Skip to main content

Mechanic Monday: Out of Mana Tramples on Through

Did I really end my last entry with “Til net time!”? Lord I hope that was an intentional cyberpunk joke.  Look, it’s 11:36pm and I’m tired, and I’ve already been writing all evening, so you’re getting the bare minimum from me - especially since I still need to shower and get back to MtG Arena, which I’ve now downloaded.  RIP priorities - you would have loved me having you.

Excess Damage Represented by Additional Pieces

In GREEM, each player has stacks of 3, 2, or 1 checkers.  On a player’s turn, they may move a stack a number of spaces equal to the height of the stack.  If a stack lands on a friendly stack of equal or lesser height, the stacks are combined.  If a stack lands on an opposing stack of equal or greater height, it removes the opposing stack.  If a stack lands on an opposing stack of lesser height, it removes the opposing stack and creates a new friendly stack, which has a height equal to the difference between the two stacks.  The game ends if all spaces on the board have a stack (in which case the player with the majority of occupied spaces wins) or if only one player’s pieces remain (in which the player with pieces remaining wins).

Another abstract with stacks.  What can I say, if they were good enough for Sid Sackson and Steve Jackson, they’re good enough for me.  This idea could go a couple of different ways - right now there’s pure capture/replacement, with big stacks capable of multiplying alarmingly, but also as easy to remove as anything else; or there’s the image I still have in my head, of nothing being removed but pieces stopping short of capture, with their excess momentum forming a line of pieces on the opposite side of the “hit” piece, like splash damage.  In case it wasn’t clear, this simulates the MtG mechanic Trample.  I think the splash damage thing might be more interesting.  Less like a Chess capture and more like a Tafl hammer creating its own blast of anvil.

Right, that’s all for this week.  Maybe this shite idea will keep morphing until it’s something usable.  Tifl next time!

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