a flat number at end of game Just going by some other worker placements.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
But did you move it back to more than one tile per worker placed?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2017 04:31
|
|
|
Kashuno posted:Per your guys suggestion, tried the number of workers plus 1 and it worked surprisingly well! Toying with another tile placement idea and different tile designs from here on, but at least it feels much better Swank, really glad to hear it! See, trying out completely broken rulesets is useful! 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2017 13:19
|
|
|
So kinda betrayal esque but without the lovely exploration setup phase and actually balanced thought out scenarios? Yeah I could see that working.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2017 02:17
|
|
|
Anniversary posted:I suspect it was a case of posting in the wrong thread? Yeah agreed; there's a "CaH is trash" vs "But we had fun with it" argument going on right now in the main boardgames thread.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2018 02:34
|
|
|
Lovely!! is it bee lives verb or plural noun?
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2018 18:23
|
|
|
Mind sharing what the prototype concept is? Everyone here is always eager to hear about goongames!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2018 13:51
|
|
|
That sounds super cool. Have you ever played losers chess or the like? (trying to lose all your pieces, you must take a piece if you can, you choose which if you can take more than one)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2018 15:14
|
|
|
Are we allowed to have two goon dog themed games??
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2019 18:12
|
|
|
Dominant species gives you a market row of tiles to draft, which might be better but might not too.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2019 15:14
|
|
|
Yourself, right?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2019 12:57
|
|
|
I believe someone said to make sure both of you stay at least 3 feet from the monitor, though...
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2020 13:33
|
|
|
Sarx posted:I just came back to SA after a long absence and it's cool to see this thread, because when I last posted I was just getting started as a designer and I'm one of the lucky few who gets to call it their full time job. Super inspiring to look through the thread and see all the creativity. Holy poo poo, you're not kidding. What games do you have?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2020 13:35
|
|
|
h_double posted:I think there was a deck of event cards you could get for Catan, that was just 36 cards with the possible rolls of 2d6, to make resource production more level and predictable. Made the game way way way more playable yeah. There's a reshuffle card that goes five or nine or something cards from the bottom, so you aren't guaranteed to get everything every time, but you're way more likely to get a regular distribution than with dice.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2020 13:48
|
|
|
I think when I used to play ohell we used even, under, and over, just those words with no additional words. Okay your bid, we're two under. Wow you're bidding five, now we're three over.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2020 23:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 18:20 |
|
|
Or just plus and minus. We're at minus one, someone's taking an extra trick!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2020 23:35
|
|