LackeyCCG

LackeyCCG Forum => CCG Design Forum => Topic started by: aardvark on January 13, 2010, 01:19:04 am

Title: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 13, 2010, 01:19:04 am
I believe Cyrus mentioned this (and if I'm wrong, forgiveness please, it's crunch time and I'm posting in a rush)

A game by the community. I'd like to see this come out of the corner. Is anyone interested in such a venture?
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: TheBuck on January 13, 2010, 11:34:02 am
I would. I use to love to make fan cards for VS well as far as the mechanics went. I would be willing to help out in that aspect.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Tokimo on January 13, 2010, 11:43:16 am
I would help playtest such a thing (one of my exercises in CCG design is trying to pick up alpha sets and figure out ways to 'break' them). I have no interest in developing another CCG at this point, but it might be interesting to present some options for ideas.

The MSE community did this and ended up making a card game about making card games. I would like to suggest one of the themes suggested during their thread on this.

Dragon. The game would feature dragon characters fighting for survival and power in a brutal & savage world.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Howl on January 17, 2010, 03:58:04 pm
ill be more than willing to help ... heh (^_^)
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 17, 2010, 04:37:54 pm
I would be down for this. I tried to organize something like this a few months back on the old boards, and we were pretty successful. The biggest thing I have to warn to everyone involved is not to let your ego get in the way. Someone has to be the decision maker, even if that "someone" is a majority vote. This means not all of your ideas will get into the game. In the last project, people started losing interest as they saw some of their ideas falling away, or they simply went off on their own and didn't consult with the group before adding things. Consensus and collaboration or the most important things. If you aren't interested in those aspects of the project, you're better off working on something by yourself.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: TheBuck on January 17, 2010, 05:46:18 pm
well i have a writing partner so i'm use to it and it will be fine by me.

i know you can't tell i write with the why i do things on here. HA.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: sneaselx on January 17, 2010, 09:03:47 pm
I would love this to happen. I will help however I can.
I can do rule design and art, but not playtesting. (I can just make the dang things, not play them.)

I understand not wanting everybody to go off and do their own rules and everything, but private cards are different. As long as they are subsequently balanced, and fit the canon, I don't see why that is a bad thing.

I would also like assurance that all parts of the game remain with the game no matter who quits.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 17, 2010, 09:51:15 pm
Okays, so I haven't seen anything further on bringing the "old" project out and dusting it off so how about a new one?

If we go through with this I would like to keep it simple; as simple as possible really. I've been involved in projects where the lead had epic tattooed across his forehead and, sadly enough withered away little by little.  The project was fun while it lasted but with all of the things that go into designing something epic...

So the name of the game is simple.

My first question I suppose, to those interested would be, what sort of theme would you like to see? I think I'll go make a poll after we list some options. At least 3 or 4 to pick from would be nice.

The obvious choices would be: 1) Fantasy and 2)Sci-Fi.

While I like fantasy a great deal imo I think that a fantasy theme might turn towards mtg when mechanics come in. *shrug*

Also, as far as everyone being able to work on it, perhaps 1 or 2 people (depending on how many wish to contribute) to work on a piece after we decide what that piece would be. ie We vote on theme, on mechanics, etc and then one (or two) person(s) develop the theme further, one develops mechanics, so on so forth.

??
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Howl on January 17, 2010, 10:32:25 pm
how about history.. or war...  i had an idea for that genre game and a few Beta cards for it but was far to shy to reveal it.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 17, 2010, 10:33:35 pm
I would vote Sci-Fi with a character emphasis (in other words, shying away from space combat and inter-planetary travel). Just my opinion.

I also like the idea of having project disciplines for different contributors. Off the top of my head, you need two people to work on rules/mechanic design, one creative designer, one person to make the card templates, and one person to act as a producer (make sure everyone is communicating, etc). There can be some overlap here. After a certain point, most people could transition to actually just making cards.

Also Sneasel, if I'm remembering your role in the last project correctly, my comment about people going ahead without the group wasn't referring to you. I think you were probably the best member of that project, and I was very sad when it fell apart.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 17, 2010, 11:07:33 pm
@Howl:
Did you have a particular war in mind (like WW1, WW2, WW3)?
Side note: What would it take for you to post it up?

@Gnkoichi:
Could you spell out character emphasis for me? I have an idea of what you mean, but that's my head.
Would it be like putting out characters and building them up with skill cards or something?

@everyone else:
Any other suggestions? Anyone wanna see a conspiracy theme or civ-type game, etc etc?
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Zao on January 17, 2010, 11:55:43 pm
Community CCG, yay  :D

We could also create an absolutely weird universe, using Random Generators like the Seventh Sanctum website. It can give great and hilarious ideas sometimes. I'd love to play a card named "Cloister of Lanterns" or "Corrupt Angel's Bastard Sword of Sliperiness Deflection".

And for the theme, I don't mind, as long as it offers many possibilities (I'd like to avoid a too restricted theme)

Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 18, 2010, 12:14:36 am
Wow, Zao, thanks! I just checked out the site. I think I had something like this bookmarked before but don't know what happened to it.

As for over the top. Well, we wouldn't wanna take ourselves too seriously now would we? :P
I've already "created" the following overpowered fantasy characters:
Aeon Shadowguard (LOL, made me think of FF and the heros' names)
Sunset Rubylady (a ravishing mystery lady, who lets no one in)
Sinner Graveyard (My favorite, a dark hero with a past, ala punisher)

:D

So, I take it your submitted theme is comedy? :)
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Howl on January 18, 2010, 12:32:58 am
well... my main idea was to base like 2 set blocks at wars. like 2 set for ww1.. 2 set for ww2.. 2 sets for war of 1812... American Rev... Invasion of Conquistadors and what not.. but it was juss an idea.. and today i was looking a it .. and i decided on making new card templates for them but i will keep image images but edit templates. i should upload it juss to show.. but ill see what i can do... but remember juss an idea no .pushyness... and u know what else would be kool future made up wars. i originally called the game Timecraft.. but idk
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Zao on January 18, 2010, 12:48:02 am
It's always easier if it's taken lightly. But I really don't mind if we stick to a serious theme. Hey, it's okay as long as we have fun doing this - and have fun playing it after, right?

And when I'm talking about a theme which offers lots of possibilities, I mean something that allows everyone to add its ideas easily. For example, a CCG based on a single duel between two cowboys in a saloon wouldn't give many possibilities. After a hundred different guns cards, and a few events like "Hide behind the bartender" and "cut his throat with an ace of spades", there wouldn't be much more to do. And cowboy haters wouldn't want to participate in such a thing.
On the other hand, a wide sci-fi universe could contain a planet where people live like in far-west, and some "cowboy"-like cards could be added to the game. And space ninjas too. And intergalactic rhinoceroses riders.

Please take note that I don't necessarily want to make a CCG about cowboys who ride rhinoceroses. These are only examples. ::)

It would be nevertheless awesome :

(http://i50.tinypic.com/1ouhk4.jpg)
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Howl on January 18, 2010, 12:50:57 am
oh lol i was juss replying to Aardvarks question.. but i agre it would be more fitting of a community game to have universal Boundries.. so i believe my vote is gunna have to go towards the  universal standpoint.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Zao on January 18, 2010, 01:04:10 am
Haha :D I was replying to aardvark too. Seems like we're posting at the same time XD.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Tokimo on January 18, 2010, 02:29:08 am
Character Centric Wild West in Space?

Sounds pretty damn fun actually.

Seems like you could have a lot of fun playing intergalactic bounty hunters trying to make a buck in a harsh universe and they're willing to do whatever it takes to get the bounty, even if that's disposing of their competition.

The game would be played by accumulating money resources. If you go bankrupt you lose. You need to get enough cash to buy a place in Tahiti (40 Million Deep Space Credits), meanwhile you need to use those same credits to buy gear, allies, and tips.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: TheBuck on January 18, 2010, 06:57:29 am
I think we should stay away from anything "real" as in past wars or wars that are going on now. We can take those concepts and turn them into a Sci-Fi/Fan game. If we were to go with something that was real we would have to make sure it was spot on and we would almost deff offend people out there that thinks The South should have won.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 18, 2010, 05:27:34 pm
Yeah, for character-centric science fiction, I just meant a world that was really about cool characters who happened to be in space, not some cool space ships that happened to have people in them. Think Star Wars, Firefly, Mass Effect, Enders Game.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Cyrus on January 19, 2010, 02:52:12 am
Enders Game.

props. too bad it wouldn't translate to a card game at all... (not that that is what you were getting at)

i had a kind of cool idea that might fit your theme, even if i can't help out more due to "real life" obligations. what if it is based on a sort of scummy planet in the very center of the colonized universe? so it has a mix of everything in the game world, but without having to at all focus on travelling between planets or what not. its just sort of a giant gas station in the stars, that also happens to have lots of crime (if you want to go unique-character-centric) or lots of skirmishes and wars (if you want to go military-character-centric). just a thought.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: europeanmatt on January 19, 2010, 03:37:51 am
how about an espionage game? it would need elements of bluffing, codebreaking, memory, stealth, and combat.

some sort of Space Spies?
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Tokimo on January 19, 2010, 09:38:15 am
Space Spies sounds interesting, but I'm unsure how you make it two player.

Gas Station sounds like a good aesthetic and supports many different games (bounty hunters, crime, wars, espionage).
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: legend zero on January 19, 2010, 09:41:25 am
Any sort of wide-open world idea is best. Take Hackers, we have a human and digital world, but thanks to the different creations in the digital world we have Wizard cards and magical themes to some sub-sets. If you have a simple concept of story then any card can fit the game so long as it fits the rules.

In the average market VS system comes to mind. That's sort of the randomest TCG our there right now.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Zao on January 19, 2010, 12:26:22 pm
Fight Klub from Decipher seems pretty random too. Rambo versus Hannibal Lecter? Yeah.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: legend zero on January 19, 2010, 12:40:07 pm
Fight Klub from Decipher seems pretty random too. Rambo versus Hannibal Lecter? Yeah.

Thats what i mean, if you can describe the game world in one sentence, you're golden to do pretty much anything with it.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 19, 2010, 12:59:22 pm
I think there are two risks with that approach

1) It's not true. "It's a fantasy-genre multiverse where magic is divided into five colors" is a single sentence that describes magic, but there's a lot of limitations implied in it.

2) It's risky to say "Our design is we can do whatever we want". It is good to have options, and to not burn any bridges in the early stages. But to try to move forward without any kind of direction can be very dangerous. There's too much potential for people to have different ideas about what the world should be that don't match up.

Think about Heroscape. It's a great game for putting in ANYTHING you want. But it is that way because of the great fiction they set up with the god-like generals who summon people from other dimensions. This gives every character a context, and helps to define where to draw from creatively.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: legend zero on January 19, 2010, 01:59:13 pm
Obviously you can descirbe ANY game in a sentence, it was just a general idea for the overall goal being open ended. Sorry if I was a bit too broad in my descriptionof the intended "broadness" of the game.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Tokimo on January 19, 2010, 02:12:00 pm
IMHO, vastly open games suffer for it in terms of flavor.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Zao on January 19, 2010, 02:32:34 pm
So, when do we start this?

And how many people are willing to participate in this project? Personally, no matter's what the theme chosen, I'm in.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Tokimo on January 19, 2010, 03:21:36 pm
I will be willing to participant in a very tertiary way if a 'cool' theme is chosen (card design, mechanic design, etc). I'm fickle about my game preferences though.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 19, 2010, 03:33:42 pm
I'm very willing to participate. I believe the next step is aardvarks. Didn't he say he wanted to setup a pool to decide on the genre?
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: europeanmatt on January 19, 2010, 04:41:44 pm
So what are the options?

Fantasy
Space/Sci-Fi
Wild West
Espionage
Bounty Hunters
Cyberpunk
Crime
War/Combat
Combination
Everything/Catch-All

?????
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: legend zero on January 19, 2010, 04:46:01 pm
Espionage sounds fun, offers a bunch of different scenarios.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 19, 2010, 04:59:54 pm
I really think we should let aardvark setup the poll before we start voting.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: sneaselx on January 19, 2010, 05:05:42 pm
I personally am attracted to the idea of abstract games, with little or no theme. However, that is difficult to come up with a large number of unique, interesting cards.

Some other ideas from good books: Going Postal is a good book, it's about a thief who is released by the monarch (a very secretive and manipulative person, although ultimately benevolent.) on the condition that he revive the local post office. However, the klock towers (or something like that) are an evil corporation that run as series of the towers that send telegram like messages. It's kind of fantasy, in that there is magic and stuff, but more like an 1800s industrial city, in the transition between magic and technology.

Also another book that was interesting, (don't remember it's name) was an ancient city in the middle of a vast ocean, that was broken and corrupt, basically anarchy, because it suffered chaos-storms. These were like rainstorms, but those trapped in them would be subjected to completely random effects. Some would start growing flowers out of their heads, and some would have their heart teleported 3 inches to the right. The city was also overrun with ghost like creatures that could kill with a single touch, and the mechanical police, that were still alive since the Ancients caused the chaos storms with their machines.

Just an idea, what about a theme that doesn't have to do with fighting. Some other conflict, but not units fighting each other.
I just feel that we should attempt to make this as unique as possible.

In addition to a theme, we should choose a game style. For example, do we want it to be played quickly, long games, focus on mindgames, play with a few cards, or as many as possible, heavy deckbuilding emphasis, etc.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 19, 2010, 08:00:26 pm
Wow guys, great stuff. I've skimmed over it all and, assuming that there are no further suggestions, I'm gonna put the options to vote after I look over everything a lil' more closely.


EDIT1:

I've divided the themes into OverTheme, the Primary, and Secondary (or Specific).

The themes listed under OverTheme are those that are all-encompassing. While the actual game play may focus on fighting, diplomacy, espionage or just making money the big picture takes place there. For example: Cyrus' spoke of the Gas Station, a space theme; this could be translated to fantasy as the Trading Grounds, or what have you.

The Primary is just that, the primary theme of the game. While the overall theme of the game might be scifi, fantasy, etc. this is what the game will focus on: building resources, spying, warmongering, etc.

The Secondary or Specifics of the game are the top of the pyramid. While you may be playing a fighting game in a fantasy land, how are you going to fight? By summoning monsters? By building golems? By undermining your opponents stocks in fairy dust? etc, etc.
While the Primary can exist independent of the OverTheme, the Specifics of the game will (usually) depend on the primary. Example: Bounty Hunting, Hunting, Dueling, Skirmishing would fall under War/Combat while Civ Building would be more appropriate for an Economic Primary.

So, without further ado, the list! (as of 1820 PST)

OverTheme:

Primary:

Secondary (Specifics):

I will give this list a few more hours (until 2200 PST) for any suggestions we might like to include and then poll it.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Zao on January 19, 2010, 10:20:37 pm
That's a great list. Can't wait to see what will be chosen !

I wish it's an Historical Novel-Based card game emphasizing on Space Cowboy-Ninjas on Rhinos.


The novel based idea is really good, with only a small problem : people will actually have to read this novel to participate in the game's creation, or they will tend to do stuff that aren't really related to the novel. And it won't be absolutely original content from us.
By the way, anyone knows the name of this book with rainstorms and ghosts? It sounds awesome.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: TheBuck on January 19, 2010, 11:42:29 pm
Traditional Fantasy/War Combat/Character Emphasis
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: legend zero on January 20, 2010, 12:04:07 am
SteamPunk / Espionage / (Crack-The-Code/Dueling/Exploration) Cant descide here, maybe all three as different types of victory conditions.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: sneaselx on January 20, 2010, 03:26:00 pm
Found it- the book is called The Storm Thief, by Chris Wooding. It's not a very advanced book, but the setting is very engrossing and creative.

Oh, and what about a Survival secondary theme. You wouldn't necessarily be directly competing each other, but against another omnipotent force. You would have to compete for resources to avoid dying first.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 20, 2010, 04:57:14 pm
My Vote:

OverTheme:
Sci-Fi

Primary:
War/Combat
With Side-Objectives (Economic, Espionage, Political)

Secondary (Specifics):
Character Emphasis
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 20, 2010, 07:29:58 pm
I like the idea behind survival. I have my own thoughts about how it might be played. Say, one deck for mother nature against the survivalists. The deck size would morph depending on how many players there are. And, while not in direct competition (you said that, right?) players could still be able to set traps and decoys for their rivals. Kinda like that joke.

Two guys are walking through the forest when they stumble upon a hungry bear. One of the guys takes a moment to put on his running shoes. The second guy looks at him and says, "Are you crazy? You can't outrun a bear!" The first guy looks back at him and replies, "I don't have to outrun the bear. I just have to outrun you."

That's just my interpretation, though. What did you envision when you mentioned a survival theme?
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 21, 2010, 12:55:09 am
i posted something on the other topic. i think it bears repeating in the main topic as well as intoducing whether or not id like to participate -

Quote
in my experience, what hurts people the most is when the decision to leave in or remove a mecahnic is arbitrary and boils down to "i dont think it should go in". thats is a valid response but its also completely unbeatable. why shouldnt it go in, can it be changed to fit, will there be a player solution (which im going to call PS cos of how mch i refer to it)  to it that will make it more/less playable?

none of these can be answered if the decision to do it is simply arbitrary or done by a blind vote. sure 5 people out of 6 didnt like it but why? it didnt feel right? that again is a valid response but it doesnt help defend or dismiss the problem.

thats why id feel more comfortable doing this if people would guarantee that for every idea that didnt make the cut, your allowed to defend it at least once. maybe with a day or so to arrange your ideas and thoughts but at least once, that should be enough before shelving it

there are also other problems. designing is usually an effort of the mind - you might see something that the others just didnt. not to brag or anything but this has happened alot with me. for example, people were in general saying that a deckless + unique tcg wouldnt work. id like to think i managed it partly due to the fact that i didnt dismiss it without THOROUGHLY going over everything i could think of. some problems are similar, you might see a problem with a card being broken but everyone says that another card will counter it and dump your argument. this might not be personal but the person suggesting a look at the problem has a reason for saying it and rejection of it often feels like a rejection of his reasoning and his commitment. the reason for the rejection is not always fully explored. saying its for the good of the game or the group has decided is fine and dandy but without justification, it just becomes a smaller version of mob rule. thats the difference between a republic and a democracy after all, one protects the right of the individual AS WELL AS making sure the group as a whole gets through. a democracy just cuts out the smallest guy, regardless of how reasonable he might be

if clarity of thought is promised (not to be insulting, i just know it isnt always the case), id like to join, as long as the project moves with some speed (i dont like sitting around for 2 weeks with no progress :S). if not, then ill help out when i can, bouncing ideas off of, playtesting, offering mechanics but id give no certainty to my help. still, some help is better than none right? you could always ignore it as a safeguard

i personally like games not based solely around combat. duelling, bounty hunting and character emphasis seem to have some basis in that. whats crack-the-code?
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: sneaselx on January 21, 2010, 05:57:32 am
Quote
Say, one deck for mother nature against the survivalists. The deck size would morph depending on how many players there are. And, while not in direct competition (you said that, right?) players could still be able to set traps and decoys for their rivals. Kinda like that joke.
Yes, that is exactly what I had in mind. Maybe set survival decks based on where the players would be going. (You wouldn't have cards like Crocodile Attack in a desert, and you wouldn't have Dehydration on a lake.)
Maybe crack-the-code is kind of like there is one sequence of alphanumeric characters, and maybe winning missions gives you clues about how the code is set-up? Or maybe like mastermind, but with effects and stuff.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 21, 2010, 06:35:06 pm
Ripplez, I think a good way to guard against what you're talking about is to have people pitch ideas, instead of just suggesting them. Instead of people defending themselves when their idea is on the chopping block (which can lead to a combative atmosphere) you could have everyone defend their idea up front, by posting a pitch when they first suggest it. The pitch should include why they think it's a good idea, how it fits with the game's themes, and examples of how the idea could be used to expand on the ideas of others. It's also good to include an objective. In the end, it may sound something like this (obviously not an actual suggestion):

Quote
Suggestion for New Keyword: GIANT

Objective: Create two levels of combat, one representing ground troops, and the other representing larger that life monsters or vehicles.

Pitch: The GIANT keyword on a creature basically separates it from normal combat. Instead of being lumped in when you count up total power, GIANT creatures are separated. After combat is finished, they will fight each other in the same manner. If you control a GIANT creature at a location where your opponent does not, you can "crush" one ground troop during combat, destroying it.

Theme: This contributes to our theme of high-fantasy by creating a keyword that makes certain large creatures feel especially powerful. It also helps to establish that this world has certain rules to warfare, which we discussed last week.

Synergy: This will play well with UserA's suggestion for a FLYING keyword, which creates another level of combat. We could try to find interesting ways for GIANT and FLYING creatures to interact with each other. It can also make use of UserB's idea that certain locations can only hold certain types of creatures. GIANT creatures cannot go indoors, for example. Lastly, I am somewhat concerned of overlap with the suggestion for making Vehicles a different card type. I think GIANT may cover it in a more efficient way, though I open to suggestions on that point.

Something like this forces your detractors to come up with actual reasons, since you've actually built a case. People saying "that's not a good idea" after you spent time and energy contributing something are NOT the kind of people who would be listened to during the process. It's somewhat up to the people running the project to say "Okay, this person is clearly putting in the effort. I'm not going to let someone else step and say 'no' without an actual discussion taking place". This is basically what I was talking about. You need one person (or a few people) who are good at managing a project like this to make those decisions about what ideas are valid and what aren't. Ideally, the entire project would be made of people like this, and after pitches are made you can just vote. Realistically, it will come down to leadership decision.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: TheBuck on January 21, 2010, 07:26:28 pm
so who which of us are working on this project? I think that should come first.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Tokimo on January 22, 2010, 10:31:14 am
so who which of us are working on this project? I think that should come first.

I would like to help (maybe). Everything I suggest should be taken with a huge grain of salt, since I only want to exist as a tertiary developer (if I like the direction).
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: europeanmatt on January 22, 2010, 04:42:45 pm
I'll be glad to help generate mechanics, playtest, write flavour text etc. Can't throw too many hours at it, but some sure.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: sneaselx on January 22, 2010, 04:58:30 pm
I can do card design and art. I guess I could do rules, etc, but we seem to have enough doing that.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 22, 2010, 08:03:56 pm
Yes, that is exactly what I had in mind. Maybe set survival decks based on where the players would be going. (You wouldn't have cards like Crocodile Attack in a desert, and you wouldn't have Dehydration on a lake.)
Maybe crack-the-code is kind of like there is one sequence of alphanumeric characters, and maybe winning missions gives you clues about how the code is set-up? Or maybe like mastermind, but with effects and stuff.

Why didn't I think of that. It's a good idea. The nature deck could be the theme for each set. Good stuff sneaselx.

Crack-the-code is just like 'e said, ala mastermind or Inkognito (anyone played that game?)

Quote from: GnKoichi
have people pitch ideas, instead of just suggesting them.
Sorry, my fault for assuming. When I throw an idea out that I want to see implemented then I make sure to defend. I figured others do the same with what they love.

Since we seem to gravitate back here I'll try to refrain from making new topics for each addition. Except for polls, of course, and this next lil' bit.

What I'd like to do is have everyone who wants to participate post here (http://www.lackeyccg.com/forum/index.php?topic=189.0) in the following format. (Keep things from getting cluttered.)

Quote
Primary: (your first choice)
Secondary: (a backup if the first option already has a gaggle of people working on it)
Tertiary: (if applicable)

That way we know who's doing what. Now, if 3 or more people decide that they want to do the same thing, I propose that they either (a) choose among themselves who will do what, or (b) post a sample of their idea(s) and let the rest decide. A couple of people for each category should suffice and this way we're not spread out too thin.

europeanmatt, for example, mentioned mechanics, playtest, flavour text, etc.
Instead of spreading his talents over x areas, he could concentrate his skills in developing mechanics.

Tokimo, could be a contract consultant, called in whenever a team needs an outside pov.

etc, etc.

While that's going on, after the poll has closed, I'd like for us to start throwing out ideas for mechanics and/or rules. Oh, and please give us an idea as to how it will work, even if it's painfully obvious a little blurb won't hurt.

If you want a sample, that's too bad. GnKoichi already supplied us with a top-notch example. Go read that one.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 24, 2010, 05:23:38 am
(Normally I hate double-posting but I felt this deserved it's own new post.)

The results are in!

For those who haven't noticed, the votes have been tallied and winners decided...

The winner for Overtheme is... a tie! (Steampunk & Traditional Fantasy)*

The winner for Primary is... Espionage!

The winner for Secondary is... Character Emphasis!

Good stuff. :)

Now as soon as we settle the tie, mechanics will be thrown into the mix.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 24, 2010, 05:55:32 am
why do we need to settle the tie? steampunk and fantasy (more magic-based) is not a bad mix. think about it?

towering golems, infused with magic. cybertronic goblins, more gears than flesh. a dark shadow cast over the land by a tower reaching towards the skies pumping hot molten lava upwards to form a new skybound land, supported by the strongest magicks (for a given level of skybound)

so why do we need to setle a tie :S do you hate clockwork dragons? is that it :O
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 24, 2010, 06:16:31 am
K-I-S-S.

That's it. I want to keep this project as simple as possible. If this turns out well, then we can think about adding more things to the mix. Or if someone else wants to take the reins for a second lackey community game in the future, it'll be up to them how to direct. For now, I would very much like to keep this small and see how it goes from there.


As far as mixing Steampunk and Tradition Fantasy, I really have no problem with it. I've ready a story or two that integrated both genres rather nicely. Don't forget, however, that Steampunk is a genre full of possibilities, just as Traditional Fantasy. (Quite underdone as well methinks, but that's neither here nor now.)

Quote from: Ripz
do you hate clockwork dragons?
'Course not. Then again, a clockwork dragon isn't a magical dragon, so really, I should be asking you that question. :P

What's so great about fantasy dragons that you wanna kill of the poor widdle clockwork dragon, who never hurt no one (that didn't need a good hurtin'.), because they didn't have the chance to?





On the other hand... "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 24, 2010, 06:36:41 am
K-I-S-S? whats the band got to do with anything? :S

and i meant adding the cyber-goblins as a thematic example of how it could work

silly aardvark. you ride the clockwork dragon into the sky. it uses magic to fly and breathe fire  8)

but i understand. and im not the only persn here obv so dont take wat i say as what to do :O

just saying itd be wicked cool
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 24, 2010, 07:26:12 am
Aardvark, when you say the next thing we will work on is mechanics, do you mean the overall rules of the game? Just want to make sure, since mechanics can refer to everything from how the game is setup, played & won to detailed specifics like how Multi-kicker works. Also, how would you like this next step to be handled?
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 24, 2010, 08:09:16 am
I was gonna say wait for the tie-breaker but I don't see a real reason for that. So, without further ado...

Mechanics and rules, while closely related aren't necessarily  the same thing. While drawing a card is a mechanic, when you draw a card and how many you draw would be considered a rule.

So that's what I'm asking for when I speak of mechanics. The rules I'll leave to the rules committee. Though I think that the ideas that each committee comes up with should be put before the community as a whole before they commit to a particular direction.

Feel free to list the mechanic(s) that you would like to see put into play along with a brief explanation (please no essays) on how it would work.

We can take the example you had earlier about keywords and apply it here as well I think.
Quote from: Mechanics Idea Person
I propose the following:
Mechanic: Card drawing
Function: Draw a card

Short and simple, but of course everybody and their mother knows how to draw a card. That mechanic is pretty much a given.
Quote from: Mechanics Idea Person 2
I'd like to see this:
Mechanic: Card Combine
Function: The ability to fuse two or more cards together into a completely new card. This could be used to create a brand new item, character or whatever else the committee thinks might be appropriate.

I'd throw out more but my brain stopped working a while ago. >.<

As with the themes, we'll collect so many and then put them into a poll to let the people decide. I'd say until Friday (01/29/10) works out fine.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 24, 2010, 09:09:08 am
I see. That's an interesting approach.

Alright, well, I'll throw a few ideas out there.

Since we have an espionage game:

Mechanic: Secret
Function: Cards that come into play face down.

Mechanic: Ruse
Function: Cards that come into play face down, but when they are revealed you can either do what the card says or replace it with a card from your hand.

Mechanic: Snoop
Function: Look at one face down card.

Mechanic: Skills
Function: Characters have skills. Certain cards require a skill check to be played. Roll 1d6 and add your character's stat. It must meet or beat the difficulty on the card before you can do what that card says.


And since we have a character-focused game:

Mechanic: Main Character
Function: A single character card that starts in play and remains in play no matter what. It represents your character in the world, and has stats that affect how well you can use certain cards.

Mechanic: Ally
Function: Interesting characters who can join your main character. If they have a stat higher than your main character, you can use them for skill checks instead.

Mechanic: Training
Function: Cards to make your main character better.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 24, 2010, 09:25:37 am
how difficult is the game supposed to be?
how important is it to be differnt from other mainstream tcgs?
how luckbased?
how fast should a game be, in terms of turn count?
why is there espionage (as in, is this a war-based thing or a personal vendetta? is it suposed to cover all these themes? are there clans?)?

ill edit this with some ideas after some thinking. if you want to give some other guidelines from these or other questions, thatd be appreciated :)
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: sneaselx on January 24, 2010, 10:00:33 am
We know it needs to be character-focused, but what will these focused-upon characters do? Are they fighting? Are they code-cracking? Espionage is more of a means to a goal, than a goal itself.

Mechanic: General Theme Proposal:
Both players are building towers. Each player has 2-3 characters. The goal is to build your tower first. However, You characters can be used to invade opponent's towers, guard your tower, or provide building bonuses. Your deck would consist of tower pieces, equipment, training, etc. Tower pieces would be Secret. Tower pieces could provide bonuses, and act as location type things. Guards would be set up in the tower, and traps could be set up in the tower pieces, as well as pieces that are inherently dangerous. The goal would be to put say 10 tower pieces in your tower, but opponent would be able to try to sneak in and destroy pieces, steal equpiment, or assasinate your builders. Flying units could maybe be added that would be able to start at the top of the tower, and move down, instead of entering from the bottom.
Function: Provides an additional idea for the basic action for the game. Would allow espionage and traps easily, and fits the steampunk theme. Problems: May have problems adjusting it for Character-focused. Seems to mesh better with multiple characters.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Tokimo on January 24, 2010, 10:46:20 am
Going off of the tower building:

Mechanically:
You could have a system as well of placing cards face down with a counter on them to represent their 'security'. Items with higher security would be harder to affect. Then you could try and reveal a piece, or destroy it, or steal it. However if you tried to destroy and steal a trap it would blow up in your face. Now as a player you can reveal your tower pieces at any time and if you have 10 revealed tower pieces you reach the floating island and claim it as yours.

Additionally revealing a tower piece would allow you to use it's abilities and effects, but it would also make it easier to steal/destroy.

Aesthetically:
There's a floating island in the sky and you and another player are trying to build a tower to reach the island so that you can lay claim to it and get all the resources/treasure/whatever. Maybe instead of a floating island you're just trying to build a dock for airships to get trade going and if you get yours up first you can get airships to sign exclusive contracts with you. Maybe the world in non-spherical and there's actually a landmass above that you're trying to get too that's not floating.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 24, 2010, 10:59:43 am
I like the airship dock idea. It could be that an airship full of goods is coming to the city. Your character is the head of one of the two (or more) competing companies/guilds/factions. You need to build the tallest tower in a certain amount of time, or a tower of a specific height first, so that the airship will come to you. City laws prevent open aggression against your opponents, so that's where the espionage comes in. I like the idea of using traps in the towers as part of the secret mechanic. I feel I may be going ahead too far in starting to talk about this stuff, so I apologize if I have. Just wanted to talk out a way to work the tower idea cleanly into character-based espionage.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 24, 2010, 11:03:37 am
Oh, also, the tower idea was created because someone questioned what the goal of the game was, since espionage is more of a means than an end. I had assumed that since the goal of espionage is usually information, that information would be the goal. The win condition could be to obtain certain "document" cards, or something to that effect.

Actually, now that I say that.

Mechanic: Documents
Function: These cards serve as quests & win conditions. They are not part of the player deck. One copy of each Document card is made into a goal deck, and one document is flipped of the top when the game begins. Players must fulfill the goals on that card to steal or otherwise earn it. Then a new  document is flipped. Get X documents to win the game.
Conflicts: This conflicts with the already suggested Tower mechanic, since they are both win conditions. We could choose between them or keep both as alternate win conditions.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: sneaselx on January 24, 2010, 03:42:08 pm
Mechanic: Documents combined with Towers.
What if each player built an initial tower, and stocked the tower with documents, somehow. Traps or fake documents could be there to confuse thieves. You may also expand your tower, and add additional documents or traps.
     Dependent Mechanic: Levels as resource.
     Each card has a cost limit, which requires you to have a tower of a specific height.
     Pro: resources well tied into the game.
     Con: possibility of slippery slope.
The official goal would be find and steal documents, but building tower would allow you to play better cards, and make it harder to tell which is document and which is not.
    Mechanic Adjustment: In this case, documents would start in your deck, to allow you to play them onto new levels. So, in order for opponent to win, effectively the deck would have to be entirely burned through. That means that a means of replenishing your deck is necessary.
Pro: combines ideas in a compromise. Extends on idea of industrial espionage. Offers significant change for suspenseful play and mind-games.
Con: Mechanic Adjustment needs better alternative. Games could be very long.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Tokimo on January 24, 2010, 03:59:17 pm
One possibility for a split win condition here would be that you wanted to get your tower up so you could rake in the contracts with airships, but you could also win by getting an exclusive permit to build an airship dock in the city (by stealing documents they need, like signatures of mid level officials on forms) before the other player finished building their tower.

Of course, there might be space for alternate win conditions, like if you put a card in play called "Legal investigation" which would allow you to take an action to add counters to legal investigation while they could take actions to remove counters. If legal investigation got enough counters the opponent would go to jail and leave you to build your tower in peace.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: legend zero on January 24, 2010, 06:24:35 pm
We know it needs to be character-focused, but what will these focused-upon characters do? Are they fighting? Are they code-cracking? Espionage is more of a means to a goal, than a goal itself.

Mechanic: General Theme Proposal:
Both players are building towers. Each player has 2-3 characters. The goal is to build your tower first. However, You characters can be used to invade opponent's towers, guard your tower, or provide building bonuses. Your deck would consist of tower pieces, equipment, training, etc. Tower pieces would be Secret. Tower pieces could provide bonuses, and act as location type things. Guards would be set up in the tower, and traps could be set up in the tower pieces, as well as pieces that are inherently dangerous. The goal would be to put say 10 tower pieces in your tower, but opponent would be able to try to sneak in and destroy pieces, steal equpiment, or assasinate your builders. Flying units could maybe be added that would be able to start at the top of the tower, and move down, instead of entering from the bottom.
Function: Provides an additional idea for the basic action for the game. Would allow espionage and traps easily, and fits the steampunk theme. Problems: May have problems adjusting it for Character-focused. Seems to mesh better with multiple characters.

I personally love this idea. It prevents the game from being too one-sided for a player with a stronger theme and also allows for nice interaction. Only thing is the movement aspect, obivously you woldn't move right into the tower at floor 3 or 4, so card placements would be a bit critical.

I would suggest three win conditions (2 are very similar)

1. Build your tower for an airship permit.
2. Obtain an airship permit through special win condition cards
3. Destory your opponent's tower totally (like have a standard foundation UNDER the tower pre-game, kill that and win)
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 24, 2010, 08:26:00 pm
mechanic : clan cards
each player has a card that represents their clan, guild, base, rebel undergrond location. it has values that help determine how well it builds towers, how well its spies spy, how much developmnt it performs per unit time and so on. may have space for effects depending on the tower progress or spy progress

mechanic : two decks
each player has a deck for espionage and a deck for tower defense. this is to reduce the chance of just drawing the wrong card in your hand. since tower building is so important that shoud go by smoothly so having a deck just for it would be nice

mechanic : spywork
espionage is taking the form of raiding the enemy tower. a threshold cost to spywork will make the tower building a race, since once the threshold limit is met, all resulting raiding is straightforward. a continuous paid cost will depend on the resource system. a one time paid cost per tower block unit means tat once an element is passed, it is passed forever. a combination of all three costs, could be used. there are probably more cost types. this way the raiding is a mix of preparation adn decision making
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Tokimo on January 24, 2010, 08:59:49 pm
I think it actually might be kinda cool to skip factions entirely. So many card games do it, but a steampunk game feels like you should be able to hire anyone, build anything, and spy with the rest of them.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 25, 2010, 12:32:56 am
*bubbles with excitement*

Great stuff! Keep the creative juices flowing. :)


I am curious as to how the tower building will accentuate character emphasis.

Quote from: Ripz
how difficult is the game supposed to be?
how important is it to be differnt from other mainstream tcgs?
how luckbased?
how fast should a game be, in terms of turn count?
why is there espionage (as in, is this a war-based thing or a personal vendetta? is it suposed to cover all these themes? are there clans?)?

Difficulty?
I would like anyone familiar with ccgs in general to be able to pick it up after a couple of games.

Different?
Personally, I would like something not easily associated with other ccgs, but at the same time some games have similar mechanics or themes, so on and so forth, which makes it hard not to draw a line between games. Really though this is up to all of all of us. It's our ideas going into this game so what we do with it, what we put into it, will be what determines just how different it is.

Luckbased?
That's mostly up to the people who are working on rules. The Mechanics we choose, however, will play a role in this as well.

Fast?
That's up for debate. If anybody prefers a quicker or lengthier game, make it known. This will have an effect on the rules and mechanics that are put into place.

Espionage?
This is up to the fluff department of the community.


If I might make a suggestion.
Mechanic: Gathering votes or favor
For whatever reason fluff decides (the death of a king/queen, a new election, what have you) The player is trying to get their "man" into a position of power. This doesn't come easy and in order to get what you want, one must resort to other, less public methods.

Function: Similar to the security counters mentioned earlier, or Netrunners agenda counters, there would be a number of character cards in the deck that a player would need to influence. An influence number on the card would show how many influence tokens a player needs before they can call that person an ally. If factions are in place this could be a way to make such characters favor certain players over others, or even make the influential person immune altogether to another person's machinations.
The main character card could be modified by political statement cards, kissing the baby cards, etc, etc. Things that would make the MC more charismatic and thus make it easier to sway that rich-heiress, who provides her ally with an extra card draw or whathaveyou, to your side.

Once a player has so much influence and is able to place the main character s/he wins.

Mechanic: Mud-Slinging
Function: (Since we chose an emphasis on character I thought this would be appropriate.) By playing a card with a cost you are able to make it more difficult for your opponent to build a tower, uncover documents, place a main character, etc, etc.
Though if this happens too often there might be a penalty. That player becomes known as a gossip and so their word isn't taken as seriously in the underworld of business/politics thus making it more difficult to accomplish their goal.

Also, I came upon this and thought it interesting Steampunk List o' Themes (http://www.writing.com/main/view_item/item_id/1249132-SteamPunk-A-List-of-Themes). Just something to look at that I found interesting.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 25, 2010, 01:59:55 am
the politician idea isnt realy compatible with the tower/raid idea in its current form. it would involve alot of different cards being drawn from a similar deck with quite a number of tangents at the same time. which would be nice if it worked, it just seems really hard to get done

i had an idea to merge the two togethr

we could set up an intangible resource like the imperial favour in l5r. we could call it the populace

then we can replace the main characters in tower/raid with a political candidate(s) and/or a secret society sent to expose their wiles (depending on if you do or do not both have candidates, itd most likely be a symmetric/asymmetrc game)

then we replace the tower with a paper trail

making the raider a spy/investigator sent to expose (raid,espionage) the candidates dirty deeds amongst their attempts to block and hide their lies/truths (tower). the populace would help give a kind of balance since the candidate would thrive on it and the raider would try to reduce the candidates favour/be hated by the populace fro trying to take down someone so loved

just to clarify, this si a separate idea altogether. hopefuly it combines some of the elements and flavour of the tower/raid idea with the politics/influence idea
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: sneaselx on January 25, 2010, 06:08:54 am
@Votes(dependent on tower)
 A few things: Too many mechanics in one game can be complicated. If we want a complicated game, that's fine, but will be much harder to pick up. Also, it changes implicit espionage to explicit espionage. Espionage should be decided by card interactions between players, not just playing a card and changing some numbers.

@Merge
Might make all the cards into piece of paper. Not very interesting card design.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 25, 2010, 06:11:06 am
@Merge
Might make all the cards into piece of paper. Not very interesting card design.

wat does this mean?
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Zao on January 25, 2010, 04:30:31 pm
I love the tower building + documents idea.

We can avoid factions, as said Tokimo, but I thought some cards that would thematically be "contacts" with other organisations. They would allow your character to use resources and equipment provided by those organisations. For example, a character who has contacts in piracy (there's gotta be some air pirates, if there are airships, right?) has access to some piratey techniques.

The character itself would not be linked to any faction, only those "contact" cards would be requirements to use more advanced and specific cards.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: sneaselx on January 25, 2010, 04:49:15 pm
@Ripplez:
Quote
wat does this mean?

Quote
then we replace the tower with a paper trail

If instead of objects, we use a "paper trail", I'm afraid that the cards, instead of being things like "Barracks" which are fairly simple graphic-wise, it would be the abstract concept "Illicit Affair", much harder to make a picture for.

As a general rule, it is easier to make cards for tangible objects than intangible concepts.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 25, 2010, 06:56:50 pm
Idea!

Proposed Mechanic: Triple Win Condition

Goal: Reconcile the three proposed win conditions & ensure that all are tied to the Character emphasis.

Description: Each player has three potential win conditions (Build a Tower to height X to ensure that you earn the important Airship Merchant Contract, Obtain X Secret Documents to uncover [fluff something something], or Earn the trust of enough of the populace to become the next King). Gaining any one of these is enough to win the game. You have one character who starts in play. S/he has three stats to correspond (Engineering, Slyness, Charisma). There is a shared "Goal Deck" made up of Tower Levels, Secret Documents, and Population. At the end of each (turn? round?) a card is flipped off the Goal Deck and the players compete for it (in some way. core mechanic needed here. Skill checks?)

Pros: This creates a single mechanic (though it is to be determined) that brings three mechanics together, so that it isn't overly complicated to have multiple win conditions. It also takes the win conditions out of the Player's deck, so that they don't get in the way of drawing other fun cards. Finally, it ties all win conditions to the Player's character.

Cons: This weakens some of the flavor of each win condition, since they would not have their own mechanic for acquiring. However, they could still have their own mechanics once they are in play.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Zao on January 25, 2010, 08:30:10 pm
Neat idea you have here GnKoichi. I like the fact that you have to compete each turn to get a different victory element. Let's say each element (building tower, stealing documents, becoming king or whatever) have different ways to be won: Your deck will need cards adapted to those three victory conditions, as you never know which one will appear often during the game. Or you can push your luck and specialize only in tower-building, hoping that "tower building" cards appear often in the goal deck.

I'm not a fan of shared decks, though. It would always be the same deck every game? Or each players contribute to it, like the site cards in Lord of the Rings? In this game, the site deck balanced the game, as the leading player's sites would never be played. The leader was hindered by his opponents' sites, which were "bad" for him and usually "good"  for them, allowing them to catch up.

One more idea :

Each of those goal cards (obtained accordingly to what GnKoichi said) could have some drawbacks. For example, one of the "stolen documents" cards would increase your chances to be discredited. Another one could lower your hand size limit, etc. Each goal card would be unique, each having different ways to acquire it and different drawbacks.
This means that the closer you are to victory, the harder it is to obtain it. This would make the game more interesting, and would reduce the gap between players. You will also have to think twice before grabbing a goal card. Do you really need this kind of goal card? Can you afford the risk? Should you wait one more turn, in order to have a more solid position?
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 25, 2010, 08:36:08 pm
I think it could be a shared deck that's always the same if there are enough cards in it to keep it interesting (maybe three times the number that would appear in any given game, so five or six times the amount needed to win?). A deck that both players contribute could also be interesting, but for my personal taste I think I would go the other way.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Zao on January 25, 2010, 08:43:33 pm
Haha! You posted while I was adding an idea to my previous post.  :D It seems to happen often to me these days.

Actually, I'd also prefer a similar goal deck for each game. The contributive deck could lead to some... issues.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 25, 2010, 08:58:45 pm
I like the addition. You could also have goals that help you, but not for that goal. Like a tower card that gives you a charisma bonus. This could help force players to fight over cards that they might not otherwise.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 25, 2010, 09:32:35 pm
not necessarily sneasel. for one hting, a) we do that all the time with sorceries and instants. illicit affair can be represented somethign like http://www.pojo.com/thespoils/cotd/2007/february/28.shtml

(the card image)

unless you meant rules. i dont think itd be that hard to come up with some effect text thatd match :S

also, theres no reason why you cant have cards like barracks worked in somewhere. youd be researching their activities upto the illegal activities, they could still be playing such cards to protect their info

or it might not fit at all. its just an idea
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Tokimo on January 25, 2010, 10:14:36 pm
Perhaps if you want to add an element of social power it should be becoming mayor instead of king? Airship towers and kings seem to be on totally different magnitudes.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Zao on January 25, 2010, 11:42:17 pm
B.. but KINGS are so awesome! I'm sure we can fit this in the theme. Not that I hate mayors, but i always think of a fat man with a moustache when I hear this word. While the word king evokes sexy and majestic beards.

Anyway it's not the most important part of the game. :P Vocabulary can change anytime.

I admit kings in this setting might seem out of place. But monarchy still rocks.

@GnKoichi : We indeed can do a lot of things with those goal cards. With some imagination, the goal deck will be full of surprises.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: TheBuck on January 26, 2010, 02:46:58 am
When we do actually start this thing up we all should give each other our AIM SN or email.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: sneaselx on January 26, 2010, 08:44:34 am
My biggest fear is of the community deck. It is a community game based around Lackeyccg, so it doesn't make much sense to make a game that lackey cannot handle, without complicated workarounds. Also, as you said, it waters down each option.
What if we make a four phase game?
First Phase: Players compete to capture the different pieces.
Second Phase: Election- Players compete for votes. (some kind of advantage? Maybe trying to win control over the city, to improve your tower permit powers.)
Third Phase: Tower building- Use your tower pieces in a separate deck, to build the tower.
Fourth Phase: Stock the tower with your documents, try to capture all the documents.

Winner has the most documents at Phase Four.
Each phase would also be a standalone game.

Maybe at the end of each round, you get more points, to spend on new characters. Whoever does best in each round gets more points to spend on characters in the subsequent round.

Oh, and I'm sorry, I don't use AIM or SN, whatever those are.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 26, 2010, 08:08:05 pm
@Votes(dependent on tower)
 A few things: Too many mechanics in one game can be complicated. If we want a complicated game, that's fine, but will be much harder to pick up. Also, it changes implicit espionage to explicit espionage. Espionage should be decided by card interactions between players, not just playing a card and changing some numbers.

@Merge
Might make all the cards into piece of paper. Not very interesting card design.

My suggestion was not meant as an addition to the tower mechanic and Ripz' idea is of her own making. Mine was meant as an alternative.

I have to agree that a combination of towers, politics and secret documents seems like it would be rather watered down. I think that if everybody wanted to combine them that having 2 of the 3 would work but that a combination of the trio would be more of a mess. Not to mention that I'm asking for simple for this thing. It would definitely complicate things trying to balance the 3 of those into 1 game without a great deal of time. I'd like this done before the end of the year. ;)

I know it's just a word but mayor does sound a lil' outta place, imo. King doesn't quite float my boat either tho, so... heh. If such a mechanic were to be used, perhaps, regent or some other such title. I like regent better. :P 'Course, that's neither here nor there, nothing concrete has been decided and I'd still like some more major mechanics, along with minor ones, before putting anything up for vote. Don't forget the little things, guys!


another suggestion (not intended as an addition to anything previously mentioned):

Mechanic: The Chase: A rivalry between spies or Spy vs. Spy vs. ?
Explanation: Both players are spies, one loayl to her royal majesty (or whatever fluff the CD-F dept decides) and the other, uh, not. Before starting, the players would decide who is going after who, and how many turns to play. It is the job of the hound to discover and bring the fox into custody along with whatever state secrets the fox has "liberated".

This might involve locations so...
Mechanic: Locations
Explanation: Certain cards would serve as places for a character to travel to and from. From the City Square to the Opera House to the Royal Mansion to the Gallows and back again.

Mechanic: Trust Scale
Explanation: Because agents, whatever form they may take, are unlikely to survive without some form of outside assistance, I propose a trust scale. Players would start at a neutral score of 0 (from -5 to +5) and depending on actions taken they would draw a gain/lose trust card. This is how others might determine them to be trustworthy or not. It could also be used to influence minions, if you become to untrustworthy some of the more upstanding people that work for you might be discarded. On the other hand, if you become a paragon of shining light, the seedier types in your employ might decide that they don't like working for someone on the up-and-up. Discarding doesn't have to be the penalty either, instead they could decide that they want to work for the competition, unless of course that player's trust score is in the same state.

I know I've seen them mentioned but I don't think that I've actually seen them put out as actual mechanics that anyone would like to see, so here goes.

Mechanic: Trap
Explanation: Whether uncovered at a location, through investigation or some other means a trap would spring once your opponent has stepped into it and shower him with some sort of negative effect. ie. discard a card/entire hand, take an Lose Trust card, lose any one character, take damage, etc. etc. A trap doesn't have to be a bear trap, it could be an alarm, a button that opens the cage of the clockwork dragon and so on. I'd like to see what could be done with it there's so many possibilities.

The fox and the hound might not be everyone's cup of tea. It seems it would be more of a defensive game for the fox and depend on how aggressive the hound is. Which is why I suggest a time limit of x turns to be determined beforehand. If the hound has not captured the fox and/or the briefcase full of goodies then the fox wins, otherwise the hound wins.

dang it. I had something else in mind but I forgot what it was. *shrug* I'll think of it later, I hope.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 26, 2010, 08:59:53 pm
Since the themes vote is closed, I'd like to propose that now is a good time to break into the rules team and the fluff team, so we can start making decisions and moving forwards. It seems like this discussion is naturally moving away from the suggestion process and into debate territory, which is fine, as long as we're ready for it.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 26, 2010, 09:01:17 pm
its easier to make rules when the flavour comes out. id rather the flavour team worked on wat exactly the universe will be liek before we started on rules and mechanics

this isnt a counter to koichis point, just to add to it
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 26, 2010, 09:35:37 pm
Since the themes vote is closed, I'd like to propose that now is a good time to break into the rules team and the fluff team, so we can start making decisions and moving forwards. It seems like this discussion is naturally moving away from the suggestion process and into debate territory, which is fine, as long as we're ready for it.

I concur.

We have the themes down so Fluff Management can get to work if they so choose and the Rulemongers could get some sort of foundation if they so choose. I say if because we're still going through mechanics and they'll need to work with the Mechanics to some degree. Also, last but definitely not least, the Artists can get started on card templates and the likes.

The groups will be led by those who chose the corresponding area as a primary and/or secondary. Tertiary volunteers are free to help out wherever it may be need assuming they are not already putting their efforts to use elsewhere (like rules, hinthint, winkwink).

Fluff Management
GnKoichi
Zao

The Rulemongers
Ripplez

The Mechanics
TheBuck
aardvark

The Artists
sneaselx
LegendZero


d'accord? d'accord.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 26, 2010, 10:06:35 pm
Aardvark: What is the separation between Rules & Mechanics?

Zao: We should chat atleast once to do some brainstorming/planning. What's your preferred method? Time available?

Rules/Mechanics Folk: What fluff stuff will help you early on? We can focus our efforts on certain elements if you want some decisions made sooner than others.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 26, 2010, 10:31:01 pm
Aardvark: What is the separation between Rules & Mechanics?

I'll go back to my earlier example of card drawing.
The mechanic itself is to draw a card.
The rules are what the player does with the mechanic.

Rules also delve into specifics while mechanics will be more general in nature. For example:
Mechanic: Play a card take an action.
Rule: Play an event only during your turn. Play a response only after your opponent plays a card. Play an instant at any time. Event, Response, Instant, all of these mechanics allow the player to do something after playing a card, the rules specify when and thus classify an event card according to its nature.

I hope that explains what I mean by the difference between mechanics and rules. I admit it is a fine line, but it is there.

*starts singing Thin Line Between Love and Hate by the Persuaders*
*fade out*
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 26, 2010, 10:47:19 pm
May I respectfully suggest that the mechanics & rules teams be combined? I understand now the difference between them functionally, but I do not see a reason to have different people working on them. A single team of three people working on rules & mechanics in concert would likely function better than people working on each separately. The mechanics serve no purpose other than to support a larger rule set, and the rules are empty without core & secondary mechanics.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 27, 2010, 12:22:30 am
Good idea. I had hoped for a few more people and didn't want things to get cluttered but since there are only 3 people between the teams, and they are so closely related. I don't see why they shouldn't become one.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 27, 2010, 06:24:43 am
our tcgs are in peril. aardvark, the spirit of enthusiasm coud no longer stand the terrible stagnaton plaguing our forums. he sent six special roles to six special young people*

sneaselx with the power of artwork
legendzero with the power artwork also

gnkoichi with the power of fluff
zao with the power of fluff too

ripplez with the power of rules adn mechanics
thebuck with the power of rules and mechanics as well

and aardvark with the power of rules and mechanics also too

with their powers combind they summon the forums greatest champions - TEAM LACKEY

the power is yours!**

*its the internet noone will know your a 50 yr old balding man
**additional terms and restrctions may apply
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Zao on January 27, 2010, 11:25:44 am
@GnKoichi

Chatting would be the most efficient way, if it's possible. Whenever I'm on my computer, i'm always online both on MSN and Steam. I'm usually available from 18h to 22h (Eastern Standard Time) except on Wednesay and Thursday. Tell me if you can, then i'll PM you my address (or Steam ID)

@Ripplez

By the power of mighty lackey! Yarr!

---

And I shamefully copy/paste Koichi's question, as I'm looking forward an answer too :
"What fluff stuff will help you early on? We can focus our efforts on certain elements if you want some decisions made sooner than others."
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: legend zero on January 27, 2010, 01:35:37 pm
I'm good for templates, but dont expect charcter art from me, I only promised what i could, but I'm also interested in Mechanics, if you would like.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: sneaselx on January 27, 2010, 04:09:35 pm
I like the idea of spy v. spy, and support it to the extent my "power of artwork" allow.

Do I have the authority to propose mechanics?

Mechanic: Alarm System
Effect: Traps can trigger the alarm. Some cards can only be played if the alarm is active. (ie. when your cover is blown, you can call in the swat team.) However, the other player can also play alarm cards, and can try to avoid the activation, or deactivate it.
Pro/Con: This provides an additional way to regulate how you play cards. It also helps fit the general theme. (still to be decided about fluff theme.) Encourages espionage, as you try to get the advantage and then activate your alarm, pulling in all the stops. But a pure espionage deck would try to prevent the alarm, and you would be unable to use most of your cards.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 27, 2010, 05:02:04 pm
Zao, unfortunately I don't use either of those chat programs. Do you have a gmail account or AIM? We could use either of those chats (we could also use google docs to share ideas if you've got gmail). If not, we can just chat here.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 27, 2010, 05:09:22 pm
Also, I want to bring up the idea of dependencies between the teams:

Fluff team goal: City/Character design (dependent on game's win conditions being chosen by Rules team)

Art team goal: Card Templates (dependent on card's stats & other information being chosen by Rules team)

Right now the Fluff team can work on overall world building, so that's where we'll focus, unless another team has dependencies for us.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 27, 2010, 08:25:30 pm
Do I have the authority to propose mechanics?
Of course! Anyone and everyone is free to voice a mechanic that they would like to see integrated into the game. I would like to see everyone pitch in. 'Course, it's the community's choice as a whole whether or not it actually goes in, which means it's up to the proposer to convince the community to use their mechanic(s).

Quote from: Legend_Zero
I'm good for templates, but dont expect charcter art from me, I only promised what i could, but I'm also interested in Mechanics, if you would like.

No, worries. I only ask that you contribute what you can. I want this to be fun, not a burden. As far as the actual pictures are concerned (once the individual cards are made, of course), just use your own judgment as to how to fill the gap. Maybe something like what Dragoon did with Dark Journeys and ask if we can use art that's already been made.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: legend zero on January 27, 2010, 10:06:25 pm
That works for me, but I kinda need to know whats gong ON the card first. :lol:
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: TheBuck on January 28, 2010, 01:18:34 am
Kinda defeats have teams set on doing certain tasks don't you think?

Do I have the authority to propose mechanics?
Of course! Anyone and everyone is free to voice a mechanic that they would like to see integrated into the game. I would like to see everyone pitch in. 'Course, it's the community's choice as a whole whether or not it actually goes in, which means it's up to the proposer to convince the community to use their mechanic(s).

Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: sneaselx on January 28, 2010, 05:25:38 am
I think the teams are mostly to formalize where you go if you need something done, and teams get final say on any decision within their jurisdiction.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 28, 2010, 07:01:36 am
yeah. i think aardvarks philosophy is tat while the game should have efort put into it, it should be fun for all. i thin what aardvarks going for is - anyone can pitch in to help any aspect of the game. btu remember that there are people who actualy have responsibilitis for that aspect of the game and that they will have to check wat you actually put in

but dont go by my word. its just wat i thought aardvarks going for, far be it frm me to say what aardvarks thinking. its not my place to say :S
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 29, 2010, 12:25:46 am
Kinda defeats have teams set on doing certain tasks don't you think?

Not really. What the others said pretty much hits the nail on the head. Everyone is free to contribute but the teams are the final tweakers. So we, the community as a whole, will decide what goes into the game, but it's up to the teams to fine tune the final choices and make 'em work. Once mechanics are put to vote that is (which is tomorrow btw).

@LZ:
lol. When the time comes of course. I don't expect you to pull that stuff outta thin air, donchaknow. The template on the other hand is something that The Artists can already be thinking about. It's a steampunk theme with a whole lotta espionage going on with character emphasis overtones. Maybe brown, maybe pink with purple polka dots? I have no idea and that's exactly why I didn't volunteer for that. ;)
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: TheBuck on January 29, 2010, 03:25:48 am
I think we need some better comu with everyone I didn't know we had started this project lol thought we were still just tossing around ideas.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 29, 2010, 08:48:21 am
could we find a chatroom or lackey room or something where we coud all talk?

im not comfortble giving my details out sorry.maybe an irc room we can access from mibbit or something?
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: legend zero on January 29, 2010, 09:31:55 am
I'd be thinking it'll be a vertical card for characters, maybe horizontal for tower pieces (If we're still on that, hard to follow). I'd make the card border out of pipes and use older looking fonts wherever I can. Main color scheme will probably be Browns, Blues, Grays, Metalics, and Some overall mid-range colors as far as saturation goes. No brights, it does not really fit the whole "Steampuk" idea.

@Ripplez, it's right there, look up!

If you also go to the FULL chat, there are different rooms you could use, one mirroring each board on the forum here.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 29, 2010, 10:33:46 am
no. ajax is stupid

no offense trevor but if you tried holding a half an hour discourse in the chatroom of shoutbox, youd see what i mean :S

sorry if it seems like im criticisng the site, im not. but having spoken several times for several lines, just to find outt he other person had logged out five minutes earlier without any alert (they still show up in the room as being present even tho in actuality they arent), it gets annoying very fast. imagine that with 4+ people

i like bright colours :( so much of steampunk is boring dull colours. i love art like this -
http://www.wizards.com/magic/images/mtgcom/arcana1000/1026_invoke.jpg

this is exactly what i thought of when we talked about steampunk + magic. and maybe its still doable with just steampunk? a contrast between bright and dark, mechanical and not

just my thoughts, sorry
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: legend zero on January 29, 2010, 10:38:17 am
I was talking card template, not card art. All's fair in the card arts themselves, but the TEMPLATES will probably be a bit darker.

Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 29, 2010, 07:07:52 pm
What with people living in different zones and all, a topic especially for each team might be appropriate.

TheBuck, it was mentioned that the fluff and art teams could get started with some brain storms since their area of expertise doesn't depend on any other decisions to be made.

I'm gonna sort through the posts and sort them out into a poll.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on January 29, 2010, 08:01:08 pm
TheBuck, it was mentioned that the fluff and art teams could get started with some brain storms since their area of expertise doesn't depend on any other decisions to be made.

Just to clarify, we are dependent on other decisions. It would really help us out to know the win condition for the game. Not trying to rush that decision. Just saying that it's a dependency for some of our tasks.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: sneaselx on January 29, 2010, 08:08:28 pm
As a matter of fact, predominantly bright, colourful art would contrast very well with a dark template, maybe with brighter symbols.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 29, 2010, 09:15:36 pm
i dont know what kind of win conditions were working on :S i think we should wait till we start and finisht he poll aardvarks going to start
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: TheBuck on January 29, 2010, 09:55:40 pm
Perhaps we all should meet on the vent server once or twice a week.
Also are we working with life, cash, or some other form(s) of power/life.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on January 29, 2010, 10:49:10 pm
I suppose it would help if I had put the link up. ::)

Vote here (http://www.lackeyccg.com/forum/index.php?topic=205.0).
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on January 31, 2010, 10:00:44 am
to elaborate on some ideas ossible for the merge [tower/raid + politician] (from now on calld the merge), i got some :)

you could have a goal deck and strategy cards in your main deck. strategy cards have thigns like attributes up top that show one of five colours (five colours used to represnt intrinsics? how revolutionary!!!). these cards have a dual use. one is as a normal card, draw one, play a card, give +1/+1 and so on. the othr is as a strategy card, during a strategy phase. these cards would represent actions taken to accomplish your goals

for example, you could have a card - [ thorough arcane research : provides U : place a counter on this and exhaust it to draw a card. if you have three counters, it gives R as well. end of turn, discard a card ]

which is nice and all effectwise but more importantly the RU it provides counts to play cards from the goal deck by counting towards the threshold for them. the goal cards are the platforms of your campaign. for example - [ protection from dragon : needs RU : you gain +2 approval. you may destroy a dragon card in play to draw a card. you may sacrifice a faction of the populace to put a 4/4 dragon token into play ]

which coincidentaly are the cards you flip over when you try to win (to reduce their approval rating). flipping a protection from the dragons gets something like - [ you lose +2 approval ]. probably cos youv been sacrificing civilians by turning them into dragons :P that never goes down well

the other idea was splitting the populace into three or four factions. it doesnt mean anything as such in itself but cards refer to aspects of the populace that give you approval. for example - [strengthening the industry : needs GUU : the guildmasters give your their vote for +2 approval : steampunk cards cost 2 less to play] where the guildmasters are a faction of the populace. this identifies exactly who is doing this. it lets you a) support them and target them b) lose their vote making the other cards really hard to play since they dont work anymore and c) reduces the availabilit​y of other options for factions. so for example - [you flip it and find : lose 2 approval : discard a total of two steampunk cards from a combination of hand and field. the guildmaster​s reject you - you lose their trust] then youve really done it. flavourwise probably because youv been shipping in parts from outside places, which the guildmaster​s woudnt approve of

so those are my ideas on that theme if we do it. they can be tweaked around, maybe make approval stick on the card rather than collected by the player ala dark journeys by dragoon. just wanted to throw that out there
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on February 01, 2010, 07:53:57 pm
Ok, so there seemed to be some confusion in choosing the mechanics.
Would YOU (the community) like to break it down or just go with what we have right now?

I think that it could be handled better and am willing to try it again differently. Using Ripz suggestion or whatever else YOU think might help.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on February 02, 2010, 02:05:01 am
just redo the poll, using only the win conditions this time. then well have some idea of the theme for the game.. just ym sugestion
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: GnKoichi on February 02, 2010, 05:25:52 pm
Oh god. Don't redo the poll! We have a rules team. They should get together and start making decisions. Use the poll data that we have if it's useful. If it's not, I say ignore it. Don't hold on to things that turn out not to work. We're our own bosses. We get to say what's important.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on February 02, 2010, 11:24:23 pm
I agree. I'd rather not redo the poll. Unfortunately the results didn't are a bit goopy. I'm going to continue this here (http://www.lackeyccg.com/forum/index.php?topic=216.0) so as not to clutter the main topic.

So that this thing isn't abandoned after so long because people lose interest I'd like for us to set goals and perhaps post them here to keep other apprised of our progress. Make us accountable so to speak. Anyways, without further ado...

The Mechanics
Main goal as of Februrary 2, 2010: Choose the victory mechanic from among the top choices in the poll.
Time Goal: 3-4 days.
What this means: We hope to have a choice no later than Februrary 5-6, 2010. The reason for this wide timeframe is due to the differences in time zones as well as differences in opinions. If we are able to come to a conclusion before the estimated time then we'll be ahead of schedule. (Yay us! :P)

Remember have fun with this!
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: aardvark on February 08, 2010, 08:10:44 pm
My connection has been fuzzy the past few days. Sorry for that.
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: TheBuck on February 10, 2010, 12:53:46 pm
Moved to http://www.lackeyccg.com/forum/index.php?topic=216.0
Title: Re: Community Game
Post by: Ripplez on February 10, 2010, 04:18:27 pm
its better to post the rules + mechanics part in the rules and mechanics part of the community game series of topics