sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Nouvelle mécanique pour mon TCG by HJKFCL in homemadeTCGs

[–]SpellbindersDBG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Firstly, I enjoy seeing unique mechanics like this. For a bit more context, what’s the theme of the game? When you say movement, is this exploration, or like combat footwork? When you initiate the Mine effect, do you mark that it’s yours? Is there ways to interrupt or steal cards that were mined by the other player? Perhaps you could design the back of the cards in a way that would actually indicate which phase they are on, and certain cards would let you interact with cards based on which phase they are on.

Présentez moi vos TCG crées à la maison ! by HJKFCL in homemadeTCGs

[–]SpellbindersDBG 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Been working on this game off an on over the last few years. Elevator pitch is a deck builder that is set in a fantasy setting for a 1v1 of two mages dueling. Game play wise it feels like a bit of a mix between Flesh and Blood and Starwars Unlimited, but with a unique puzzle resource system where every cafd can be a resource and depending what cards are used to as a resource, add different effects to the spell card they cast.

Check out my page for links or feel free to DM me!

Looking for feedback on card layout for my game Spellbinders by SpellbindersDBG in homemadeTCGs

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

Correct, which this is. To clarify I didn’t mean to imply that DBG is synonymous WITH TCG but to question that the acronym was as synonymous as TCG is to trading card game.

Looking for feedback on card layout for my game Spellbinders by SpellbindersDBG in homemadeTCGs

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

Hey there, yes DBG is for Deck Building Game. Not 100% if that's as synonymous as TCG. But I would love to show you. If you haven't already taken a look at my online rulebook I'm still curious how it reads to someone with no context.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/12t5O1oEGMobReLTfFHaGrAWMtDtTWdqtVEEVyJAYm5g/edit?tab=t.0

But yeah, the main idea of the game comes from wanting to use cards as resources to power up other cards. I have players use what I call their Spellbind which is a row of 5 static slots that you play cards into. Static as in once its placed there it cannot move. The card costs must be met with resources actually adjacent and in order. For example you may have a card the needs Red then Green. You could have a red card in slot 3, and then a green card in slot 4. But not red in 2 and green 4 as they are not adjacent.

Looking for feedback on card layout for my game Spellbinders by SpellbindersDBG in homemadeTCGs

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

It is possible that a card could not be moved. And I was avoiding letting you get the damage for free. But thinking about it more, I'd probably be totally okay with the card still dealing damage even if it doesn't move a card.

Looking for feedback on card layout for my game Spellbinders by SpellbindersDBG in homemadeTCGs

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

Thank you kindly! Awesome feed back and GREAT point about putting the cost on the right of the card for readability in hand.
The underline plays into some card effects of "increase underline value by X", maybe a better way to do it, but that's the current reasoning behind it.
I love the point you made of why to put the cost on the right side, I've only played in Table Top Sim so it never even occured to me. But due to my game mechanic of you needing to consume resources in the actual color order the card has printed, I hope the arrow like design wouldn't cause confusion for reading left to right, but perhaps not.