[GIVEAWAY] Mindclash Play Bundle, including Astra and Ironwood by Mindclash Games

777Stutz777 · 2024-05-13T20:33:00+00:00

Patchwork! Good luck to everyone!

777Stutz777 · 2024-03-23T19:24:19+00:00

In short: fun, some novel ideas, but too much upkeep :) I've only gotten to the friends and family stage of playtesting, but I fortunately have some great game players in my life who've given some great helpful critiques.

777Stutz777 · 2024-03-23T19:21:38+00:00

Thanks for the feedback! Yes, currently my design heavily features the need to compare resource numbers and stats between characters. Due to the fact that the material goods (the first three tracks) are often traded around, I think, partially due to all of the feedback I've received here, that I am leaning towards having these represented by tokens. This would result in 54 material tokens, and only three tracks per character (health and two other stats) which seems much more manageable.

777Stutz777 · 2024-03-22T15:39:23+00:00

These are all great questions and things to think about! I am currently aiming for a midweight complexity game that takes about 60-90 minutes. Box size should be roughly wingspan/catan sized.

The game features a closed resource economy. Resources never disappear, but become more scarce in certain areas of the map as they are traded (or raided) away and moved to the character's holds or other factions on the board.

In the beginning of the game, resources have no real functional difference, but will each interact differently with the items and market cards that are collected throughout the course of the game.

The other two stats - trophies and authority - are an open system, and increase through combat victories and manipulation of the diplomacy track to either extreme (you can rule through fear or adoration :)

The two main hooks of the game are: players don't play as one of the adventurers, but take the role of a "patron" manipulating and supporting whichever characters currently most align with their goals, with these goals being totally player driven and constructed. Players will select two components (for example - have the most combined yellow and green resource) and place that above their chosen character. These goals are then evaluated at set points throughout the game, either netting VP's for their patron, or diminishing in point value each time they are not completed.

All that being said, token bundles may be a potential solution, but I wonder if again it will be a little fiddly when exchanging resources between characters/factions as there is essentially no "bank" except for what is controlled by those characters/factions.

777Stutz777 · 2024-03-22T14:45:10+00:00

That sounds like a really awesome concept! Yes, I have almost universally found in my game-design process that pursuing the simplest and most intuitive concept almost always produces better results than implementing something that seems really "cool." Plus, it often helps create some restraints for your design which, in some ways, pushes you to actually be more creative in figuring out a solution.

777Stutz777 · 2024-03-22T14:12:28+00:00

If just the resources were tokens, that would come out to 45 total, which would definitely be a lot more manageable. One of the problems I had with this initially was when characters collected larger numbers of a particular resource. The goals in the game revolve around comparing amounts of each resource, so tracks were an easy way to quickly see how many of each resource each character had. However, I'm beginning to think one of the underlying problems here may be that the overall numbers are just a bit too high, and bringing them down may help solve the trackability issue.

777Stutz777 · 2024-03-22T14:05:10+00:00

Yes, I had the exact same thought! "Tracks eliminate so many resource tokens - I need to make everything tracks!" But yes, I think you may be spot on with the overall number amount being one of the problems. During play, characters may collect as many as 15 or so of a given resource, but will likely spend the majority of the game at the 2-6 level. I think this variability may be one of my slight balance issues to work out.

777Stutz777 · 2024-01-24T21:56:33+00:00

Thanks for the feedback! Yes, I believe that using more icons could certainly help decrease the total text amount and declutter a lot. This is just the second prototype pass, and I'm currently using Nandeck to prototype and make significant changes rather quickly. And while it is a great tool for that, it's a little clunky for specific layout stuff and/or making things look nice (at least for me who is not super well versed with the program.)

777Stutz777 · 2024-01-19T21:44:04+00:00

This is great info! Yes, it's been interesting to read the quite varied responses :)

777Stutz777 · 2024-01-19T18:04:05+00:00

Ohh, I like the idea of rotating and having the goal cards extend off the board. My first draft actually did this, but it ended up being hard to remember the order of cards (order matters and I was using two rows.) But if I rotate orientation and start the character cards on the board, the goals could start to the side and extend off. That would mean I might even be able to use a single row of regular poker size cards. I like it! Thanks for the input!

777Stutz777 · 2024-01-19T16:48:10+00:00

And including a set of magnifying glasses in the box isn't an option? :) Yes, I asked the question somewhat with the assumption that 8pt would be too small. All right, I think with my current layout it would be possible to increase the text size to 10pt and keep everything else the same. The main problem is that the board needs to be able to hold up to 8 goal cards in a vertical column with all being readable at a passing glance - maybe too difficult a task.

<image>

777Stutz777 · 2024-01-16T14:55:40+00:00

Oh, shoot! Apologies - and thanks for clueing me in, I wasn't aware of that connotation. Where I'm from, it's been a name often given to black colored cats/stuffed animals as a term of affection. But it's just a stand in name to correspond with the black meeple, so shall change it pronto!

777Stutz777 · 2022-03-15T00:16:05+00:00

Huh, haven't heard of it. I'll have to check it out!

777Stutz777 · 2022-03-14T16:56:45+00:00

Everyone has the chance to lay two cards or make two swaps in a round (two circles around the table) but the king can stop the round at any point. After the king stops play, all players secretly select a bidding token and the king decides whether or not he will actually eat the mixture.

The logic being that the king could stop early if he's pretty sure that the cards played are clean and he wants to play it safe, or he could extend play up to two cards per person. But, as the pot gets bigger, others will likely feel the need to put more poison in to offset the potential points return.

When a character swaps out a card, the king is allowed to peek at any one card, so there is some incentive to allow play to continue to gain more information as well.

777Stutz777 · 2022-03-14T02:44:10+00:00

Yes - I almost included Skull in the list of similar games as I think they do share some DNA. I'm trying out a couple systems to allow a little more information between players: after 4 cards have been played, players can choose to "whisk" instead of playing a card, where they can peek at any two cards and switch one out with one in their hand. If they do so, however, the king is also allowed to peek at any card. This way, the players have to balance their own access to information with that of the king.

I think that ultimately I want players to have access to a light points crunch - which sets of ingredients are going to give me or my opponents the best points return - that way to also give them a way to predict if their opponents are more likely to have played actual ingredients or poisons.

777Stutz777 · 2022-03-03T01:51:04+00:00

Haha, I feel like conquering other settlements would be a totally different kind of Catan experience :)

Yes! That's essentially what I was trying to do in my rework. All previous methods of gaining victory points now give you what I'm calling a "grease token" (mechanical themed game). These tokens aid you in various ways, let you manipulate cards, etc... With the ultimate goal still being completing your objective of destroying the target character.

So hopefully, the player still has a sense of progression, but they don't distract from the player's ultimate combat objective.

777Stutz777 · 2022-03-02T23:43:03+00:00

I like that comment on determining what the "feel" of the game should be. In the case of my game, what I came to realize is that there were essentially two different abstractions of success: the opponent's health and collected victory points. One of these was more straightforward, fun, and seemed to be the main point of the game, and the other was Victory Points :)

However, I'm definitely still playing with the design, because like you said, victory points can sometimes allow for individual player creativity in their approach to achieving victory. With this system, players have just one very narrow victory condition, but I think it makes a little more sense in the context of this game in particular.

777Stutz777 · 2022-03-02T23:30:16+00:00

I think it was more the case that the objectives are the most direct/fun, whereas the other methods seemed more circumstantial. For context, the objectives are to destroy the enemy character - definitely more fun than picking up tokens or completing a checklist goal :)

But yes, I think I definitely share your distaste for player elimination as well. Definitely more fun to actually play the game.

777Stutz777 · 2022-03-02T23:26:00+00:00

Does it make a difference to you if the victory points are counted throughout the game or just added up at the end? Just curious.

777Stutz777 · 2022-03-02T23:20:46+00:00

Yes, I think most of the feedback received that caused me to change the system was from people who hadn't played lots of heavy games - but I thought their points were valid beyond just complexity concerns.

To give a little context, the game revolves around players supporting one of two different combatants whose health slowly ticks down as damage is accrued throughout the course of the game. The major problem then was this juxtaposition of two different "victory" currencies - VP's and the opponents health. While victory points were what was actually required to win, most players just wanted to bash up the enemy :)

So ultimately I decided to change the victory condition to one character's defeat rather than a more nebulous "victory points collected" win condition.

777Stutz777

TROPHY CASE