[GB] Design Considerations

[Eliahad]

I don't have a lot of things to put here yet, I guess, but I was just thinking a little bit about what sorts of icons, colors and other card considerations we need to consider whilst putting some of these things together.

For example: How are we going to use colors? To denote Card types? To represent the different Gods? (My brain just said, make colors card types, and use symbols to represent the Gods, so when we create expansions, we just have to come up with a new symbol and not a new color.)

What things can be represented by icons? HP costs for sure. Movement Cost could have an icon. Hexes. Barriers. Terrain <type>. The Godball. Pillar of Heaven.

Thoughts fading.

[Mike]

Just agreeing with you.

I like having different colors for each god, because it makes them super-easy to identify, but it only works if we limit ourselves to never having more than 8 or 9 gods. And ultimately, we want 20... or 50. So I don't know what we wind up using color on the cards for, but gods are identified by easy-to-recognize symbols.

Also, do we give all of the god cards the same back? If they all have the same back, then we have the option of playing mix-and-match and/or combining all the cards to make a single master god deck.

On the other hand, I'm not a fan of playing mix-and-match, because that means we have to make all cards equal in strength or else go back to a card-cost system. Giving each god's deck its own distinct back means A) they are easier to identify and B) all our "balancing" is done on a deck level, and not having to balance all cards against each other.

Just as an example of what NOT to do, Beneath Nexus has individual decks for each player, which is cool. All the decks have the same back, so they COULD be mixed and matched, but nothing in the rules allows for it. The way to tell decks apart is that each card has a stylized symbol on the front that represents the player, but all the symbols are abstract and all done in purple and white. They are not intuitive. Not good.

I'm rambling. Let me set this one aside for now.

[Wowie]

I saw a game recently with an intriguing system for mix and matching character decks. The idea was that every deck was split into 6 parts, and whenever you mixed and matched decks, you had to switch out parts of the deck wholesale, you couldn't pick-and-choose. So each chunk of a deck was balanced against its respective chunk, but the cards within each self-contained part could be different. I could go further into detail, but thems were the basics.

Nevertheless for this game it's probably better to have god decks non-mixable. Otherwise they lose their identity and theme, which I assume is important?

[Eliahad]

Yay! Wowie is back!

[Wowie]

I don't check around here too often. But nevertheless I was never really gone, I just never had much to add.

[Bluedevyl]

So, here's my idea... I love this sort of thing.

We associate one color with one aspect of godhood. Poseidon's cards are blue, but in a Japanese expansion Ohoyamatsumi could be blue as well... simply differentiate the backs of the cards with expansion symbols.

I don't think if we start with the idea that the backs of the cards are dead space, they can contain whatever art is designated and there's less of a concern about potentially mixing and matching.

The idea of a particular aspect of divinity having a signal color might make it easier to grok for newer players...

Just some thoughts.

[Mike]

GOD CARDS
Yeah... I'm sold on not mixing decks. In the final version, we sell you god decks of 30 or 36 cards or whatever, and those are intended to always play as a unit. Then, I agree with Andrew that we put the distinctive symbol of the god on the backs of their deck to A) make them easier to identify and sort and B) discourage mixing/matching that would throw off game balance.

MAP
With the hex map we've been using, the hexes on a full size board would be nearly 1.5 inches across. This is awesome. Plenty of room.

TERRAIN
Terrain should be hex tiles that literally fill the space of a single hex on the map.

BARRIERS
Instead of making these stackable, we may want to have small bead-like tokens that get placed in the hexes. I watched a how-to video for some other game that did this, and with as roomy as our hexes will be, we should be able to put a hero figure into a hex and still have room around the figure for 5+ little obstacle markers. I don't know how many barriers we will have in play in the final version or what the cost difference would be, but this is worth considering.

HERO FIGURES and GODBALL
Ideally, I want pretty, molded plastic, pre-painted figures. I don't think that will happen. However, in whatever form the hero figures take, I really really want some way to set the godball itself onto the figure when that hero has control of the ball. I don't care how we do it, but it would be so nice that when I pick up my figure and I have the ball, the ball just comes with me and we don't have to make a show of picking up both of them, moving them, and restacking them each time.

On the other hand, maybe the ball is designed such that it just fits neatly in the hex next to the hero fig in much the same way as I described barriers above. Maybe.

[Eliahad]

If we make the card backs colorful and unique to individual Gods, the card fronts could be colored by card type to make recognizing and playing the cards a little easier? Or is that a bad idea because then the colors serve two functions instead of one? On the other hand, one of those colors would be invisible to you most of the game...

[Mike]

COLORS
Yeah... I'm okay with distinctive colors for the card backs to help distinguish decks. But then also, there should be some use of color on the front that distinguishes between different powers or effects or whatever. Cards that modify hero actions are in blue (for example)... or if you want to differentiate between bonuses and penalties (boons and curses) we could use two different colors. Reaction/Instant cards have a purple border or whatever. This sort of thing.

[EDIT] You posted while I was typing. But yes exactly... I think we're saying the same thing.

SYMBOLS/ICONS
I am very cautious on this one. So far our cards are very roomy. We can fit all of the needed text in them and still have room left over for art and notations and such. I am cool with symbols on the cards IF their meaning is obvious/easy to remember... OR if the symbol is accompanied by the explanatory text anyway. For example, Magic has abilities such as Flying, Vigilant, etc that originally included the basic explanation of the power on every card that had them. But then in later sets, they figured everyone knows it, so they started just putting the name on there without explanation. Great for long-term players. Sucks for me, because then I have to break out the rulebook each time I get one of those, because I can't remember everything it does. Or games that use symbols to save room on their cards, but then I need a separate reference card/sheet to interpret those symbols each time because they aren't intuitive.

So like I say, we can have a small number of symbols, a core group, that are central to everything and easy to interpret/remember, because they are obvious and used everywhere. But then beyond that core, I think symbols are nice as a convenient visual but still have the explanation as well.

Or possibly I'm overly cautious here and just being a big baby about it. But something to think about.

[Wowie]

I like the idea of making it so that no matter the expansion, everything is always written in a way that can be understood by a first-time player. A first-time player wouldn't care that X expansion came out long after the base game, they'd care that it had their favorite obscure god in it! Make no confusion between "easy to understand" and "easy", however.

[Eliahad]

[Mike]

I have the same capitalization problem.

[Eliahad]

I've been listening to a ton of design podcasts, as I think Mike and Dan might be aware, and I have two things to add to the considerations. Wait, 3, mostly from an accessibility/inclusive standpoint.

1) We need to use a colorblind friendly palette.

2) We don't sexualize any of the characters. Just because these are Greek God's, there is a certain amount of that in their history, sure, but we can let the history be the history and keep it separate from this game. (Yes, this removes the "fukkin" card from consideration. And as amusing as it is, I don't know if it belongs )

3) As much as I see the Norse pantheon and Heroes being a logical next step after finishing the Olympians. The Egyptian or Aztec Gods may be a better 2nd expansion.

[Mike]

There are no things here I disagree with.

1. Given. And it's almost exactly as easy to do as to not. So why wouldn't we?

2. Wholeheartedly agree. I'm even being careful of Hera. I LOVE having her in and I like the direction we're going with her, but I've been very careful with her, because so much of her mythos is designed around being the shrewish, jealous, temperamental wife. I don't want to fall into that. She can be strong and conniving and dangerous without being a stereotype.

So yeah, Aphrodite can be about healing and love and attraction and influence without being about sex/lust/romantic love and without being gender-specific.

3. Also agreed. The Norse gods, when you break them down, are so often just reskinned versions of the Greek/Roman gods.

I'd actually love to do Indian, but Hindi is still actively practiced and I'm not willing to even TRY putting it into comic game form.

[Bluedevyl]

I was actually leaning towards doing Egyptian Gods next. I find that particular pantheon fascinating, and while I DO love Norse mythology, I think Egypt is a little more compelling from a gameplay perspective.

If we were going to do Norse next, I'd prefer to focus on the more esoteric (read non-Marvel) gods like Baldr and Freyja. Also, this is WAY in the future, but when we DO get around to the Norse Gods, what would you think of releasing a new set with a new game board? A new map with Yggdrasil in the middle as opposed to the Balkan peninsula might be really cool.

Just a thought for the far away times

So, for the record, I'm generally not in favor of game-ifying religons that are currently practiced, even if the practice is not particularly widespread. That would, for me, rule out:

Hindi
Native North American (Aztec and Inca would be okay, but I'd shy away from Iroquois, Lakota, Cherokee, and groups like that)
Buddhist
Shinto

I still think that leaves many to explore, but that's where I'm at right now in terms of what pantheons I'd personally prefer to avoid.

[Eliahad]

Egypt will be so much fun! I'm excited about it. And yeah, no living religions. Except for the solitaire version Mike is planning.

[FlameBlade]

Design consideration:

Never tell players no.

That is, curses should not say, "player cannot shove"

Find something else! Alter dynamics of the game! For example, curse such as...soon as you touch godball, you must throw it exactly 5 hexes. Soon as that act is done, discard the card.

Just an example!