maka 1256479461|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Dueling Runes
3 runes, so it may be played with two cards…
Recent Forum Posts
You can subscribe to an RSS feed for this page
maka 1256479461|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Dueling Runes
pmagnus 1256477111|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Dueling Runes
Does Magic Mirror always require three cards? or can it be played with two cards, provided they have all three of the required runes?
maka 1256427416|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Dueling Runes
We played a couple of hands today. I've made a couple of modifications to the rules.
- Counter Spell and Magic Mirror are cast directly from your hand and at any time during the turn (as a reaction to another wizard casting a spell).
- When players draw cards, they don't draw to replenish their hand, but instead redraw up to 2 cards (never exceeding the maximum 5).
This way, a player that casts Magic Mirror, will be left with a smaller hand next turn. I think this is a nice penalty for such a strong spell…
maka 1256386343|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Dueling Runes
As I think more about the changes to Counter Spell and the addition of Magic Mirror, I realize it's more a mess than anything else… :(
I still want to try these changes, but Counter Spell suddenly seems a bit too easy to cast. Also, what's the point of casting a powerful offensive spell if you can see your opponent has a a counterspell or magic mirror ready for use?
So, I'm thinking one solution to the whole problem is that Counter Spell and Magic Mirror are casted from your hand instead of from your spell sequence. This way you're not sure if your opponent will be able to stop your attacks and the player using them is basically hurting his future choices…
Another idea is to force players to choose their spells for the turn secretly (maybe by giving each player a card with the spell table where they put one or two tokens before revealing their card for the turn. The problem is that this adds a new component to the game…
I'll try to give all this options a go soon…
maka 1256339428|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Dueling Runes
I think for now I'm leaning more towards making magic mirror and counter spell "responses" to spells being cast on you. This may solve the problem without having to add more special rules. I want to try all the options before making a decision though…
Forcing a player to cast the most powerful spell removes some of the options a player has, and it doesn't seem logical to force a player to cast a spell that won't have any effect on the target… at least if you have lots of suns and your target has resist fire, you have the option to cast a hit or an ice bolt, even if those would do less damage…
pmagnus 1256329943|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Dueling Runes
I was responding to a thread on BoardgameGeek, but concluded that the discussion probably belongs over here on the wiki.
I guess the only solution is to force players to cast a spell… or maybe make counter spell and magic mirror special spells that aren't declared normally.
If you go the route of requiring a player to cast, then the opponent can still opt to use their Wyrm for a Hit rather than for a Fire Ball. A Hit isn't even a spell, so maybe it even cuts through a Magic Mirror.
You could avoid that problem by requiring players to use their Wyrm for the most powerful spell they could cast. That would create the odd situation (for example) in which you'd be forced to play a big fireball because you have lots of Sun runes at a time when your opponent has Resist Fire up and so will take no damage. I guess that would make Resist Fire more powerful, though.
maka 1256292355|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Dueling Runes
I decided to add a new spell to the basic game: Magic Mirror. It reflects a spell back at the caster. I changed Counter Spell so it's easier to cast (only needs one activation rune + one other activation rune as energy) and Magic Mirror needs all three runes (one as activation, the other two as energy).
I think Magic Mirror is great if you don't have many wyrms in your hand because you can use a wyrm in your Spell Sequence to damage your opponent as long as you have a moon and a knot available. It also makes attacking more risky, so a player having many wyrms doesn't have such a big advantage.
I also decided to simplify Resist Heat and Resist Cold because as they are always cast before any offensive spells, they should be able to stop them. Of course, this means that the current turn when they're played counts as one of the turns of the spell (you have to remove a token at the end of the current turn, unlike in spells like Invisivility or Haste that take effect next turn).
Feedback is welcomed
maka 1254007422|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Dueling Runes
Tonight we played a couple of games of Dueling Runes with the basic spell table. The first game was over quickly when thanks to a haste spell and a lucky initial hand full of wyrms I managed to fry my opponent pretty quickly.
Then I thought that the game would be more interesting if it was longer, because you'd need more than a lucky start to finish your opponent, and the possibility of a recovery from initial attacks would be much higher. So we played a second game, this time with 12 HP.
This second game was much more interesting because we both had time to develop different strategies. I tried invisibility and some ice bolts while my gf threw some fire balls at me. It was all pretty balanced but then with 2 hastes in a row, she basically became accelerated for the rest of the game. I tried to heal and resist while launching the occasional ice bolt, but she was healing and throwing fire balls at me, one after the other. Then, with just 1 HP left I managed to make her forget all her runes (a three leaves amnesia spell) and I was hoping to play a big drain spell next, but she played a wyrm that even without any runes was enough to end the game with my defeat.
One thing that I didn't anticipate when writing the rules and happened tonight was that my amnesia spell was triggered before my gf was able to activate another Knot spell, but as I turned that card face down, her activation was canceled. It seemed the most logical thing to do, but I'll add a note in the rules just in case…
pmagnus 1253117419|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Chicane
After playtesting: The first change helps a lot. The second is unnecessary.
maka 1248634305|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Dueling Runes
Actually, now that I think about it, I'm not so sure… First, it might make the round too long (too many HPs per player) and the Haste spell, as you pointed out, breaks… Also, the actual gameplay doesn't really change much from the regular rules, so I'm not sure the change is justified…
In principle I did like the idea of your hand of cards being your HPs, because it does limit your options as you get hurt, but in practice, it doesn't work that well… I'd like to find a system more like that one, but without the drawbacks :D
pmagnus 1248549599|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Dueling Runes
I haven't tried it yet.
It occurs to me, though, that it makes Haste a kind of suicide. Haste might need to be changed a bit or replaced with a different spell.
maka 1248544984|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Dueling Runes
I tried the first one, but found it limited the options of a player too fast. I actually really like your other idea, and will try to give it a go soon. Did you try it?
Thanks!!
pmagnus 1248542247|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Dueling Runes
Jorge: I am not sure which cards as HP idea you tried (and rejected). Is it that a player discarded cards from their hand as they took damage?
Here's another possibility: Divide the deck in half at the beginning of the game. Each half-deck is a draw pile for a separate player. When you take damage, discard the top card from your draw pile. First player to exhaust their draw pile loses.
pmagnus 1247506199|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion The Decktet / Game Design » trick-taking games
I don't get as much of a chance to playtest the trick-taking games as I'd like, but I've been thinking about some possible rules changes. I have a post about possibilities for Chicane over in the game's forum, but I've also been thinking about Ace Trump.
Ace Trump was one of the first two games I invented for the Decktet, but I ultimately grew unhappy with it. The crosscutting suits made it very hard to tell how good your cards were, even ignoring trump. Knowing how good 8s or 9s are requires counting cards for almost every suit, which is just too much. If I lead a 9, for example, then there are two Crowns (one for each suit) that can beat it. An 8 can be topped by one or two 9s and two Crowns.
Moreover, it is possible for there to be ties. If someone leads a number card, two later players can follow suit with higher cards or the same rank - two Crowns, for example. So there had to be a rule for resolving ties, and I never found an elegant solution.
Recently, I played the game Xactika, which inspired this possibility: When a player leads a card, they pick one of its suits. Subsequent players must follow that specific suit if they can. The high card that follows suit wins (assuming no trumps are played). Trumps work as per Ace Trump, so it may still be possible to follow suit and trump in.
This makes 8s and 9s better. If I play a 9 (the Diplomat, say) I can call Moons and so there is only one Crown that can play over it.
This eliminates ties. Only one card at each rank can follow suit. (Except if Pawns or Courts are included, but I don't mind if the extended deck requires new rules.)
Any feedback would be welcome.
pmagnus 1247167479|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Chicane
The game is playable with the current rules, but bidding seems too dangerous. Here are two rules that would make bidding more attractive:
1. If the high bidder takes more tricks than they bid, they score their bid minus one for each overtrick. (This combines with the existing rules. A bidder who takes fewer tricks than they bid scores zero points. A bidder who takes exactly the number of tricks that they bid scores their bid plus a bonus of three.)
2. In a Bottom hand, Aces are considered high and Crowns are considered low. Number cards retain their usual order. So the order of cards in a Bottom hand would be: Crown,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,Ace (In a Top hand, Aces are low and Crowns are high.)
The first rule makes bidding a bit less risky by adding a margin for error. The second rule makes controlling the bid matter more, by increasing the difference between Top and Bottom hands.
Both of these rules need more playtesting. Feedback is welcome.
pmagnus 1243802578|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Biscuit
Can you draw a card even when you have one in your hand that you can play?
No.
At least, that's how I've played it. This means that you can be forced to play a card that will let your opponent go out, but it keeps things simple.
You are welcome to say yes and allow drawing at any time if you prefer, but it will make for a somewhat longer game.
(EDIT to add explanation)
noursy 1243802141|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Biscuit
Can you draw a card even when you have one in your hand that you can play?
pmagnus 1242702366|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Thricewise
Last weekend was the Spring Spielbany, and I tried out a new version of the game. Success! I've updated the rules here. Also, I've renamed the game.
With three possible ways to score (flushes, sets, and straights) there is some intense pattern matching involved. One player compared it to the game Set.
pmagnus 1241996459|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Moving Day
When you roll a 3 and have to add the ranks of the figures, do the crowns count as 10 or 0?
Crowns count as 10.
And additionally, if you roll an 1 and a 2, do you make a check for both items 1 and 2?
Check both.
noursy 1241984812|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
in discussion Special / Per page discussions » Moving Day
When you roll a 3 and have to add the ranks of the figures, do the crowns count as 10 or 0?
And additionally, if you roll an 1 and a 2, do you make a check for both items 1 and 2?
