Difference between revisions of "Talk:Magic Numbers"

From Dvorak - A Blank-Card Game
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
Line 15: Line 15:
:Any idea regarding quantities of various numbers?  Like, are you looking for five cards of each number 1-4, four of each 5-8, up to one of each 16-20?  Or split evenly, four of each 1-15?  Or whatever happens to be handy? Also, what happens if someone can't play a Thing? --[[User:Jtwe|Jtwe]] 19:45, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
:Any idea regarding quantities of various numbers?  Like, are you looking for five cards of each number 1-4, four of each 5-8, up to one of each 16-20?  Or split evenly, four of each 1-15?  Or whatever happens to be handy? Also, what happens if someone can't play a Thing? --[[User:Jtwe|Jtwe]] 19:45, 29 September 2010 (UTC)


::RE: How many of each?  I think, ideally, keeping the big-number "swingy" cards to around 10% is key (pretty much anything 10-15 pts. would be what I consider big swing cards).  Versus a straight 10% for the lower point cards, I'd want to go heavier on lower-point, higher utility cards-- 1's and 2's that fit a number of strategies and that would ideally make the bulk of the deck.  A distribution of 60% 1-5 points, 15% 6-10, 10% 10+, and 5% weirdoes like big powerful 0-pointers, negatives, etc. would do nicely.  That's 100% a guess too, and flexible.  As far as Thing-screwage, I was always a fan of the mulligan rule a lot of MTG players use: if your opening hand was land/mana-source-free (and land/mana sources being needed to play most other cards), you could reshuffle and draw 6 (vs. the typical 7) cards.  It's easy to enforce, it's concrete and it's reasonably well-known.  Later in the game...dunno.  What do some of the other Dvorak designs do with it?  I'd be happy to take inspiration or outright-theif one of those ideas...


::RE: How many of each?  I think, ideally, keeping the big-number "swingy" cards to around 10% is key (pretty much anything 10-15 pts. would be what I consider big swing cards).  Versus a straight 10% for the lower point cards, I'd want to go heavier on lower-point, higher utility cards-- 1's and 2's that fit a number of strategies and that would ideally make the bulk of the deck.  A distribution of 60% 1-5 points, 15% 6-10, 10% 10+, and 5% weirdoes like big powerful 0-pointers, negatives, etc. would do nicely.  That's 100% a guess too, and flexible.  As far as Thing-screwage, I was always a fan of the mulligan rule a lot of MTG players use: if your opening hand was land/mana-source-free (and land/mana sources being needed to play most other cards), you could reshuffle and draw 6 (vs. the typical 7) cards.  It's easy to enforce, it's concrete and it's reasonably well-known.  Later in the game...dunno.  What do some of the other Dvorak designs do with it?  I'd be happy to take inspiration or outright-theif one of those ideas...
---PRELIMINARY CARDS (8 of 'em) are up and similarly up for discussion.

Latest revision as of 03:42, 3 October 2010

Talk Page: Magic Numbers

Welcome one and all. Looking for any interesting ideas for cards as I round out the first run of the game. All submissions welcome; but a few ground rules.

1) Keep it whole number real integers. Right out are things like natural log/Euler's number, weird constants, and anything higher than basic arithmatic for now. Save that stuff for expansions :-D

2) Target deck size is 100-150 cards, split evenly on Actions/Things. Anything over that might make it into further editions, so don't let that discourage you.

3) I do have a little trump to pull; as lead designer, I make the final cut. But if there's a card people really like or really hate, LMK.

4) Keep it reasonably clean. "69" is bound to come up here...it's a game about numbers. But let's keep it to a 15-20-point max, PG-13 rating. Ask yourself "If I was playing this with my mom/dad/sister/grandmother etc. would I be embarrassed to play this card?"

5) All card titles MUST have a number, number concept, number-related figure of speech, etc. in them.

Any idea regarding quantities of various numbers? Like, are you looking for five cards of each number 1-4, four of each 5-8, up to one of each 16-20? Or split evenly, four of each 1-15? Or whatever happens to be handy? Also, what happens if someone can't play a Thing? --Jtwe 19:45, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
RE: How many of each? I think, ideally, keeping the big-number "swingy" cards to around 10% is key (pretty much anything 10-15 pts. would be what I consider big swing cards). Versus a straight 10% for the lower point cards, I'd want to go heavier on lower-point, higher utility cards-- 1's and 2's that fit a number of strategies and that would ideally make the bulk of the deck. A distribution of 60% 1-5 points, 15% 6-10, 10% 10+, and 5% weirdoes like big powerful 0-pointers, negatives, etc. would do nicely. That's 100% a guess too, and flexible. As far as Thing-screwage, I was always a fan of the mulligan rule a lot of MTG players use: if your opening hand was land/mana-source-free (and land/mana sources being needed to play most other cards), you could reshuffle and draw 6 (vs. the typical 7) cards. It's easy to enforce, it's concrete and it's reasonably well-known. Later in the game...dunno. What do some of the other Dvorak designs do with it? I'd be happy to take inspiration or outright-theif one of those ideas...

---PRELIMINARY CARDS (8 of 'em) are up and similarly up for discussion.