Skip to main content

Mechanic Monday: Movement Based On Adjacency Strength

Honestly, I just want to get through Mechanic Monday today.  It’s been a long week with plenty of stress and disappointments, and I don’t have much cute noodling to offer for filling in the blanks.  So let’s get to it, shall we?

Movement Based On Adjacency Strength

GREEM is a 2-player area control game where 25 Markers are up for grabs on a 5x5 grid.  You and your opponent start out in control of Markers on opposite corners of the grid.  On your turn you either move pieces from one Marker or add a piece from your reserve to a Marker you control.  The distance that pieces may travel from their starting Marker are determined by the number of friendly pieces on the starting and adjacent Markers; on a turn, any number of friendly pieces may be moved from one Marker, and pieces may be moved together to another Marker or split up to multiple Markers, but the maximum number of moves is determined by the number of friendly pieces adjacent to the origin Marker.  Control of Markers is determined by a simple majority; a Marker may have up to seven Pieces in all.  The game ends once one player controls 13 Markers, or when a player controls four more Markers than their opponent at any given moment.

Right, so the experience I’m going for is a balancing act between spreading out, consolidating your strengths, and jockeying and blockeying for position.  I want to see seemingly sedentary consolidation turned into a burst of mobility; I want to see Sure Things overcome, Feints as positions of Strength are abandoned/endangered for a quick win or a setup for the inevitable Big Majority.  Maybe there needs to be some kind of blocking Mechanic, or a Cala-style track requiring that pieces be left in each moved-to Marker.  Either way, it seems like there’s a fun elegance with Room for Drama.

Ok, that’s it, good night!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

TTRPG Tuesday: Three Means Of Resolving

Hi it’s another TTRPG Tuesday! First of the year.  Let’s get right into it. Saw a challenge on Twitter to make some resolution mechanics.  I can do those! Here we go: Hand to Hand The player performing the action and the person running the game or otherwise opposing the action both put their dominant fists toward one another, bounce them three times to get a rhythm, and reveal a number with their fingers, 0-5.  Sum the two numbers, and if the number is greater than 5, subtract six, so that the final number is always between 0 and 5.  On a 0, the action fails catastrophically, on a 1-2 it fails, 3-4 it succeeds, on a 5 it succeeds spectacularly.  The player taking the action starts the game with all five fingers up on their non-dominant hand; after an attempt, they may lower fingers on that hand to add to the sum of the attempt. Ex. Alice attempts to seduce Cat’s character over to the coup conspirators.  They put their dominant hands together (right for Alice, left for Cat) and thro
Post a Comment
Read more

TTRPG Tuesday: Minimum Viable Product for WWDW?

Hello and welcome back to TTRPG Tuesday! I’ve put together a barebones introductory document for We Won, Didn’t We? and, well, I think it speaks for itself.  Check it out HERE ! This introduces the skeleton of the game, as well as walking through the steps; I’d say next up is a rudimentary character sheet, and maybe I can bring this to a Playtest Zero session and see what folks think of character creation within one of the starting Bulbs.  I’ve opened the doc up for comments, so if you have thoughts dear reader, fire away.  Brain fried, go read the doc, til next time!
Post a Comment
Read more

TTRPG Tuesday: Beliefs as Roles

  Hello from high above the Rockies, as I make my way back to Chicago from Big Bad Con 2023.     This was my first con in five years, and only my second ever.     I had a better time at it than I did at GenCon, which I understand derives largely from this being an industry con vs a consumer show.     I made a modest number of purchases but it was easy to stick to the constraints of my limited luggage space, which was fine; shopping and new releases were not the attraction here.     Gaming, panels, and (as I soon learned) networking were. This con was certainly less overwhelming and I think my expectations were clearer and my FOMO much lighter, but I’ll readily admit that I had a lot to learn.    I misunderstood or made mistakes regarding almost every event I signed up for, including happy accidents like sitting in on the wrong panel only to learn a ton, or expecting a mending workshop to be about fixing one’s writing when the application was rather more literal, which was a fascinat
Post a Comment
Read more