file Layout change suggestion for Library cards.

22 Feb 2024 14:19 #110760 by self biased
If you're here from the video, welcome!

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

22 Feb 2024 15:13 #110762 by self biased
Speaking of Layout Changes... Allies, amirite? I originally made a post on Facebook, but some people don't use facebook, so here's a slightly revised version of that post.

Lately I've been thinking about the Ally card layout, and how it's a little weird that we get the keywords first, then the stats.

Unique Mortal with 1 life. 2 strength, 1 bleed.

The "2 strength, 1 bleed." is especially weird to me, as it's not really a sentence. This sometimes results in information being shown on the card in different spots.

If Life, Strength, and Bleed were given their own dedicated line at the top of the text box, the information should be easier to parse, and make the game more accessible.

It should also be noted that Allies usually have two lines of bold text, so giving ally stats their own dedicated space won't really gobble up any extra real estate in the text box, though I'm sure there's an outlier somewhere in the catalog.

in the original HeySteev made the suggestion of putting the keywords first, then the stat line. And that works too, but I feel like the stat line on top looks cleaner and provides more consistency between cards in terms of the flow of the layout. Part of the way through my process, I realized that the dashes weren't the best way of separating the stats and switched to using commas. For those curious, the general rubric I'm proposing is Line 1: Stats, Line 2 Keywords. and on Line 3, requirements. But Requirements and Keywords can likely be swapped if there's a need for clarity.

Now, on to the examples:

Here's HeySteev's suggestion:

followed by Juggernaut's suggestions of using card text that leans heavier on "Game Syntax" instead of "Natural Language."

and a few using a layout I've developed that eliminates the green bar:

As always comments and criticism are welcome! Though bear in mind i'm specifically looking for feedback on the layout as a whole, and not "There are changes in the card text that change how the card works."

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

22 Feb 2024 18:06 #110763 by Palamedes
Respect for the effort!

The current arrangement of attributes seems very logical to me. When I look at an unfamiliar card, what do I want to know?

What does the card require to play? Seraph (Can they play it? yes, ok, go on)
What is this? Mortal
How many life does it have? 2
Strength? 1
Bleed? 0
What else? Ability text... (This wall of text must be hiding something :lol: ).

It doesn't really make sense to me to have the stats before requirements and the creature type, but I understand that for the sake of visual clarity you want to put that first.

The dividing line is always a bad choice, I think it's totally unnecessary. There's also no reason (and at least to me it's ugly) to put a different font size for the stats and the rest of the text. Bold/regular is just fine.

Allies often have text that changes or upgrades base stats (0 str, but 1R damage / +1 life on advanced discipline). If the stats are so separated and large, it may be that many will overlook the important rest of the text.

Putting the icons for combat and/or reaction is an interesting detail, like on the Power cards. But because of the text break, it probably reduces the number of possible words in the text block.

How would you solve "Shambling Hordes" with your templates?
The following user(s) said Thank You: self biased

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

22 Feb 2024 19:14 #110764 by self biased
I disagree that the there's no reason to have the stat line a consistent size and font on each card. I also disagree about the dividing line "always being a bad choice," as similar things have been used in other successful games. But at the same time, it does take up a little more room and at the end of the day I can take it or leave it.

My own interpretation would be something like this:

If you're asking about the "Game Syntax" style card text, that was more Juggernaut's thing and not mine. I'll give it a shot, though.

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

22 Feb 2024 19:25 #110765 by self biased
Here's an interpretation using a more "Game Syntax" style. This is a quick, off-the-cuff thing, so please don't criticize me too harshly on text I cobbled together in ten minutes.

A more successful version would almost certainly require adjustments to the main rulebook.

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

22 Feb 2024 19:37 #110766 by self biased
and here's the green bar-less version.

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

Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.101 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum