|
|
|
|
Icons courtesy of komodomedia.com
Collectible Card Games are hard to develop on your own, simply because you have to make so many cards. Is there a way to implement a CCG-type dynamic using a standard deck (or two, or more) of playing cards?
|
|
|
|
Collectible Card Games are hard to develop on your own, simply because you have to make so many cards. Is there a way to implement a CCG-type dynamic using a standard deck (or two, or more) of playing cards?
CCG Standard Playing Cards
This parallels a design I'm working towards with custom cards.
Each suite is a faction within the game. Players designate their faction with their initial card play onto the table.
Thereafter a player may strengthen their faction by adding more of that suit, or may choose to create more diversity by adding other suits in support.
Attributes can be assigned for each suit.
Attributes can be assigned for card groupings within each suit.
Examples: Royal Cards have Power and Authority; 10 - 8 represent Politics and Religion; 7 - 5 wield Finance and Lore; 4 - 2 operate in Military and Craft. Aces amplify a cards ability and force factor and can be moved among the cards in play during action phases.
When played onto the table players must designate with which option each card will function. i.e. Finance or Lore.
Spades emphasize Authority and Craft; Hearts support Religion and Power; Clubs enhance Military and Lore; Diamonds denote Finance and Craft.
A heads/tails marker may be placed on a card to indicate it's alignment, or each card could be marked on its face in some binary fashion.
Example: King of Hearts - player chooses to use it for power which is enhanced by its suit.
Players may contend with each other within any of the eight areas as described in the card attributes. This may involve killing opponent cards, swapping cards with opponents, replacing opponents cards, stealing opponent cards, or even giving the opponent cards.
The active player designates his offensive cards, stipulating the attribute salient the contest will involve and then the opponent attempts to counter with their cards. Aces may be reallocated to support the operation and a straight comparison is made.
I imagine a general deal to all players of four to five cards (4 - 5) and each player selecting one card from the deal and passing the remainder to their left. This procedure continues until each player has four (4) cards to start the game.
A two-player game would only require a single deck of playing cards. I'd think for 3 - 4 players you'd want two (2) decks, and 5 or 6 players, three (3) decks.
Play starts with the first player drawing a card from the common deck and playing a single card to the table, declaring their primary suit. Thereafter all other cards of this suit have enhanced capacity for that player's use.
Players may not act against another player until they have two cards from each of the suit groups: Royals, Leaders, Managers, Workers.
I think with this model or a variation that standard playing cards could be used to create a lot of CCG scenarios.
Victory could be determined in any number of ways: capture of opponents 'key' card; amassing x number of cards/suit; or, reducing opponents cards to x or killing x cards.
Throw out questions. Run with it.
I took a stab at starting this
I pulled a number of the concepts above into something, which I have to get organized enough to actually post. Hopefully I can get my mind around enough to put it up this weekend. One problem we had in test playing was that (if we base the strength of a card on its numberic value), players could easily hoard the cards that could be used against them in their hand, effectively driving the game to stalemate. I'm not sure what sorts of mechanisms are commonly employed in card games to prevent this sort of behavior, while still allowing the level of choice made available by having several cards in your hand.
consistency for users
I think that the attribution based on heart, spade, etc. makes a lot of sense, but would have to be somewhat consistent across games within any set of users, so they should be broadly drawn and then supplemented with a spec sheet for each game. Sort of like the various versions of trivial pursuit, with the standard colors around each type of category. Otherwise trying to remember what hearts are for in this game versus that one would be too much.
Perhaps we need common "base rules" for a CCG?
I agree that rule consistency is vital if something this complex is to catch on. Maybe we can borrow a page from the various RPGs, where there are basic, common rules for how the world works, and then specialized rules for a given campaign? We'd need a basic list of the statistics/scores that can be accumulated, and basic rules for placing and manipulating the cards. Then the actual games themselves can be added as an additional layer, that defines starting scenarios, goals, special restrictions, etc.