Game Designer

Hello Veeky Forums

I'm making a quick turn-based card game. I was wondering what makes games like these fun in Veeky Forums's eyes?

Next post will be more info.

I'm so sorry for you.

You're going to get a tob of shit on here from some grade A assholes because you used the word "fun"

Best advice, try to understand who's a prick who can't learn to have fun and who's trying to help

It's a basic spellcasting and resource collection game. Don't want to reveal too much, but here's the main "kicker" so to speak

No Card Drawing.
Players instead collect 2 elemental tokens at the start of their turn. Players can cast any spell in the game (a booklet is provided with all spells and their elemental combination) as long as they can pay the cost.

Personally, I dont like deck builders. I prefer games where both players have access to the same set of cards. Small-scale deckbuilding games are the laziest form of design, because you're basically just coming up with a 100 or so cards and saying "thats all I can e asked to do, you guys figure it out".

I feel like a lot of the fun from CCG's is the "gotcha" moment, what with countering or building a strategy to screw someone over.

That said, my experience is minimal compared to most of Veeky Forums.

I thought about this. I initially designed a shared deck of spells to be the limiting agent, as in when the deck runs out, players start to lose HP when they can draw (similar to Hearthstone). I found it to be too slow paced, most of the time you're waiting for a spell which is not fun or fast paced

Whats your solution then, because giving players their own deck sure wouldnt fix that particular problem.

I posted my take on the solution here. Basically, remove any idea of drawing a spell and relying on luck.

You have access to all the spells in the game as does your opponent. The only variable is the Elemental tokens you collect at the start of the turn and that information is seen by your opponent (so there's a bit of planning and mind games; "oh he's stacking a lot of Fire elements, I should get a 'Water Shield' up or something")

Have you heard of Quarriors, because from a pure design perspective you're making something very similar without the advantage of random meta.

I like tiny, fast draft games. Like Sushi Go and Heat. Games where you have a certain amount of control what you are passing to the other players but don't have full knowledge.

Lots of creative ways to fuck with other players. Let it be bases on planning more than on luck. Clever thinking and constant, but friendly competition is what makes card and board games really fun.

I like it. At a glance It seems to rely on dice-luck. I've never heard of it but I can draw something from this.

It doesnt rely that much on luck. You should really see a demo of it. It is basically what you're making with several improvements.

The cards players have access to change each game, meaning that the meta does as well. The result is a game which relies not on knowledge of the game itself but on skill with games in general. Once somebody learns the rules they are on an equal footing with somebody of the same skill level who has played the game 100 times.

That highlights a problem with the game you've designed: if the entire stock of cards is accessible from the word go, then players who have played for longer have a distinct advantage, because they will be more aware of easily exploitable meta.

I just thought of a really weird idea.

What about a card game that is like an unholy combination of turn-based MTG and Karuta?

Hell, you can theoretically play this with MTG cards, albeit you might need a specialized deck.

You draw cards from a Karuta-like card pool in the middle, where every card is available and visible for either one to take at any time. Each player can take one card each turn, unless a card allows them to draw more.

Each player starts with, say, 20 life (and there's a life regen of 2-3 per turn), and instead of mana, you use life to cast spells, and the cards on the pool are eligible targets for everything (They're permanents, although no one controls them).

Whoever runs out of life first loses.

I might want to try this, honestly.

You could play this with MtG cards but it wouldnt be very interesting. The soul of that game would be the gambit of taking a powerful card and trying to use it before your opponent could counter it. MtG isnt designed around focused counters, which is what you'd want the focus of that game to be: victory only through combos, with the goal being to discern your opponent's chosen strategy and develop a counter.

Right on. I'm still watching a quarriors playthrough.

>The result is a game which relies not on knowledge of the game itself but on skill with games in general.

I never thought about that. What makes a game skill-driven instead of knowledge-driven?

**

I'm thinking of adding another option aside from casting a spell and ending a turn.

Players can pay 5 Elements (1 of each kind) to capture an Extra Pool. There's 4 Extra Pools. Each Pool will grant a r player 2 extra tokens per turn.

Opposing enemy can target the Pool (which as its own HP) and when its brought to Zero, that Pool will now belong to the opponent. Pools are just like players, they can recieve damage and effects, but not cast spells, so they can be protected and what not.

This adds an element of expansion and perhaps risk. Is it worth paying 5 Elemental Tokens to draw more income at the risk of your opponent possibly recapturing the Extra Pool for less tokens.

The fact that what cards are available is random. Essentially the goal of quarriors is to figure out what the most efficient way of winning is as fast as possible. Everybody starts with equal resources, and unless the game is made up of tons of defensive cards you can usually win in less than 10 rounds. As such, your knowledge of what cards are available is irrelevant, because you only play with the ten cards you draw for that game, meaning its less about knowing the game and more about learning what the optimal setup is in a given build.

No offense, but until you reconcile that core flaw (that you're basically making a game in which memorization and mastery outweigh skill) I wouldnt even focus on anything else. Unless, that is, thats the kind of game you're trying to make. In that case Im just not interested.

>Easy to start playing but you'll still notice nuances and think of tactics ten games later
>Allows for rebounds/comebacks. Pro-level MtG games ending in 4 turns isn't my idea of fun.
>Expansions have useful cards without completely bending the existing game over the rails
>Sense of camaraderie, the smell of freshly-printed cards

There's no memorization (because its not really a board game, its a computer game).

It will show you what spells you can cast for the given amount of elements you have.

>Ctrl+F "Splendor": Phrase not found
Have you played Splendor OP? Go play Splendor for an example of this exact resource mechanic. It's not a bad mechanic in itself but I also recommend you play Splendor about ten times to understand what you should avoid in your game.

Giving this a look right now, Ive never heard of it.

That's why it needs a specialized deck. One where hard counters are rare and it's all about crazy combos you can do with what you have.

But yeah, making a game with all the stuff outright is better than trying to make some special deck in MTG.

In my eyes there are some key points to make it fun for me.

>Strategy
You have to play cards tactically . A card can kill other cards but has a weak point or limit.

>Luck
Some luck involved that can change a winning street. You can comeback if you can use the situation.

>Quickness
A round shouldnt take long. Easy rules to play a card quick. Some sort of easy to achieve end or winning conditions
Games shouldnt take forever, only if some really equal combatants are fighting with the same amount of luck

I watched a tutorial.

The main differences are, my system allows for unlimited elemental tokens to be held. And any amount of spells can be cast in one turn, as long as you have the cost.

Splendor, I believe you can only purchse one development per turn. In any case, I need to play this to get a better feel.

Go away Rob!

Yes, but you can still plan ahead more if you have a better understanding of what the entire stock of spells is.

If you havnt played that many games, you really shouldnt be trying to design one. We're in a golden age of game design right now, and unless you've really surveyed what's already available chances are you'll end up reinventing the wheel. Poorly at that.

I haven't played many tg games but I play a few games avidly. Though I've played enough Turn based games to understand the mechanics of one.

Right now I'm into to Coup, Settlers, and the Game of Thrones board game.

so do you plan on players coming to the match with a deck on their own, or are they on equal footing? i wouldn't call it a card game then, just a board game.

look up Prismata. it looks like a resource-gathering card game, but players play cards from the same pool which is randomized for each match so they have to figure out a strategy to beat their opponent at what he's doing.

i think for such a game the priorities are
-getting the chance to win if you are going first or second at 49/51 % or closer,
-ensuring there is an element of randomization that makes matches always different
-ensuring the core gameplay and the randomization works well enough so that it won't be possible to guess what the best strategy is by using simple tips or even worse always doing the same moves
-make it fast ( 10-15 minutes at most for a match?) and keep complexity in the choices rather than memorization, having to look after 50 different things going on the field or other bullshit.

Let me see if I can explain this another way: you've made a Complete Information game, that is to say it is a game where both players have the opportunity to know what is in play and what can be played. However, the scope of possible moves is so broad that it favors players who are more familiar with the game.

I understand. I think I will still opt for this. It's like learning to be Wizard, you need to be familiar with the spells.

I'm okay with the learning curve to be a bit higher at the cost of broad possibilities/moves per turn.

The only information that is shared is the Spells and what Tokens are collected at the beginning of each turn.

Alright, just know that you're making a fundamentally flawed product thats going to resist new players in favor of rewarding old ones.

I wouldn't say flawed but its a design that I wish to execute.