Zombie Survival CCG idea

[xchokeholdx]

Alright, I see where you are getting at. Your survivors WILL lose, but you can more or less decide (by playing survivor cards) how long it is going to take, AND how much time your survivors buy you to win the game with your zombies yourself.

So, all cards are a standard 1/1 facedown Zombie. Tapped resources can not be used as zombies.

I love the idea of having to balance the use of your resources between your survivors and zombies:

let?s say you have 4 resources ready, those are also normal 4x 1/1 zombies. Opponent plays his survivor turn, you tap 1 resource to play a 2/1 zombie from hand. Opponent has to fight 4 zombies this turn; 3x 1/1 and 1x a 2/1 zombie.

defeated zombies return to the resource row. Slain zombies are discarded (should be HARD to do). normal
your survivor turn starts, your resources DO NOT untap yet, so you have 3 resources to use (1 tapped zombie). the played 2/1 zombie does not count as a resource, but stays in play until slain.

I now can use those 3 resources for my survivors.

maybe readying resources should be done just before you take your Zombie turn..

I just tried this out with some pieces of paper, and even though the idea is good, there are a few problems:

a slain 1/1 zombie effectively reduces a player's resources.. not good.

Maybe a better idea is to keep the resource share between zombies and survivors, but simply let the zombie part be more powerful in cards and rules. just by playing a few times, I got confused about my resources and tapped and slain zombies and opponent?s cards (maybe less of a problem with real cards and card backs) for example:

Zombies that are defeated are tapped and placed to the side until untapped again. Slain zombies are discarded.

Some zombies will infect a player when slain (e.g. poison damage).
Slaining a zombie can only be done by (for example), some special weapons, doing 4 or more damage in one turn or discarding a certain item, etc..

dunno if you played Vampire (Jihad), but they had a similar system, where only aggravated damage would send a vampire back to its coffin.

or a simple: All zombies "heal" 1 wound at the beginning of your turn. rule would work too.

gah... care to team up with a bunch of guys here and really make this work trevor?

[Trevor]

Resources and how they work are really important and something that needs to be done right.
I will need to think about it.

Sure, let's try working on this together and see if our visions align. I was also inspired by the Walking Dead.

[xchokeholdx]

Alright, lets get this Dead walking then!

Ideas more or less already in place, or have a good chance of making it to the rules to be play-tested:

? shared draw deck between Survivors and Zombies (Walkers).
? You play both sides at the same time, and the objective is to survive as long as possible, while your Walkers try to defeat your opponent?s survivors.
? For the moment, it is impossible to WIN the game by surviving. The game will not allow you to survive it, by an ever increasing number of Walking dead.
? Your survivors will move and flee from location to location, trying to outrun the ever increasing Horde of Walkers. Your group of survivors might be forced to split up, and even some survivors are meant to be left behind...
? Maybe players use 1 starting location for their survivors, and during the course of a game, play more locations to move to. A maximum of 2? locations in play at a time, while a 3rd played new location causes the last one to be discarded, along with all items and survivors. Walkers go back to hand or are unassigned to be reassigned to a new location next turn.
? Items come in 2 flavors: Stationary and Carry-able. Stationary items "stick" to a location and can note be taken with you. Carry-able items move with characters and are often (maybe fixed rule: always) attached to a character.

Things to be Decided:
? naming convention. Card types, Survivors vs Zombies/Walkers? Icons, traits and abilities. Turn structure.
? A working resource system that works for both your Survivor as your Walker deck.
? Summoning sickness effects can easily be created by all new Survivors and Walkers come into play tapped.
? Moving from one location to another can only be done if your survivor/walker is in the "ready" state (untapped) perhaps. Items can be used to "prevent" your character from being tapped while moving/fleeing?
? How many card types?
   - Walkers
   - Survivors
   - Items (both Stationary and Carry-able)
   - Locations to flee to and from. Will zombies have  locations to play?
   - Action cards that shape combat and have a one time effect on the game
   - Condition cards that have an overall, longer lasting effect on the game.

? Balancing card sides.
It is no fun having to draw just a single card each turn and topdecking like madmen, especially if you are playing 2 decks in one. I propose a similar style drawing like the LOTR:TCG had. at the end of each turn, players draw cards until they have 7/8 cards in hand.
? Defeated Walkers could, instead of going back to hand, be "unnassigned" from a location in play. The Walker player must then move them again to a location in play, causing them to tap out and unable to immediately attack.
? Maybe some items and Action cards allow a survivor player to Slay a zombie, causing it to be discarded or returned to a draw deck from play. This needs testing, as I am afraid that the buildup of zombies will be very, very fast, and if the survivor player do not have a location to flee to quickly, the game might be over in just a few turns.
Talking about that, will we aim for a MTG style?, e.g. the game can be over in just a few turns, or a more drawn out game , like the old Startrek:TNG CCG was, where both players at least get a few chances to win the game?

? So far, I love the Walker factions, where a player can focus their deck around. We should stimulate this by creating synergies between cards from the same Walker factions:

Zombie factions are Rage, Horde, Contagion, and Sentient:

Rage:
These zombies are filled with rage and ferocious energy. As soon as they see survivors, they will run towards them with horrifying speed, and they will pursue them with recklessness and savage intensity.
Gameplay mechanics include being able to attack immediately, surprise attacks, self destruction for temporary or instant effects.
Faction color: Red

I see these Walkers as types that don?t need to TAP to move, or ready themselves at the end of a turn. They will have high strength, but low on life and probably easier to be slain than other Walkers. They wont have the option to not attack, they will be forced to, even though they will lose a battle.
(aggression)

Horde:
The true power of these zombies comes in their numbers. Horde zombies swarm and overwhelm survivors. They may not be the fastest zombies, but what's the point of running away from them, only to find out you are running toward more of them and you've been surrounded?
Gameplay mechanics include abilities to play a lot of zombies, zombies are more powerful when you have a lot of them, ways to draw lots of cards, and return discarded zombies back into play.
Faction color: Orange

I see these Walkers as types that can come into play anywhere and automatically brings other zombies from hand/discard/deck into play. they?ll have average strength and will be very hard to be slain.
(swarm, general)

Contagion:
All zombies are able to infect a survivor and thus turn them into a zombie, but Contagion zombies are blood-spitting, ichor-spewing, infection machines. Instead of killing survivors, why not just "recruit" them to fight for your side? There is no greater horror than to have a survivor have to face what used to be a family member or friend.
Gameplay mechanics include turning survivors into zombies, special abilities to use on ex-survivors who are now zombies, and damage over time effects.
Faction color: Green

I see these Walkers as types that infects survivors, or even locations (add penalties for being there). they sacrifice themselves to deal damage to a large group of survivors if they are able. Any infected survivor turned into a Walker will have a great benefit on them.
(poison, combo)

Sentient:
Not all zombies are completely unthinking forces of nature. Some posses a minimal level of sentience. Instead of trying to bash through a door with bare fists, these zombies might try turning the doorknob. This group includes zombies that have been altered by science, and non-human zombie creations (such as zombie dogs).
Gameplay mechanics include being able to use some (crude) items, being able to able to counter survivor strategies, and a lot of other weird science related effects.
Faction color: Purple

these are the impossible to slay Walker types. They will be able to pick up left behind items, to prevent your fleeing plans. some of them can even jump to a new location played instantly!
(control)

I highly urge each and every lurker and poster on this board to give you input. First thing to figure out will probably be a good resource system.

[xchokeholdx]

RESOURCE SYSTEM IDEAS

The final resource system will probably resolve around one type of resource, both used for your Survivor and Walker's side.

PROPOSAL # 1 (xchokeholdx):
I propose a system not based on Land or cards-played-face-down-resources, but a Token style resource called THREATS.

Each new Survivor played, each new location played, each item, each Action and condition played to help your survivors survive will add THREATS. these THREATS will be used by your opponent to play Walker cards. This system is similar to the LOTR:CCG style Shadow pool system, only that I propose that THREATS created this way will NOT go away at the end of a turn, and will be available for the Walkers until used.

Trevor will post his proposition on a resource system when it is ready.

Any ideas on new, working, balanced resource systems are welcome!

[BrotherM]

I have been following this thread and I defnitely like how this game is shaping up.  I'm not a huge zombie fan, so please bear with me

In MtG and many others, resources are a build-up mechanic.  Meaning, part of the game is increasing your supply of resources to be able to do bigger and better things.  However, zombie lore really works the opposite of that, especially with this game set up as a race to kill the survivors.  IMO, the survivors should start with more options, then quickly lose them as the game goes along.  So, I would suggest some sort of diminishing resource- kind of similar to V:TES.

I would suggest a system where each player starts with a fixed # of survivor resources- perhaps the starting # could be impacted by deck design?  Anyway, as the player uses the resources for survivors, they are then permanently converted into zombie resources (for the player, not his opponent, so different from LoTR.)

For example:
I start with 30 survivor resources and 0 zombie resources.  In the first turn, I summon a strong survivor for 3, then equip him with a gun for 2 more.  I now have 25 survivor resources and 5 zombie resources.

Once the survivor resources are used up, only zombie resources remain.  I think the zombie resources should be reusable.

I think this system will help create the atmosphere of escalating panic on the survivors side, as they have less and less resources available and the oppozing zombies get stronger and stronger.  Also, would provide some interesting options in game play- how long do I hold on to these survivor resources to be able to save my butt when the real tough zombies come out?  But keeping my resources as survivor side means my opponent isn't facing my toughest zombies.

This would definitely need some playtesting, but I think it might be a good fit with the other mechanics that have been determined so far.

One additional question for Trevor:  Have you considered multi-player for this game?  I think it could work great as either heads-up or multi-player.

[xchokeholdx]

BrotherM, that sounds awesome, and a really good way to give each survivor player the feeling of "losing the battle slowly" over time.

I thought about implementing it in deckdesign, but the problem is that it is easier to "cheat" that way, and deck-checking all decks before you want to sit down and play is a bit cumbersome to do...

What about implementing it on Location cards? Lets say a survivor player is forced to use (lets take a number here) 6 location cards. Each location cards is numbered 1-6, and will show each player how many resources he or she may spend each turn. Survivor players will start at location 1, and move (flee is a better word) during the course of a game to other locations to stay "ahead" of the horde of Walkers, following the numbers, 1.2.3.4.5.6.

for example:

The roof:
(1)
Survivors: 5
Walkers: 2

Sewer escape
(2)
Survivors: 4
Walkers: 3

Times Square
(5)
Survivors: 2
Walkers: 5

due to the (basic) difficulty of removing Walkers permanently from play, Walkers will slowly build up their force on one location. when a player decides to "flee" to a new location, Some (slow) Walkers are temporarily left behind on the old location, at the price of less resources to spend each turn for the Survivor player, while the Walker player increases the resources it may spend.

a simple table will do, but can be changed easily with the addition of gametext:

Location number   Resources Survivor   Resources Walkers  Gametext
1                        6                            1                         -
2                        5                            2                         -
3                        4                            3                         -
4                        3                            4                         -
5                        2                            5                         -
6                        1                            6                         -

And with sample gametext:

Location number   Resources Survivor   Resources Walkers  Gametext
1                        4                            1                       At start of turn, draw a card
2                        6                            2                       No Walker may be discard from play
3                        6                            2                       At start of turn, discard 1 Item or 1 Survivor
4                        2                            2                       All cards with cost 4 or more cost 3 to play
5                        1                            1                       Walkers attack twice each turn
6                        6                            6                        At the end of each turn, discard your hand.

Sample and broken of course...

any takers?

[Trevor]

I think location cards should be simple things, and not something as complicated as a path. LOTR used a path system, and it probably was the worst and clumsiest component of the LOTR CCG. I like the idea that a locations are simple things, that function like any item, except all locations have the active keyword "Stationary". So, when a player moves, they are discarded.

Forcing a movement path seems like it complicates things too much, and it will spread the other aspects of the game too thin.

I'm not exactly sure how movement should work, but it should be tied closely with the resources system. How I want the game work is this:
The power of the zombie side grows steadily, and WILL eventually overpower the survivors. The survivors can choose to flee, and they should need to eventually flee, and they choose when to flee. There should also be some mechanic in place that limits the amount they can flee, either an arbitrary amount (x fleeing per game or X fleeing every Y turns), or fleeing should be cost prohibitive such that fleeing too often would hurt you more than it helps you.
What fleeing does is somehow ebb the growing zombie horde such that the survivors aren't overwhelmed as quickly, but remember that the zombies will eventually overwhelm the survivors.

As far as what mechanics work to this end, I am not yet sure.

Regarding the system LOTR uses, LOTR is a survival CCG, but both good and evil sides of a deck had a shot at succeeding. People looked forward to playing the good side in LOTR. I think its cooler to dread playing the survivors. Every turn as the survivors should be a desperate fight to not die. Playing the zombies should be a fun attack, and if you don't quite finish them off this turn, you know you have a good chance of doing it next turn. Playing the zombies is care-free in the sense that you can't lose the game at that time, and you are guaranteed to at least make head-way.

[Trevor]

I have been following this thread and I defnitely like how this game is shaping up.  I'm not a huge zombie fan, so please bear with me

In MtG and many others, resources are a build-up mechanic.  Meaning, part of the game is increasing your supply of resources to be able to do bigger and better things.  However, zombie lore really works the opposite of that, especially with this game set up as a race to kill the survivors.  IMO, the survivors should start with more options, then quickly lose them as the game goes along.  So, I would suggest some sort of diminishing resource- kind of similar to V:TES.

I would suggest a system where each player starts with a fixed # of survivor resources- perhaps the starting # could be impacted by deck design?  Anyway, as the player uses the resources for survivors, they are then permanently converted into zombie resources (for the player, not his opponent, so different from LoTR.)

For example:
I start with 30 survivor resources and 0 zombie resources.  In the first turn, I summon a strong survivor for 3, then equip him with a gun for 2 more.  I now have 25 survivor resources and 5 zombie resources.

Once the survivor resources are used up, only zombie resources remain.  I think the zombie resources should be reusable.

I think this system will help create the atmosphere of escalating panic on the survivors side, as they have less and less resources available and the oppozing zombies get stronger and stronger.  Also, would provide some interesting options in game play- how long do I hold on to these survivor resources to be able to save my butt when the real tough zombies come out?  But keeping my resources as survivor side means my opponent isn't facing my toughest zombies.

This would definitely need some playtesting, but I think it might be a good fit with the other mechanics that have been determined so far.

I have been following this thread and I defnitely like how this game is shaping up.  I'm not a huge zombie fan, so please bear with me

In MtG and many others, resources are a build-up mechanic.  Meaning, part of the game is increasing your supply of resources to be able to do bigger and better things.  However, zombie lore really works the opposite of that, especially with this game set up as a race to kill the survivors.  IMO, the survivors should start with more options, then quickly lose them as the game goes along.  So, I would suggest some sort of diminishing resource- kind of similar to V:TES.

I would suggest a system where each player starts with a fixed # of survivor resources- perhaps the starting # could be impacted by deck design?  Anyway, as the player uses the resources for survivors, they are then permanently converted into zombie resources (for the player, not his opponent, so different from LoTR.)

For example:
I start with 30 survivor resources and 0 zombie resources.  In the first turn, I summon a strong survivor for 3, then equip him with a gun for 2 more.  I now have 25 survivor resources and 5 zombie resources.

Once the survivor resources are used up, only zombie resources remain.  I think the zombie resources should be reusable.

I think this system will help create the atmosphere of escalating panic on the survivors side, as they have less and less resources available and the oppozing zombies get stronger and stronger.  Also, would provide some interesting options in game play- how long do I hold on to these survivor resources to be able to save my butt when the real tough zombies come out?  But keeping my resources as survivor side means my opponent isn't facing my toughest zombies.

This would definitely need some playtesting, but I think it might be a good fit with the other mechanics that have been determined so far.

That is an interesting idea about dwindling options as the game goes on, but I think it is intrinsically flawed. As games progress, I don't think people should have fewer options. The idea of being more and more under-the-gun with more pressure is cool, but I think restricting what people have to work with is a bit too restrictive. I think you can get the feel of more and more pressure by having the zombies just grow faster than survivor resources.

One additional question for Trevor:  Have you considered multi-player for this game?  I think it could work great as either heads-up or multi-player.

This definitely should be a multiplayer game, though I haven't thought too much about the mechanics for that. I think multiplayer should work like every player controls his survivors, and they try to have each other player's survivors be killed. I considered having an option to have multiple players play as survivors, and one player play as zombies, but that doesn't mesh well with the 2 player concepts.

[xchokeholdx]

@Trevor.

Having location cards just as an "artistic" addition to a game, or just to have a visual picture present on table to assign cards to, is more or less the same reason I dislike Magic: You are "forced" to have them in your deck, but do very little gamewise. And drawing them late game is always a "sigh" on a player's face..

Location cards are VERY important to the survivor player. I think a split in benefits on location cards can do the trick:

ok,so a fixed "path" is not the way (pun not intended) to go. How about this:

Simple, but effective locations:

just 1 number and some game text.

the number is the amount of EXTRA resources the Zombie/Walker player gets when the survivors moves/flees from this location. the game text is mostly useful game text for the survivors, like:
? (3) When you flee from this location, take 1 stationary item from here back into your hand.
? (5) When you flee from here, Tap all zombies present.

This way, nothing dwindles down. the survivor player still get to use good game text on location cards, but at the same time, the amount of resources the Zombie/Walker player has increases a bit each time the player is forced to move/flee.

Locations ARE already tied to resources, if you include stationary items in the game. Each time you move, you are "paying" for it with cards you can?t take with you.

I think that with Zombie/Walker cards that are HARD to get rid of permanently, a "land" based resource system (e.g. where you play cards from hand and tap them each turn), can be tossed out of the window. A simple X resources each turn can do.

[BrotherM]

That is an interesting idea about dwindling options as the game goes on, but I think it is intrinsically flawed. As games progress, I don't think people should have fewer options. The idea of being more and more under-the-gun with more pressure is cool, but I think restricting what people have to work with is a bit too restrictive. I think you can get the feel of more and more pressure by having the zombies just grow faster than survivor resources.

One additional question for Trevor:  Have you considered multi-player for this game?  I think it could work great as either heads-up or multi-player.

This definitely should be a multiplayer game, though I haven't thought too much about the mechanics for that. I think multiplayer should work like every player controls his survivors, and they try to have each other player's survivors be killed. I considered having an option to have multiple players play as survivors, and one player play as zombies, but that doesn't mesh well with the 2 player concepts.

I admit, it is a system that presents some real difficulties.  I haven't tried playing with it at all or anything, and it may very well prove to be unfeasible.  It just seemed like a fairly original system that would work well with the theme and the mechanics you have already.  YMMV

I think there may still be something valuable in the concept, but that's really up to you.  Perhaps the resource split between survivors/zombies could be manipulated via cards- that should provide a pretty wide design space for cards.

I think you are right about multi-player.  I think the notion of several groups of survivors being chased around by the swarms of zombies is right in line with the genre, and it could be really really fun.

Good luck in your future work with this.

[Picks-at-Flies]

I suspect we're all going to come at this from a different angle.  This is an approximation of the rules I came up with.

Step 1:  Redraw to your hand size
presumably zombies have ways of reducing this;  maybe based on number of wounded survivors (ooh, ditch your wounded, get more cards!)

Step 2:  Repopulate zombies:  next zombie player puts 4 cards from his hand and/or top of deck face down at your current location.
Zombie cards can only be 'played' from these face down zombies.

Step 3:  Human actions
There is an action limit.  Either fixed, or increases with fewer survivors (so the lone survivor gets more actions but fewer options).  Some cards will require multiple actions.  The number of actions should be sufficiently low (about 2-4) so that even 4 zombies a turn is bad.
Automatic actions:  Any character can attack the zombies.  If Attack > Stamina, zombie dies, no retaliation. Only one zombie at a time can be killed this way, and this automatic action can only be taken once per turn.  If a generic zombie is killed, the current zombie player chooses which one.

Step 4:  Zombie actions
You may flip a number of Zombie cards equal to the number of human actions taken.  Zombie reactions can be flipped during the Human actions step, but only up to the number of human actions taken at that point.  Some zombie cards should require the discard of generic zombies.  Some will have abilities which take a zombie action.

Step 5.  Zombies attack
Add up the Attack of all the zombies at this location.  Subtract any human protection (normally from barricades).  The final amount is how much damage must be absorbed by discarding barricades, wounding humans and sacrificing wounded humans (the stamina of each deducting from the amount).  Humans sacrificed this way become zombies, the barricades are removed from the game.

---
Locations
My mind is sticking with a location deck.  Each player gets 10 locations (probably fixed).  They are largely blank, but might contain a number indicating how many barricades it can take.  Equipment, and some barricades, are tied to location type (bar, sports store etc).

Running requires a card action.  This lets there be multiple variants, each with different quirks.  Survivors cannot run to a location where there is another group of survivors.  By default, barricades and other human cards tied to the location (the tumble drier?) are discarded.

Whenever a human player runs, each other player finds their location card with the same name and puts any remaining zombies on it.  They become active whenever a human player runs to that location.  Yes, even your own zombies can hurt you.  However, there is only ever one zombie player at a time:  they cannot use the abilities on other players' zombies, but those zombies do add their values to the zombie attack.

Edit:  I should have re-read the thread ahead of time.  Some of the ideas here run quite differently to the original sequence you proposed.  However, this has been running round in my head, and I like the idea of the inevitable approach of the zombies rather than a giant battle sequence each round.  Also, this way, if you opt to take no actions as a human, you will never destroy any zombies.  As for a state of being "on the run", perhaps one of the locations types IS On The Run - which will lead to some very interesting decisions about playing zombies there.