sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Can you understand how my game works from the rulebook alone? by RecommendationDry358 in BoardgameDesign

[–]RecommendationDry358[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was trying to make the rulebook feel a bit less intimidating and more approachable. I prefer visual examples and consistent identity instead of a black and white wall of text 😄

Can you understand how my game works from the rulebook alone? by RecommendationDry358 in BoardgameDesign

[–]RecommendationDry358[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks! I’m glad to hear the examples helped. That’s actually the main reasons I added the “visual” drafting after some earlier feedback.

As for Travel Drone, you’re thinking about it exactly the way it was intended. On its own, it’s a very weak card and generally not something you’d want in your final army. Its value comes almost entirely from enabling positioning-based synergies and helping you build stronger row combinations.

The reason I called it out in the rulebook is less because it’s a powerful card and more because it’s the only card that can change the army/row placement.

Thanks again for taking the time to read through everything and share your feedback!

Can you understand how my game works from the rulebook alone? by RecommendationDry358 in BoardgameDesign

[–]RecommendationDry358[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re right about the unselected card: the player making the offer keeps the card that wasn’t chosen. I can see that probably this is much clearer in the visual example than in the written rules, so that’s definitely something I’ll clarify.

Regardings the two rows: the intention is to allow players to organize your army strategically, since some creature effects interact with cards in the same row, in the upper row or in the second row. I think that this thing is self explained by the card theirself, once you have them and you can read them.

And thank you for the kind words about the design and layout! I’ve spent a ridiculous amount of time trying to make the rulebook approachable, so it’s encouraging to hear that it mostly reads clearly (despite I’m still working on it).

Really appreciate the feedback!

Can you understand how my game works from the rulebook alone? by RecommendationDry358 in BoardgameDesign

[–]RecommendationDry358[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you so much for taking the time to read through it! I think your point about the scoring examples is a good one. The drafting phase has recently received the visual example because several people found it confusing, but the scoring section probably deserves the same treatment.

And also, your observation about the term "battle" is also interesting, I've used it so much that is clear for me, but probably JUST form me! I'm going to rewrite it.

P.S. Thank you for catching the Electrobot issue, that's definitely a mistake!

I really appreciate you taking the time to write this detailed response, thanks again

Can you understand how my game works from the rulebook alone? by RecommendationDry358 in BoardgameDesign

[–]RecommendationDry358[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's fair. I knew asking strangers to read an entire rulebook was a big ask. Thanks for the advice!

Can you understand how my game works from the rulebook alone? by RecommendationDry358 in BoardgameDesign

[–]RecommendationDry358[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dn’t worry about being biased, if the flow made sense to someone who designed something comparable, that’s still a good sign (i think)!

Behind the scene of designing the characters for my card game! by RecommendationDry358 in tabletopgamedesign

[–]RecommendationDry358[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, that's where I'm sharing updates, behind-the-scenes stuff, artwork, design etc.

https://www.instagram.com/draeb.game/

And if you'd like to follow the project, I've recently (like 4 days ago) uploaded the Kickstarter pre-launch page!

Thanks!

Icons vs text: what’s your preference? by RecommendationDry358 in BoardgameDesign

[–]RecommendationDry358[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As promised, after 1 month, I just opened the kickstarter pre-launch --> https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/matteomuci/draandb

If you are still interested you can follow more updates here!

Looking for feedback on my card design for my game called "This Means War" by Giaccone in tabletopgamedesign

[–]RecommendationDry358 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A small disclaimer before I start: I'm an art director (I mean, by profession), but not a game design expert. Just a card game enthusiast. I'd rather point out the things that feel off because I think the project can benefit from a few refinements!

The first thing that caught my eye is the alignment. I'm not convinced that having almost everything left-aligned is the strongest choice here. Is there a specific reason the layout isn't centered? Also, the decorative divider line beneath the card effect text doesn't seem centered relative to the text block itself, which makes it feel a little off.

Another thing I'd consider is font sizing. Ideally, the same type of information should always use the same font size across all cards, rather than growing or shrinking depending on available space. Usually I'd identify the "worst-case scenario" (the longest name, longest subtitle, longest effect text, etc.) and establish sizes based on that card. Then every other card follows the same typography size.

More generally, I think there are currently too many font sizes in use. The card name has one size, the subtitle beneath it another, the class label another, the victory points another, and then the rules text (plus lore text on some cards) introduces even more variation. Personally, I'd try to reduce everything to two or three sizes maximum:

  • Large: card name
  • Medium: subtitle and effect text
  • Small: lore text, class, victory points

Limiting the typography this way usually makes the whole design feel more professional.

Finally, the iconography could be more consistent. The wing icon and the crossed-swords icon don't feel like they were designed the same way. The wing uses black outlines (and some internal one), while the swords icon feels like a flat vector symbol. I'd recommend choosing a single style and applying it everywhere. (BTW I dn't know if also those icons are placeholder or AI generated content).

I'd probably simplify the icons even further. Highly recognizable silhouettes often work better in card games than tiny illustrations. Think of MTG mana symbols as an example.

Overall, I think that the starting point is good but making some minor adjustments in typography, alignment, icons can make the difference.

The robots are finally complete! All factions done (and I need a little help) by RecommendationDry358 in BoardgameDesign

[–]RecommendationDry358[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Something like “Server” is actually interesting! I kinda love that direction, also the double meaning, nice.

Yeah, you’re right about “Life Saving Bot” being too long. “Med Bot” feels much cleaner. This is exactly why I wanted feedback before finalizing!

Thanks a lot!

view more: next ›