I am currently testing my abilities at making a Trading Card Game, somewhat alike Yu-Gi-OH and Magic : The Gathering. Well, at least that's how it started! I'm now seriously considering finishing it and turning it into a fully-playable, published game! Now I've come across a few Design queries, and what the opinions of you avid gamers, and game creators!
At the moment there are three types of card - Monsters, Offensive Magic, Defensive Magic. Monsters are played onto the field, and used to destroy the opponents monsters so that you can hit the opponent, or used to defend you from the opponents monsters. Offensive Magic affect the Strength, Defence, or Health of Opponent's Monsters, and Defensive affect Strength, Defence and Health of your own.
Now all Magic and Monster Cards have their own "element" - Red, Blue, Green, Yellow, White, Gray, Black - which each have an advantage on one other, and a disadvatange to one other (exc. Grey)
My query is this; is it too much to then give Monsters a TYPE as well? For example, a WARRIOR type creature has an advantage of PLANT types, but a disadvantage to MAGE types? Along with elements, players would have to choose which monster to play taking both elements, and Type, into account.
Is this maybe too much? Would players get fed up with having to work out all of the advantages and disadvantages, or would it just make the game more interesting and challenging? If you would do something I have talked about differently, please tell me all suggestions!
~Ease~
ID:153181
 Oct 30 2004, 1:57 pm
|
|
Don't. I don't think any one card should have any advantage over any other card -- except in the way they work. I.E. elemental attacks, status ailments, and of course, TYPE ADVANTAGES.
Now, Magic: The Gathering has a good system. Said cards do have type advantages, but only what is printed on the card, not what is in the rulebook. There are some goblins (Goblin king) that gain advantages for every goblin on the field, in his case, +1/+1 for every gobby that is in play. Just keep it simple, and make a small rulebook, but allow cards to bend, break, and add to the rules. | |
I don't understand why a warrior type would have an advantage over plant and a disadvantage to mage anyway even if you did use that system. Some plants grow strong and have tough bark (trees) or are otherwise resilient to attack, which means many plants might actually be resistent to a warrior; and mages are usually frail compared to physical warriors and fall quite easily when the warrior hits.
If you want another tier of strengths and weaknesses to use, make an in-game excuse as to why one group of creatures has a disadvantage to another. For example, perhaps mages hate warriors for their all-brawns approach and also for the fact that warriors can take them down so easy if they aren't being careful; so maybe those wizards train specifically against warriors to give themselves even more power against them. There is an in-game excuse as to why a mage might have an advantage over a warrior, but other than that a mage would have no such advantage. | |
Ease wrote:
I am currently testing my abilities at making a Trading Card Game, somewhat alike Yu-Gi-OH and Magic : The Gathering. Well, at least that's how it started! I'm now seriously considering finishing it and turning it into a fully-playable, published game! Now I've come across a few Design queries, and what the opinions of you avid gamers, and game creators! As mentioned before, some would like it and some would not. The players who prefer complicated strategy and hard thinking would prefer it that way, but others who don't want to much strategy would prefer it the simpler way. In other words, it'd probably be best to do it the less complicated way. Chance | |
It sure adds to the strategical part of the game, which is a good thing.