file Old design choices that proved to be non-optimal

17 Apr 2019 08:30 #94536 by Lech
Looking over another multiple-master-phase deck i figured out that it's about time to start a debate about design choices that were good but not best.

First candidate: Master phase.
IMO, if the game would be redone, there would be only three phases:

Unlock
Minion
Influence

And most cards would be played in Minion phase (including current master cards), reasoning is, in many cases cards would be better balanced. Also, there are many cases where players draw master cards too late and are denied master card power spike, or they draw too many master cards and are stuck with it.
Moreover, there would still be possibility to apply (at the start of minion phase) or (at the end of minion phase) on those neo-master cards, if it's suitable. There could be increased limit on master cards out-of-the box to two, and power adjusted.

Second candidate: Actions

The most glaring problem nobody will agree with me about is that actions have only two outcomes: full success and failure. It's quite ok for most cases but the action that suffer the most about no partial success is bleed and stealth modifiers. If the game would be redone, there could be place for partial success (just 1 stealth over intercept, as opposed to full success with 2+ stealth over intercept or no block attempts), which would decrease benefits from successful actions (especially bleed actions, and :obf: modifiers would not give plain stealth but some kind of stealth that increase partial success range).

Third candidate: No vanishing returns from single discipline

Prime candidate here is mono-discipline (insert: combat, +bleed, +stealth, +vote). As the game is constructed, it's most of time better to go mono/duo-discipline than decrease crypt quality for triple+-discipline crypt, as you can stack a lot of similar effects with just single discipline. As game progressed, the amount of different action modifiers for say auspex/obfuscate increased and you can mix/match them for very good +stealth/intercept package. There were not a lot of lost in crowds/into thin air look-a-like cards which is real shame.

When it comes to combat, prime offender here (design wise, not balance wise) is animalism with it's carrion crowds that have "A vampire can play only one Carrion Crows each combat." The game would be better if it would get a generic trait (animal summon) and text "A vampire can play only one animal summon each combat.", opening more design space for similar cards that wouldn't stack with it (it should also be killable retainer, but it's another story). Similar case would be with Torn Signpost-like cards an "blood buff" trait.

:laso: :CEL: :DOM: :OBT: :POT: :cap8:
Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Apr 2019 09:28 #94538 by LivesByProxy
I like the idea of having 'partial success' or greater rewards for succeeding with more stealth. It doesn't even have to be 2+ stealth for full success, or just 1 for partial, it can be done on a card-by-card basis. For example, one card could reward succeeding by 4+ stealth, and even let you contribute stealth-modifiers (even if not needed) to reach that 'full success'.

I also think the game and deck-building should be based on using a variety of Disciplines. Unfortunately, the current card designs suffer from 1) the grouping rule limiting crypt options; 2) partly because of the grouping rule, every new group needs a core bunch of vampires with the same Discipline spreads - inferior out-of-clan disciplines are generally not very useful, and creative and interesting Discipline spreads are rare; 3) the Library cards requiring Disciplines don't ask for particular spreads - most are mono-Discipline, and the few that are dual-discipline follow the "[inferior][inferior] OR [superior][superior]" model. There are no Library cards requiring three Disciplines, or others following the Elemental Stoicism model.

About the phases: I was thinking about how the game could be redone in a way that necessitated less beads, and the solution I came up with was changing the phases and separating age from capacity. Basically, have two phases: Master & Minion. You can take them in either order. During your Master Phase, you get Influence Points to spend. You spend these playing cards, activating effects, and untapping them.

_________
But none of this or that matters, because the game won't change. It won't get a reboot or update or patches or sweeping errata.

:gang: :CEL: :FOR: :PRO: :cap6: Gangrel. Noddist. Camarilla. Once each turn, LivesByProxy may burn 1 blood to lose Protean :PRO: until the end of the turn and gain your choice of superior Auspex :AUS:, Obfuscate :OBF:, or Potence :POT: for the current action.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Apr 2019 13:56 - 17 Apr 2019 13:56 #94543 by Ankha
How do you express "partial success" when doing an action such as : burn a location?

Also, it's weird to simplify the phases to reduce them to 3, and then suggest a change that overcomplicates action resolution which is already complex.

Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
Last edit: 17 Apr 2019 13:56 by Ankha.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Apr 2019 15:22 #94546 by Mewcat
Wait, there were mistakes in a game that failed 3 times? Or was it 4? So hard to keep track.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Apr 2019 15:44 - 17 Apr 2019 15:58 #94547 by Lech

Ankha wrote: How do you express "partial success" when doing an action such as : burn a location?

Also, it's weird to simplify the phases to reduce them to 3, and then suggest a change that overcomplicates action resolution which is already complex.


1)For example, burn location unless controller burn 3 pool?
When it comes to bleed action, it might be reduce bleed amount to half (rounded up or down)

2) It's not about simplification per se, it's about better flow and flexibility. Besides, it's not vastly different if there are three different outcomes instead of 2 if stealth/intercept mechanics is keep nearly as is.

:laso: :CEL: :DOM: :OBT: :POT: :cap8:
Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.
Last edit: 17 Apr 2019 15:58 by Lech.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Apr 2019 16:42 #94548 by Mewcat

Lech wrote:

Ankha wrote: How do you express "partial success" when doing an action such as : burn a location?

Also, it's weird to simplify the phases to reduce them to 3, and then suggest a change that overcomplicates action resolution which is already complex.


1)For example, burn location unless controller burn 3 pool?
When it comes to bleed action, it might be reduce bleed amount to half (rounded up or down)

2) It's not about simplification per se, it's about better flow and flexibility. Besides, it's not vastly different if there are three different outcomes instead of 2 if stealth/intercept mechanics is keep nearly as is.


There is an underground vtes scene near me that consists of 8+ player games in a garage with no time limits, 50 starting pool, alternate rules, and massive amounts of weed.

One of the rules they made was that if you exceeded the intercept of the acting minion there was no combat. You also could add intercept to be over the stealth.

The concept of different levels of success was something I have kicked around with on political actions.

blah blahs blahed
political action: worth 3 votes - do 1 damage to 2 blahs or worth 1 vote - do 4 damage to blahs or worth -1 vote do 6 damage to blahs

Needs tuned but you get the idea. voting has always seemed like mostly a fail to me. play with titles, hope to get vote lock and do whatever you want.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.125 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum