As I see it, there has been very little discourse on the hybridisation of CCGs and RPGs. The CCG, the bastard cousin of the RPG, is a veritable treasure trove of innovation when it comes to concepts that could find use in an RPG format.

The one concept I would like to focus on briefly is more a meta-concept: that of collectibility. The use of a system of rarities to compartmentalise and define power levels is not a new concept in RPGs, although many RPGs instead place monetary values on things that could otherwise be classified by the ubiquitous Rare, Uncommon and Common.

What could be classified using the R/UC/C system? The primary use for the R/UC/C taxonomy could be for an acquirable internal commodity that is integral to the mechanics of a character. Therein lies the trick. Many Roleplaying games, unlike collectible card games, do not have optional, interchangeable modules that each player can choose to incorporate into their character. Given such a modularity can be developed, vast new aspects of gaming could be tapped.

Thoughts?

jknevitt wrote: Many Roleplaying games, unlike collectible card games, do not have optional, interchangeable modules that each player can choose to incorporate into their character. Given such a modularity can be developed, vast new aspects of gaming could be tapped.
Thoughts?

My question would be is it possible to make a business model that would accomplish the "collectability" of CCG's applicable to RPG modules or whatever.

That is, what are you going to sell? 3 dollar PDF's with a random assortment of 9 common, 4 uncommon and 2 rare Spells, that only those with that PDF can use for their character?

The problem I see with that (which I'm not sure is what you're getting at, and please correct me if I'm wrong) is as soon as anyone in a group gets it, unless the social contract entails not "sharing" modules, everyone gets it. So its not like a group of friends that all play Magic, where you need the physical cards in order to play. You'd be trying to make information itself collectable, which I'm not sure is very possible.

However, if the game in question was designed in a very Step On Up fashion, with very strict guidelines about who can use the modules (maybe the GM gets his own, with different monsters or traps, stuff like that), then it would attract the players who would be into that kind of thing.

Here I'm just spinning out a stream of consciousness, so bear with me:

I envision a model where you include a copy of the resolution mechanics and setting with every module, or have it freely available, or somesuch. Perhaps to play each character has to buy a "Character Pack", which come with a ubuiqutous set of skills and powers and such, with some randomized "rares". Maybe theres a "wizard" pack, a "figher" pack, whatever. The GM buys a GM pack.

Every time you hit a certain goal (gain a level, hit a certain combination of stats, whatever) you become eliable to buy a "booster". Or you can trade in a certain amount of skills/powers to get a random one of the same rarity for a small fee (like 50 cents, or something). The GM has the same kind of restrictions as to when he can get boosters.

If you start a new game, you have the same distribution limits of a starter pack, but you can use any skills/powers that you've bought in the past.

So the designer is basically in the business of coming up with loads of cool stuff, and randomizing its distribution.

Again, all of this runs on a pretty strict "honor code" system, I would think, but it may attract a certain kind of player. Plus, it would enable pretty cool "tournements", I would imagine.

I don't know if any of that is anything like what you were looking for, but there's some thoughts.

This is an interesting thought but I'm not sure how you would implement it.

If you'll let me rephrase what I think you're saying: assume that an RPG character is analogous to a CCG deck and assume a character characteristic is analogous to a card. The characteristics are assigned a rarity.

I think this is basically what is done now in a way. Using a standard D&D example, you roll your 3D6 to generate base attributes. This is just another rarity system. Rather than opening a pack and saying "Wow, a 16 in Wisdom!" you roll three dice and then say, "Wow, a 16 in Wisdom!" You could expand this randomization from only the base attributes to other characteristics like skills, feats, magic spells, and so on.

One interesting thing I've seen is role playing mages using actual Magic decks. Back a couple years ago they used to have these big cards that were like characters. They would alter your basic game. So if I played as Merlin the Great Mage or whatever my hand size would be 9 rather than the standard 7. But my life total would start at 18 rather than 20. Or whatever. Anyway, what these guys did was develop a system for making the "big cards" so you could make your own character. Then they would do standard adventure stuff.

I think the biggest problem is just that a lot of folks look at CCGs as "the bastard cousin of the RPG". I don't know if you're familiar with it but you could also check out the Legends of the Five Rings CCG. I haven't played since they moved the timeline up 40 years but games used to be ready made stories. You would have your clan and enlist different characters with their own intricate backgrounds. Some of them were actually spies and some of them were slowly corrupting your clan. And so on. In this case your "character" was really the clan. You were just directing your subordinates.

Nathan P. wrote: My question would be is it possible to make a business model that would accomplish the "collectability" of CCG's applicable to RPG modules or whatever.

...

I don't know if any of that is anything like what you were looking for, but there's some thoughts.

Yah, you can see in my post that I got way excited about it as I started thinking about it.

I don't think the logistics would be really that hard, except for the randomization part - but I feel like you could put each chunk into a seperate file and have a smart computer person write a little program that would randomize them and put them into folders, which you then just sell in a random order.

Again working off of the (Magic) CCG model...

You start with your "base set" of, say 100 common player chunks, 75 uncommon and 50 rare. Come up with some base character packs. Start off with those, and come up with an "expansion" about once every year or year and half, each one with say 75 new common chunks, 50 uncommon and 25 rare. Or maybe just uncommons and rares. Every fourth expansion is new setting - desert-themed, or underground, or whatever. Cycle through like that.

Come up with some rules-enforced limits, like "If you're playing a desert game you can only use these expansions".

I actually don't envision that it would have to be cards at all. Basically, a player would have a binder that he could put all his expansions in to make his own personal "players handbook". Say its all through PDFs...you just print out the two or three sheets of paper that holds all the chunks from each booster you buy, punch holes in em and put em in the binder.

And, actually, I think that people would grow more attached to characters, because it would be such a process to build them. Like, if you've been playing through two or three expansions, then you're character is going to have different options than your buddy who just joined the game and only has one expansions worth of chunks.

And yes, "sealed" tournaments would be hella cool.

Maybe, if your character dies, all the chunks you used in him become inaccessable to you unless you get them again in new packs. That would not only encourage gamist play (survive!), but also drive sales and, I think, make each character unique. I dunno if the GM would have similar restrictions.

Man. This has gotten me fired up - I guess it's way more exciting than the homework I should be doing.

Nathan P. wrote: Yah, you can see in my post that I got way excited about it as I started thinking about it.

I don't think the logistics would be really that hard, except for the randomization part - but I feel like you could put each chunk into a seperate file and have a smart computer person write a little program that would randomize them and put them into folders, which you then just sell in a random order.

Again working off of the (Magic) CCG model...

You start with your "base set" of, say 100 common player chunks, 75 uncommon and 50 rare. Come up with some base character packs. Start off with those, and come up with an "expansion" about once every year or year and half, each one with say 75 new common chunks, 50 uncommon and 25 rare. Or maybe just uncommons and rares. Every fourth expansion is new setting - desert-themed, or underground, or whatever. Cycle through like that.

Come up with some rules-enforced limits, like "If you're playing a desert game you can only use these expansions".

I actually don't envision that it would have to be cards at all. Basically, a player would have a binder that he could put all his expansions in to make his own personal "players handbook". Say its all through PDFs...you just print out the two or three sheets of paper that holds all the chunks from each booster you buy, punch holes in em and put em in the binder.

And, actually, I think that people would grow more attached to characters, because it would be such a process to build them. Like, if you've been playing through two or three expansions, then you're character is going to have different options than your buddy who just joined the game and only has one expansions worth of chunks.

Maybe, if your character dies, all the chunks you used in him become inaccessable to you unless you get them again in new packs. That would not only encourage gamist play (survive!), but also drive sales and, I think, make each character unique. I dunno if the GM would have similar restrictions.

Instead of PDF's why not just a website with a database of each user. For X amount extra cards will be added to that user account. The website would be able to generate character sheets with a serial number that tournament runners could pop into the website to confirm the validity of the character. Then all the designer(s) have to do is enter new cards into a database instead of laying out a PDF or printing cards. The same goes for Sealed deck Tournies. Just pay X and create a character from only the cards you bought for the sealed deck.

Guys, I can't wrap my brain around how anyone would become motivated toward demand of randomized digital product. Digital product is by its very nature perfectly "clonable." So, once you've got your hands on one version, BANG! Everyone else can pretty easily. There goes rarity out the door.

Similarly, content suffers similar problems. Content is, essentially, "ideas." Once an idea is revealed, how can we prevent

I think the problem is that there must be a physical object to actually merit a scarcity and supply control system.

My suggestion? Easy! Dice. Make the dice collectible for a game. They are physical objects, not easily reproduced. Scarcity would work for those. There was Dragon Dice years back, but it was purely a strategy game if I recall. Maybe that model could be a lot of fun for an RPG as well.

Similarly, miniatures would work. Of course, they are exorbitantly expensive and WotC is already doing it.

Wow, a lot of great ideas. Greedo hit the nail on the head by making the character=deck, characteristic=card analogy.

Here's the one idea I had:

Frex, a GM buys the Wicked Kewl RPG. Inside the WKRPG, there are a number of collectible characteristics (be they on perforated card sheets or whatever). Players are also encouraged to go out and buy a copy of the WKRPG or a "character booster", since their copy or the booster might have different characteristics. These would have different rarities. If you own certain characteristics, you can use them for character creation and advancement in play, and can paperclip them to your character or whatever.

The issue of duplicability could be solved through a number of means. Paper/card types, watermarking, serialization, etc etc. These would all increase the printing cost.

Imagine if Wizards had've done this with Feats for D&D3e.

For your consideration:

Dragon Storm is a collectible card RPG.

I'm (to my knowledge) the resident Card Game Publisher, and my approach was to borrow more from RPGs than CCGs. And I do consider Twilight a hybred of the two, not to a major degree, but there are mass borrowings from both sides of the fence.

I love the card game format- its portable, easy to work with, all the information you need is RIGHT THERE.
What I publish myself is a CUSTOMIZABLE Card game, not neccesarily a COLLECTABLE, exactly for the reason of Magic.
What we have there is a degeneration of play, in my opinion. Too many of these new sets are rehashed, there is no skill involved in playing. Cards are reprinted, renamed, and a vicious cycle exists that to be good you have to spend more money, not simply play well.
Challenges exist in the "Pro Tour" level with the Draft programs, but among your store players all a person has to do is spend the most money. Doesn't matter they know jackshit about the game. According to my understanding anymore, someone drops a card called "Platinum Angel" and you may as well fold.

On the flip side, Final Twilight (See signiture) is a customizable game. Three preconstructed decks are currently available, a booster/Modular set is due out in January. The Modular Packs represent a change from traditional Collectable Card Game development- each of these presorted packs of 12 cards is specially geared toward one of the three Decks in print, and even then there will be several packs for each deck, meant to modify it to better perform one task or another. Want to do a little of it all? Buy all the packs. A full set for one Twilight character will run you less than $20. Each Mod Pack contains a full play set (4 copies) of each of its cards. Its 3 different cards per pack, but you don't have to hunt or spend $100's to get what you need/want.
The thing about Twilight is the game relies on purely Stratagy. One of the most "broken" cards according to CCG vets has actually had almost nothing to do with victories, while one of the most critisized has been the most helpful. Also too, the last tournament I held, the second place winner walked in a bought a deck, competed against folks who have been playing since it came out this summer, and won.

Collectable games are purely a captialistic adventure, a way to suck as much money out of a consumer as possible. If you have to buy 20 packs to get 1 Card (or what not), I, as a player, feel royally gyped. And I highly, highly doubt players will want to spend money to, what amounts to in Role Playing, rerolling the die.
Besides, CCG Printing is EXPENSIVE. My first run cost me $3600 for the printing, about $2000 for art. The market is also a vastly different creature than RPGs.
I think RPGs have more to offer CCGs than CCGs have to offer RPGs.

What would really distinguish such a game from any other CCG? Except that "deck" is substituted for "character" and "card" for "ability", what exactly makes up the "roleplaying game" aspect of the game?

Matt Snyder wrote: Guys, I can't wrap my brain around how anyone would become motivated toward demand of randomized digital product. Digital product is by its very nature perfectly "clonable." So, once you've got your hands on one version, BANG! Everyone else can pretty easily. There goes rarity out the door.

Shadetree wrote: Instead of PDF's why not just a website with a database of each user. For X amount extra cards will be added to that user account. The website would be able to generate character sheets with a serial number that tournament runners could pop into the website to confirm the validity of the character. Then all the designer(s) have to do is enter new cards into a database instead of laying out a PDF or printing cards. The same goes for Sealed deck Tournies. Just pay X and create a character from only the cards you bought for the sealed deck.

Besides, CCG Printing is EXPENSIVE. My first run cost me $3600 for the printing, about $2000 for art. The market is also a vastly different creature than RPGs.

xect wrote: What would really distinguish such a game from any other CCG? Except that "deck" is substituted for "character" and "card" for "ability", what exactly makes up the "roleplaying game" aspect of the game?

Noon wrote: That's a good point. Say I go the cheap ass games route, just having cardboard with black ink prints on them...I suppose I can't do the collectable thing then, as they are quite copyable. But the customisable game should be quite viable.

Also, on the collectable thing...does it have to be as blood sucking as you say it is? I'd imagine you could have a customisable core, but also a collectable market of cards which don't statistically effect that core too much, but are nice to have (and their sales help pay the rent).

Heh.

Yes, you can play Magic without a Black Lotus. In fact, due to the rules, regulations and judging system, you'll never see a Black Lotus hit the table. According to the more recent Type 1 format of play, Black Lotus is technically illegal (If I remember correctly, they rotated out the original sets from play.)

Collectable Card Games are bloodsuckers, pure and simple. The design is such that tournaments and artifically developed systems are what drive the sales. They are meant only to make money, quality of a design be damned.*
The best cards, in professionally produced and market games, are always the rarest. The common cards suck more than anyone realizes. The ONLY competition lies in Sealed Draft tournaments, whereby players open decks and pick amongst only those cards. The open tournaments are ruled by those with money.
Case in point, look at the tournament system for Magic, Type 2.
Legal sets are: The Current Core, on its 8th iteration, redefined every 2 to 3 years, the last Block (1 Major release, 2 smaller releases) and the prior Block (again, 1 Major release, 2 smaller releases).
To play in a Type 2 tournament, your deck must fall within these guidelines.
Wizards publishing schedule for a given year: February, release 1 143 Card set. May/June, release 1 143 Card set. September, release 1 37X card set. Numbers vary slightly. To be 'competative' in Type 2, you have to be buying within these series only. Doesn't matter you've played for the last 5 years. Your SKILL means almost nothing, especially when the playtesters allow broken cards in.

From what I've seen of Yu-gi-oh, its worse than Magic. The regulations aren't as bad (there are some bannings/exclusions in official events), but all boils down to is who has the best card on the field. The cartoons even emphasis this: if I lost any of my Magic decks, I wouldn't care as a player- myself, I'd be bummed, my decks are special because they're so different. But Yugi was devistated when 5 cards were lost, because without them, he couldn't win. Thats not a competative game, thats Russian Roullette- who gets the bullet first.

Simply put- COLLECTABLE Card Games are bloodsucking fiends, for both players and publishers. If Wizards is right and it costs them $.10 per card, I can't see how they stay in business. I managed $.03 per card, and thats STILL quite an expense for myself. Start factoring Wholesale discounts of 60% MSRP and they have so very little they could be making.
CUSTOMIZABLE Card Games on the other hand are a blast, especially if a play system is handled right. Release reasonable sized sets of cards that are easily accessable and emphasis play over power and you have a good game. From what I've seen in my own unending testing and playing, I'd like to think Twilight achieves that.

*In my opinion this is truth, for when a company reprints cards with different names, it is in my opinion poor design. A product should be evaluated and appreciated on its own, not because its "X, except not!"

The issue with games like Magic is the sheer bloody-mindedness. Take a look at the aforementioned Platinum Angel:

www.arenamagica.com/imagens/PlatinumAngel.jpg

What would be better for an RPG with a collectible/customizable aspect is that the power gulf between the more common "cards" and the rarer "cards" be not as great as in Magic.

As for copy-protection... ever play SimCity? The original SimCity that had the code card? That was black text on textured red card that was incredibly difficult to photocopy. You could simply just use shades of ink and/or paper that are hard to copy legibly. There's always the other option of serilization. You could just uniquely number each one. Of course, copies are easy to spot, regardless of copy-protection methods. I'm yet to see a good copy of a card from any CCG -- even if produced from a hi-res scan.

daMoose_Neo wrote: CUSTOMIZABLE Card Games on the other hand are a blast, especially if a play system is handled right. Release reasonable sized sets of cards that are easily accessable and emphasis play over power and you have a good game.

1) CCGs are the bastard cousin of RPGs for a reason. RPGs cannot and do not need to be CCGs. You want to make a hybred, make a CCG more RPG'ish, as opposed to taking an RPG and making it CCGish. The restrictions, in my opinion, are too great.
Twilight *is* a poor attempt to bridge some of this. I ended up with a combat oriented RP with combat-magic system and a game where the players have a face. From a CCG perspective, I feel this is a great leap. From an RPG perspective, it is still lacking and limited in so many ways. On its own, its a wonderful system and I love it to pieces. After some time, however, I refuse to refer to it to others as a hybred or as a collectable card game.

2) RPGs don't need a rarity. As someone else said, its enough for the die mechanics to say "Okay, you have 18 strength, you have enough strength to use AZZ KICKIN SWORD, so here you go."
$10-$20 investment into one book plays for years and so many people. For a CCG of any kind, thats barely enough to get started. Currently, $24 buys you everything available for Twilight.

3) If you wanted to do this, skip the collectability and go with the customizable. Develop the thing to be used on business cards. If you wanted them professionally printed, you could get 1000 14pt glossy coated cards for $40 (These are nice- I've ordered some at Poker-size for promotional events for Twilight). Bear in mind, however, this is one design. If you have a set of say 300 cards, you'll need to order 300 different designs, which totals to $12,000.

4) The other thing to consider- the CCG Market is much more difficult to enter for the above, bloodsucking reasons. Magics the most widely played because it is the most widely played, for the same reason that d20 is. Players KNOW d20, new players know they can find others to teach them, they know about it. A new CCG is an unproven creature. How many people play? How much does it cost? Is it good? How do I know if no one else plays it?
CCG players are a scared lot. Hell, I'm GIVING my game away in 15 card introductory packs and people are still leary of it. My MSRP is $2-$5 less than Wizards or others (who run $10 to $13 per deck in stores) and people still don't want to spend the money.
As I said, a single RPG book fuels any number of players, characters and sessions. 1 pack of 15 cards is 1 pack of 15 cards.

The best cards, in professionally produced and market games, are always the rarest. The common cards suck more than anyone realizes. The ONLY competition lies in Sealed Draft tournaments, whereby players open decks and pick amongst only those cards. The open tournaments are ruled by those with money.

The issue with games like Magic is the sheer bloody-mindedness. Take a look at the aforementioned Platinum Angel:

RPGs don't need a rarity. As someone else said, its enough for the die mechanics to say "Okay, you have 18 strength, you have enough strength to use AZZ KICKIN SWORD, so here you go."

Magics the most widely played because it is the most widely played, for the same reason that d20 is. Players KNOW d20, new players know they can find others to teach them, they know about it. A new CCG is an unproven creature. How many people play? How much does it cost? Is it good? How do I know if no one else plays it?

Aye. My thoughts on this are going in a totally different direction, but I really don't have the time to write them up atm - hopefully over the weekend? Anyhow, I'm not thinking about this in terms of "cards" at all. I am thinking about it in terms of focused Gamist design and a kind of honor system. I think the comments about customizable, not collectable, are good ones. I think there would be multiple modes of play, maybe strict and relaxed, where strict play is dependent on the actual chunks you own, and relaxed is where its all open to you.

Another thought - you have your rulebook, it has everything organized into chunks with different rarities, etc. For relaxed play, you can use all of them. For strict play, each player rolls some dice and determines a random set of chunks they can use. For tournement play, each player is provided with a premade folder full of random chunks ("sealed deck").

Supplements basically just contain setting information and new chunks.

Sorry if this is a somewhat empty post, but maybe some more thoughts to chew over.

Nathan P. wrote: Another thought - you have your rulebook, it has everything organized into chunks with different rarities, etc. For relaxed play, you can use all of them. For strict play, each player rolls some dice and determines a random set of chunks they can use. For tournement play, each player is provided with a premade folder full of random chunks ("sealed deck").

Supplements basically just contain setting information and new chunks.

This whole deal would need its own system to avoid that problem. That is, I don't think you could CCG-ize d20 or GURPS or anything like that.

Completely un-thought-out example - say theres attributes (strength, dex, intelligence). Say theres a lot of them, and some are more rare than others. Say that when determining your chunks, you are actually finding what attributes the character possesses. Other chunks may rely on only some attributes, so if you don't have that one, your SOL. Basic things are strength and stuff like that, uncommon ones are things like magical/psionic/spiritual attributes (faith, soul, cosmic understanding). Rare ones are things that are rare, like physical mutations or a connection with a diety.

So one character, say a priest, could have Strength, Dexterity, Wisdom (common), Faith, Divine Favor (uncommon) and Connection with Diety (rare) on his char sheet as his attributes. Say another, a rogue-type has Speed, Quickness and Toughness (common), Danger Sense, Animal Magnetism (uncommon) and Chameleon (rare) on his char sheet. The priest can't use chunks that require Speed, while the theif can't use chunks that require Faith. That kind of stuff.

So this would have a prerequisite system built in, in addition to a rarity system. I envision a lot of time gleefully spent building that perfect character.

See, now we're getting somewhere!

What strikes me immediately about Nathan's example is how much more interesting the imperfect character would be. The rogue with Speed, Quickness, Wisdom, Danger Sense and Faith, for instance.


Does the CCG deck-design metaphor lead naturally to the phenomenon of the character whose entire history is a training plan for their eventual career? Or is there a way to shake that up, if one wanted to?

Nathan P. wrote: Completely un-thought-out example - say theres attributes (strength, dex, intelligence). Say theres a lot of them, and some are more rare than others. Say that when determining your chunks, you are actually finding what attributes the character possesses. Other chunks may rely on only some attributes, so if you don't have that one, your SOL. Basic things are strength and stuff like that, uncommon ones are things like magical/psionic/spiritual attributes (faith, soul, cosmic understanding). Rare ones are things that are rare, like physical mutations or a connection with a diety.

So one character, say a priest, could have Strength, Dexterity, Wisdom (common), Faith, Divine Favor (uncommon) and Connection with Diety (rare) on his char sheet as his attributes. Say another, a rogue-type has Speed, Quickness and Toughness (common), Danger Sense, Animal Magnetism (uncommon) and Chameleon (rare) on his char sheet. The priest can't use chunks that require Speed, while the theif can't use chunks that require Faith. That kind of stuff.

Greedo- What I'm trying to drive home is that the Collectable CG nature is inherently expensive, for both publisher and player. Not that d20 is the be all to end all, or that Magic is. There are a number of ways something could theoretically work. Realistically, however, it won't. Not as a Collectable game.
Magic works because of its tournament driven system. That is the only reason for new expansions. It sounds like you're an early player. If you haven't seen the game in a few years, its changed considerably. Some argue this is good...I argue otherwise, obviously (Why else spend $8,000 and three years of my life on a project?).
The tournaments are structured so that only the newest cards are eligible, with Type 1 accomodating the oldest, though as I understand it, even the original sets are now illegal.
As to the Angel, did you know of "Indestructable"? Artifacts with that cannot be destroyed. There are also spells which grant that. These newer sets are a victim of its popularity, the game produced in such a way that people are driven to spend scads upon scads of money on nothing. Players are encouraged to seek out "instant win" cards instead of playing with their wits. Skill is destroyed, the 'best cards' put above that.
For the record, yes, you can win with with pure 'commons', in any game. I've played against decks that cost more than I make in a month with a deck of my own that cost me maybe $5 to make, and I owned.

And these comments can be applied to any Collectable Card Game out there. The goal of Collectable games is to make money. The rarity is to ensure players will keep buying, the vast majority of the common cards are literally chaff, because if you're content to play with the common cards, you have no drive to purchase more cards to get more powerful cards.
Yu-gi-oh - "God Cards" so powerful they were banned before even being released, on top of chase and power cards for currently in print sets going for $100's of dollars.
Pokemon- Little kids spending $40 for one card? 5 year olds robbing each other?
Duel Masters - Taking some steps in the right directions, but the focus is still on the power of the cards, not the skill of the game.
VS - Seems to be following the Magic model, of releases, set structure and tournament regulations.

And, I am not saying that creating a new CCG is a worthless expediture. I'd be a damn fool if I did- I developed one! 6 years of design, 3 years of serious research into the market, and $8,000 later, here I am. Look at my signiture- Final Twilight -Trinity Preview, the first set, with the new set, Trintiy Premere due out next month. Twilight embodies all of my beliefs of the card game:
The decks are constructed and designed so not one of the decks has a distinct advantage. Each deck, however, is distinct in play styles and flavor. Each deck also supports a number of options. I've even gone ahead and adapted some of RPG's points to the card game- the Decks are, essentially, a character's toolkit. Cards can only be used by a given Character if they share the same faction as the card (essentailly, meeting the base value). Combat is die oriented, modified with equipment and spells.
Mark Jarus is of the Law, Knowledge and Storm Magic factions. He can use spells, Police tactics, enlist police officers, use police equipment (Firearms, Bullet Proof Vests, Riot Shields).
Kerra Neil is a Warrior, through and through. She relies only on the company of warriors to hunt Mages, and her allies reflect this. Additional Warriors recieve bonues to equipment use, immunity to certain forms of magic.
Charles Faust's deck is very much like his character in the stories. Dark and mysterious, Faust has a tendency to to sit in the background, hiring weaker Thugs, mercenaries, and creatures of darkness to do his work. If he DOES join the fight, thats usually a bad thing for his opponant, as Faust is a wielder of Corrupt Magic, Undead Powers, and is part Vampire.

The expansion system for Twilight is also highly unique. I'm releasing them in what I call Modular Packs- packs of 12 cards, three different cards but four copies of each, a full play set. They're packaged with regard to character and theme. Series one focuses on Faust's necromanic powers, Mark's storm sorcery and Kerra's own techniques. Series Two, planned for release in February, focuses on Faust's underworld connections, Mark's official connections, and Kerra's ties to other Warriors of the Order. Each series will also see packets of Universal cards, cards any one deck can use. Entropy, slated for release around July (In time for Origins), will introduce new characters, factions, and spell and card types.
The difference is there is no NEED to buy. A starter deck gives you everything you need to play. A starter deck will play a modified deck just fine, a Trinity/Entropy deck will play a straight Trinity deck just fine. Organized play will support all sets. Twilight has no rarities, no reason to seek out scads of cards in search of one in particular.

An RPG with a card resolution system is a wonderful concept and different. I'd go along with Nathans idea, maybe even use the deck for normal resolution and use, playing it like a CCG, using like business cards written up with pertinant information.
But on another hand, I can't help but feel you're just trying to call an RPG something else. Most games are already balanced to the point that you have X% chance to have stats high enough wield a given item, just as you have X% chance to pull a Power Card from a booster pack. RPGs do this just as well with prerequiste stats, feats, traits or expenditures.

Designing a card game or custimizable and a collectable card game are vastly different creatures, and different creatures totally from RPGs. I'm one man in both camps, trust me, I know these to be true. Magic and D&D are loaded examples, and I will concede my venom for Magic partially colors my perceptions. The collectability flaws are present though in all of the currently popular CCGs, and that bothers me as a player.
I think RPGs have a fine random system built already with the dice, there are many tools and many ways to work with them. It complicates matters extreamely and makes it more expensive to both play and produce when you to try to make "collectable cards to build characters". And, I also think, making an RPG Collectable in the sense of Magic, Yugioh, Pokemon, VS, or any other CCG out there, destroys much what makes RPGs financially enjoyable- one investment, unlimited opprotunities. Your imagination is the only real limit in RPGs.

Greedo- What I'm trying to drive home is that the Collectable CG nature is inherently expensive, for both publisher and player. Not that d20 is the be all to end all, or that Magic is. There are a number of ways something could theoretically work. Realistically, however, it won't. Not as a Collectable game.

Magic works because of its tournament driven system. That is the only reason for new expansions. It sounds like you're an early player. If you haven't seen the game in a few years, its changed considerably.

And these comments can be applied to any Collectable Card Game out there. The goal of Collectable games is to make money. The rarity is to ensure players will keep buying, the vast majority of the common cards are literally chaff, because if you're content to play with the common cards, you have no drive to purchase more cards to get more powerful cards.

Let me concede this: done right, it is a possibility. I loved the original Magic games, right up until they began regimenting the tournament scene and I feel THAT is what has destroyed Magic and any other game following its model. The one sad point in Twilight is there is no joy upon opening a new pack and going "OMG! I got this!". The gulf between Magic (and other similar) games though anymore is the power cards are TOO rare and encourage TOO much spending. If you can spend a reasonable amount to get what you want, thats cool. If you have to buy like mad, like Magic (or again, others), its a turn off to players. Hell, Twilight still sells slowly.

I will warn of the expense inherent in the endevour though. As I said, it is a VERY expensive product to develop. I managed a cheap run, could have done even cheaper had I looked to alternatives, but being new to the whole shebang I wanted an actual "Game Printer".
Twilight's expansions this coming winter will run me close to $400 for 750 packs and about 10,000 cards.

I didn't read the whole thread, so shoot me if this has come up before:

You might want to have a look at this (Non-C)CG-based RPG, for inspiration.

As to a CCG where commons-based decks DO win tournaments, check out Vampire: The Eternal Struggle by White Wolf. Recently rated #1 multiplayer CCG.

(If you want to know more about the latter, PM me).

I'd like to propose a slightly different take on this proposition.

Firstly, I think a number of existing RPG's, with their splat book lines, are already collectible in the most practical sense. One might say that they are also customizable in this sense, but I suspect that is off the mark a subset of all the texts is incomplete rather than customised.

A customizable game IMO should consist of only those elements which are relevant, right here right now, to this game. Not to "the game" as an overall concept, but to the game that is being played at the table. A customizable game would identify those elements of the holistic setting that are being addressed, dealt with, by the action of the piece. Those that are irrelevant will be sent to the background, and in so doing we signal to all participants that only those elements remaining in the foreground are the ones to be addressed.

This would I think have something like the focussing effect that railroading seeks to achieve, limiting solutions to problems to certain categories of acceptable decision, without mandating in-game intervention to prevent unsuitable avenues being pursued.

I played around with the idea of incorporating actual MtG cards into a fantasy campaign using Savage Worlds as the primary rule base. Unfortunately, my players had no real interest (and they are all Magic players) and the PEG boards had a meltdown so the thread is gone.

But I do have the core document that I worked up the idea and it is here:

Savage Gathering

Okay, I have this crazy, crazy idea for a RPG campaign. I mean, it is INSANE. But it won’t leave me alone. I wrote some of this yesterday afternoon, when I should have been painting artwork. The rest was finished last night. I want to marry Savage Worlds with Magic the Gathering. And I think I’ve come up with some twisted (and fun) ideas. Bear with me, this is a bit of a stream of consciousness… and meant to promote discussion.

Why?: I’ve always liked the world that Magic the Gathering hints at. I love the visuals the cards provide. I’ve always wanted to dip into that world and have a role playing experience in it, not just games themselves.

It also provides a brand new campaign so there is no “old guard” or “newbies”… we are all new.

Premise (not GNS definition of Premise): Each player is a young mage. While they are considered “young”, I will start them off as Legendary (80 pts) in Savage World terms. However, be forewarned, there will be monsters and opponents in this crazy patchquilt world who are Legendary ++.

The Situation: The PCs HUGE citystate is one of the last bastions of Free teachings in Magic. The various schools of magic are cranking out Mages as fast as possible and banding them together in groups of 4 or 5 or 6. Need a cool name for these covens, but I’m blanking.. Ideally, each color should be represented by each little band of mages.

There is a reason for this. Much of the land has been co-opted by the Adversary. A shadowy force that controls much of the world’s mana. As the group travels, they can wrest control of lands from the Adversary. But only lands that a mage can “color channel”. In fact, the ritual needed to perform requires the channeling of colors on either side of target land’s color. And a mountainous region might have “blue” mana…. There isn’t necessarily a pure color correspondence between color of mana and the land. Although, there is certainly predilections. This is why groups sent out have as many of the mana colors represented.

Example: The group manages to deal with the Adversary’s forces in a Swamp “county”. That “county” happens to be Blue mana, not the expected Black. White, Blue, & Black mana must be represented by the Mages and then the ritual takes a day to wrest away from the Adversary.

Magic Itself: This will be a departure from the rules in SW. You don’t buy spells, you buy ranks in various aspects of Magic itself, tied into the Magic the Gathering motifs.

Magery I: The bare minimum. Gains you 10 colorless mana and identification/ manipulative channel ability with one color of mana. The mage is considered to have been granted one Land of the right color, held safe by forces of the City-State (need a cool name for that too).

Land: When Land is wrested from the Adversary, it goes to the City State, who then parcels out these counties to various mages. This is incredibly political. By buying the Land edge, your mage has managed to wrestle yet another county from the Mage Council of the City State.

Mana: Gives you another 5 colorless Mana. (Identical to SW’s Power Point Edge)

Add’l Ranks of Magery: Each add’l rank, allows you to channel 1 more Color mana in a combat round. Or, one can buy the ability to channel another color… but does not grant a Land county of that color.

Increased Spells: Get +2 cards to your deck (only after Legendary rank is achieved)

Increased Fortunes: Get +1 card to your hand, up to a total of 7. (only after Legendary rank is achieved)


How Does it Work?

Each Mage starts out with 20 non land, non artifact cards. Plus one Land for every Land Edge you have, that your mage controls. These arre chosen pre-adventure and can be of any mix, but obviously, ya probably want colors that you can actually use.

Combat starts. Each Mage draws 5 cards from his pre-built deck. Any colorless mana to be spent, must come from the Mages own Power Points/Mana. And Color mana has to be channeled from his lands. If a card is played, another is drawn.

Channeling is a governor of sorts ( like Essence Channeling in Unisystem). Usually the Mage has only 1 land, he has to build up the Color channeling in order to cast the spell. So a two Green mana needs two rounds to build up and then the spell is cast on the 2nd round, and the colorless is paid by the Mage. The roll is made, success is needed (TN: 4). But if Land came up in the 5 card draw, it can be played as an action. Basically, each mage is assumed to have 1 Land on the table automatically. Any add’l lands must be played from the hand.

Combat along normal SW lines is perfectly acceptable. Sword fights, running away… all the normal, non-magic combat can happen as per SW rules.

Summoning creatures, artifacts do come in with “summoning sickness”.

Some of this has to be fast and loose as there is not direct translations of certain card abilities. Pacify, Counterspell, etc… are just going to have to be integrated as we play. But where there are numbers, I found these correlations:

Creatures:
Creatures summoned are superiorly sophisticated “ideals”… you don’t actually summon Rion Vess the Sentinel Elf. You summon an ideal of him. Occasionally, rarely, the summon creature might take on a life of its own and stick around after the battle. Your creature cards represent your Mages study and understanding of that ideal. However, since they are “ideals” and not the real thing, no summon critter is a Wild Card. Exception: you summon a Legend. Legends are bound to serve you via the summoning magic. But they might not be happy about it afterward.

Power = certain die of Fighting, Throwing, Shooting.
Toughness+4 = Toughness in SW.
Damage = based on how many colorless mana is used to summon the critter.

Power of 1 = 1d4 Fight, Throw, Shoot
Power of 2 = 1d6 of “ “
Power of 3 = 1d8 of ‘’ ‘’
= 1d10
= 1d12
= 1d12+1
= 1d12+2

etc. etc.

Damage
Colorless mana of 0 or 1 = 1d4 dmg
= 1d6
= 1d8
= 1d10
= 1d12
= 1d12+1

So, lets take Vulshok Berserker (a red critter). He has 3 Colorless, 1 Red mana to summon. He has 3 Power/ 2 Toughness. In SW terms, he looks like this: Fighting of 1d8, Toughness of 6 and does 1d8 damage when he hits. And, oh yeah, he has haste… can go right away, no summoning sickness.

Enchanting and Artifact bonuses.
Bonuses to Power can be divided between Fighting or Damage. Bonuses to Tough just are that. So, Fists of the Anvil give +4/+0 as a card. So, +2 Fighting & +2 Dmg. Or can do +0 Fighting, +4 Dmg…however you want to divide it.

Direct Damage
Some cards do direct damage, Red often. This is represented like a Bolt out of SW
Dmg of 1 = 2d4
2= 2d6
3= 2d8
4= 2d10
5 = 2d12
6=2d12+1

etc. etc. Yeah, its big and boomy! But I would allow Mage PCs to reduce direct damage by spending Colorless mana for themselves ONLY. Each colorless Mana allows 1d4 to be taken off of the direct damage from a spell.

Here is a kicker, once a card is played, it cannot be played again until the Mage makes it back to his own Land and re-creates the rituals (get another 20 cards). Or the City States many Mage Guilds have ritual circles that can do the same. Or find a place of power and create a Ritual Circle somewhere in the wild (at the whim of the GM). This forces a reason to return to the City State. So, long drawn out campaigns are going to be hell on the amount of spells you will have at the end.

The Role Playing Aspect:
What I envision is something like this: The group decides to go investigate an area. Intel on such areas are sketchy, the Adversary has been around for awhile. I also was thinking of linking Artifacts to the Adversary. But based on the best guesses, the Mages construct their spell Ritual Matrixes (the deck of 20) and off they go. They fight forces both neutral and Adversary allies. Once those forces are defeated, the Land can be “Attuned”. This Attuning means the Land falls under the control of the City State.
Then another county can be explored, or maybe new spells and abilities need to be researched. So the party returns to the City State. Here, a regular cast, politics and subplots can happen. Wrangle over who is getting Land grants and jockeying with other Mage groups.

One can have the bare minimum of Magery and play a Serra Angel or any other MtG “type”. Eric could be Zombie Lord. Or Eric, goblin shaman! Leonids, golems, “tims”, whatever floats the boat. If players could find cards that they really like and build that personality, that would thrill me.

Random Thoughts
The million people clustered around the City State need resources and land badly. The Mage Groups are on the forefront of this. So, there really is a built in reason to adventure. I was thinking for brevity’s sake, that each Mage Group has a liason to the Mage council. This provides some direction, some help. Example: Maybe your liason could the Forest Troll Dematroa (made up the name) and he urges the Group to mount and expedition to find Tel-Jilad, the Tree of Tales. Lost to the Adversary generations ago, but is now calling to him in dreams.

Occasionally, the Adversary feels you making a move against him, so all of a sudden you start having artifact critters warping in right and left trying to stop you from Attuning the land. Then I might actually have cards as the GM to play against you.

I need to find or create a map of MtG world. Maybe create it a bit at a time, so it evolves as the game does.

Maybe the 20 card deck, 5 card hand to start is not quite the right method. Maybe the randomness of the draw would drive people nuts. Maybe it would be cool. The way I see the “magic theory” working is this. Somewhere safe, the mage has created the ritual attuned to that card. Using the spell, erases the Ritual markings back at home, university wherever. But the Spell cards seem to be in three distinct groups. The Hand, for use in combat. The Deck, for the expedition and the Sideboard… those spells you know, but cannot access, they are at home.

I think initiative should go back to dice. Just roll your Smarts (to reflect quickness of thought, instead of body, Agility has so much utility in SW anyway). Its open ended.

The Wall of 5 Colors surrounds the “civilized” lands away from the Adversary. Walls of Fog, Thorn, Fire and Water… kinda cool idea… heh.

Gonna post this on the Pinnacle Boards. Just for yucks.

Dunno. Maybe it is completely, completely nuts. Battles might get too large with too many critters running around. But 90% of this came to me in one flash. Might be fun too.

I agree with contracycle in every particular.

Indeed, context-sensitive cards (cards that are either selected, modified, or excluded based on the current game state) as an alternative to both railroading and GM improvisation (including no-myth and intuitive continuity) is something I've been trying to pry open for a long time. (My Arabian Nights Iron Game Chef game is one attempt, not really successful.)

It seems obvious to me that for an expandable and customizable card game to be interesting, the cards should be facilitating something. In other words they should be helping players do something difficult, not getting in the way of doing something that would be inherently easy without the cards. Unfortunately, in the context of tabletop RPG play as we know it, cards representing player-character characteristics, equipment, and the like fall into the latter category.

- Walt

I wuz just overlooking the text I just pasted in. I should also say this, Magic card vs. Magic card should be resovled just like MtG. It is only when a spell card goes up against a PC/NPC that all the conversions take place.

So a 3/3 critter will wipe out a 2/2 critter.

Maybe.

Like i said, I never playtested any of this. It all kinda came in a heated rush of creativity.

Walt Freitag wrote: In other words they should be helping players do something difficult, not getting in the way of doing something that would be inherently easy without the cards.

Two things:

The original post said that there was little talk here about CCGs being hybridized with RPGs. That may be true, but there has been some talk about it. I've talked with Nate about it before, and way before that, Fang Langford was very interested in this. You might be able to search up such conversations, or find some reference in the defunct "Scattershot" forum.

Point the second, I'm currently designing something like this. Slow process, but I think we may make it. Still very much in the starting phases of design, but if we develop it more, I'll go more public with it.

Mike

This is an absolutely excellent idea.

Advantages to the card game format could include:

-Random Character Creation could be extremely streamlined. Hell, you might be able to deal characters, grab a GM deck, and start playing.
-Random Event generation far better(GM plot cards, possibly plot twist cards on both sides).
-Serial Play(if the metaplot advanced with each new step, it could be much like the epic plot of L5R, but experienced in an RP firsthand nature versus detached card game nature)
-Cost could be reduced*

I see more of a customizable game than a collectable game. However, it could be one of the best factory produced plot campaigns ever.

I would personally use a multidimensional setting. Magic: the Gathering can make expansions forever because their universe extends on into forever. More races, magic, artifacts, etc. can always be found. As such, a multidimensional setting lends itself to collectability as it may never be finished.

Game would come out in sets for a grand metaplot. There would be a number of character decks(divided by region, class, race, or whatever made sense). The deck would be comprised of character creation cards and a resolution deck. The character creation in the game would be simple(based on a few core cards for race, class, or other core characteristic cards) with a number of option cards for skills and feat-like traits. Some of these Creation cards will have inherent abilities that can be used at will or work automatically, while others will effect what resolution cards you may use/have in your resolution deck. Resolution cards will be used to resolve actions with a general number(ala Deadlands card game or Overpower), but also have more specialized actions such as spells, fighting maneuvers, social maneuvers, and maybe even plot twists.

GM decks would include encounters and plot cards, as well as resolution cards.

Plot cards would include all the pieces for the current metaplot. Each card would list the different encounters needed for the plot, the gist of the plot, and any particulars it may need. This will make the metaplot something that has a definite structure, and the players may play through each plot in order.

Plot cards will be simple enough that original plots are not discouraged.

Encounters would include monsters, social interactions, or anything interesting. When playing, the GM chooses how he wishes to use the cards. The common format is to put the plot points into a stack and as each encounter comes up, flipping the card over and roleplaying out the encounter. A 'random' deck is kept on hand for when players decide to go off the beaten path and do other things.

Encounters may have a specific definition and a generic definition on them for greater versatility. For instance, a Dragon monster might be labeled Dragon/ Ferocious, large opponent appears.

Both GMs and players can level, which allows players to add and edit their creation cards and resolution decks, and for the GM to advance to higher plot cards and encounters.

When a new set comes out, a new part of the metaplot is revealed. New character decks come out for the new setting revealed, with a new GM deck to tell the next set of stories. Characters can be added to, or they can make new characters. Options for metamorphosis for those who wish to try out a new race might be an interesting idea.

Booster packs exist for those who want more cards and don't want to buy another character deck/GM deck, but include nothing that can't be found in the large decks.

Whether the sets should level and become more powered than the last or maintain a flexibility that anyone can start with any deck is a hard decision, as one promotes collectability but the other makes the game more entry level friendly.

*If a set came out once a year, at 10-15 dollars a deck, it is more expensive than some RPGs, but cheaper than collecting many card games. Also, if everyone buys their own stuff, definitely takes some financial burden off the GM.

Its a possibility to do it via a PDF, and actually I'm going to give that a shot- look for me within the week to have finished a conversion of Final Twilight to have it available as a PDF item, see how people take to that. Might even throw up some previews of the expansion along with it.

Actually, Gamskee, Twilight's operating along those lines- both of them really. Each set is a standalone story, but a tie into a greater, futher reaching storyline. The primary release of each set will be a deck of cards built around a specific character (Mark Jarus, Kerra Neil, Charles Faust). Each release futhers the abilities of existing characters, as well as introduces new ones. Next set released will feature 4 character decks as opposed to the 3 of Trinity, allow you to expand the capabilities of the Trinity characters or mix-n-match with the old cards with the new characters. Power levels vary within the sets, so you can jump in at any set and still be able to compete.

On developing a Customizable/Expandable card game, costs are major issues.
-Typical games and typical gamers require seperate pieces of artwork for each card, so if you're talking hundreds of cards, thats as many pieces of art. Most of the games around here have some nice cover work, some b/w interior, and in a few instances some cool pieces of fan art, but not enough to support a CG.
One way around this might be to have specific cards with some very nice pieces of artwork (Basic Character cards, weapon cards) and others be like 'utility' cards. IE Events like "Ambush in the woods!" be a 'plain text' card while "Warrior Monk" has a piece of artwork.
- If we could find a PDF way to properly do this, it would mean ALOT, more than what it means to the Indie/PDF publication. As it stands, any print order to be cost effective has to be done in the 1000's. Printing any lower than that costs ALOT. (One printer who actually ran smaller runs would cost almost $20 per 54 card set to produce.) I'm setting up the PDF sets as printable on business cards. Fairly sturdy, can easily be run off, no issues for folks on card sizes and edges and other common issues.
- The biggest issue for CGs is one that plauges RPGs, but one thats slightly worse. Because each player needs their own decks to play, its harder to get a CG to take off. Cheaper yes than an RPG, but more people need to buy in, whereas RPGs need only one actual purchaser to get a group started. Because of the nature of other games and the need to continually purchase, CG gamers are leary of getting into another one, if they need to spend a lot to play. I could and couldn't believe the reactions I got at GenCon when I explained the release format for the game. "You mean, I won't have to buy new cards every other month?!". Even still, its a difficult market to crack. If you check my site, I'm giving the game away, and folks still aren't picking it up.

I'd highly recommend tackling some of these costs before jumping into designing and comitting. I'm always open to new ideas, and I'm always exploring myself. Twilights set due out is being printed on 4x6 postcards (1000 14pt glossy stock, color both sides, $75, friend with access to major print cutting presses is cutting them for me), on which I can print 2 cards. I'm also looking at the aforementioned PDF/Business card format, which can also be printed for around the same cost (1000 14pt glossy business cards, 4 color both sides, $40). Can also get away with 1 color sides for a lot cheaper.

With the questions and ideas going around here, here's another one...I've been considering putting together a forum similar to Forge for the purpose of exploring new ways to publish card games. Should I do so, anyone interested in such a beast?

Cheaper yes than an RPG, but more people need to buy in, whereas RPGs need only one actual purchaser to get a group started. Because of the nature of other games and the need to continually purchase, CG gamers are leary of getting into another one, if they need to spend a lot to play.

Thats the idea, you CAN play with a starter deck or initial release, but in the eyes of a CG gamer, you need more than that. I have not known ANYONE who's gone ahead and picked up and played regularly with one deck/package. The starter decks teach the ropes, but a starter deck will almost always be beaten by a modified/constructed deck. Hence, part of a CG gamers first evaluation of a product is "How much am I going to have to buy to be competative?"
Even players totally new to CGs learn quickly when they start getting beaten by folks who have meticulously built decks. Normally the core kits or the starter kits are exactly that- you can play, but rarely does anything truly stand out. To play and win, players need to invest in the expansions and the power cards(items) therein.

Besides, as to cost, do a little bit of math. One Forge release might run $20, you have a group of 4 people who play, breakdown on that for one play group is $5 per person then. Now, the GM Owner of the book turns around and runs ANOTHER game with another 3 people- thats 7 people playing off one book. Thats $2.84 investment per player and only two groups playing, where there could easily be more players or more groups. Assuming the author only goes on to add additional flavor stuff available on the website for free, which isn't unreasonable, the only investment is the $20.
For your average CCG, each player at the minimum needs 1 deck ($10). After a couple of games, they realize they're learning the ropes, but not competing as well, so they buy say 3 Booster packs of the expansions available ($4 per pack, $12 total). Normally, the rares will be about all they can really make use of, either in game or as trading fodder, so they get 3 cards and around 42 coasters, depending on the player. Thats a $22 investment per player. For those two play groups of 7 people, thats $154 spent, within I'd say the first two weeks of playing (1 week learning the ropes playing regularly because the games can be played quickly, next week spent getting new cards and modifying decks). Considering your normal, regular playing, dedicated CG player will have a couple hundred to a thousand plus cards, thats a drop in the bucket, toward 'getting started'.

Okay folks, lets see if we can't do this, shall we?

Hunters is an attempt at doing this, alibet possibly not really come to think of it.
SO, I'd like folks involved here to drop by the Hunters thread and offer up some suggestions. Lets see what we can cobble together.

Also, check out A Grand Experiment over in Publishing, lets see what that produces as well.

daMoose_Neo wrote: Thats the idea, you CAN play with a starter deck or initial release, but in the eyes of a CG gamer, you need more than that.

-_-
The market for a CG is totally different than it is for an RPG. The core material will satisfy almost any RPG gamer, those who really enjoy will pick up the additional stuff.
You also have players in the RPG market who'll pick up a new game when they see it- drop $20, read the book, run a game or two or religate it to the bookshelf to thumb through when you need some inspiration for a new game or session.

CG Gamers are not like that, and I'm not damning CG designers (I'd rather not like to damn myself), but its irresponsible for a CG designer not to take the CG player mentality into account.
Magic is THE model for CG gaming. Folks have, for 11 years, been deluged with around 3 expansions a year, highly regulated tournament systems, ultra rare cards they have to mortgage their homes over in order to possess, and shallow reprint after reprint. This is what players are used to, this is what players expect.
There is no "independant CG" scene like there is for RPGs, so the control and innovation still lies with the suits, and this is what they produce.
Thus, here is how they look at it-

1) How much does it cost me to get started WITH MY OWN DECK? CG players like to customize, take advantage. These are, without a doubt, the ultimate munchkins. They want to know the power cards, and what it will take to get them.
1a) What will it cost to get what I want? Almost the same as #1, but slightly different- what some folks play with and what they want aren't always the same. I know some kids and older folks even who played the Pokemon CG who desperatly want a Charrizzard. Not because they really needed it for their deck, but because, come on, this is Charizzard we're talkin about! I HAVE to have it!
2) How many people play? If theres not many, they won't pick up the game, because they'll have no one to play with. A game that not many people know of or play without major corporate backing isn't likely to be at every FLGS, so even if they DO buy something, their friends won't be able to play without the hassle of trying to see if it can be ordered online.
3) What am I already playing and what does that cost? This is a huge factor as well- how much free money does this person have to spend on yet ANOTHER CG? If they're already playing three other games, its difficult to get them to pick up another CG, because of #1- their money is already allocated to the next Magic precon decks, the next Yugioh booster release, the next Pokemon boxed set and they need a couple more Yu Yu Hakusho boosters to get Card X.
4) Whats the release schedule, whats already available? This is an odd one- too many expansions with too short a release period and they'll be turned off, in their mind its too much to keep up with, too much to buy. Too few, however, and the game must not be successful enough. Too long between releases and its the same. Around two releases per year, rather evenly spaced, one in summer, one in winter, seem to be satisfactory.

Other factors-
- Artwork is under more scrutiny. RPGs routinely use interior B/W images, not always too complex, but very nice, very appropriate pieces. CGs have artwork everywhere, full color, highly detailed. This is what players expect to find, and will be quite disappointed without it. As long as it fits the genre or original lisence, thats fine, but it does have to meet a higher standard.
- Ease of rules is important here too. Not many CG gamers sit at the table with a copy of the rulebook, they trust that their initial readings (usually once or twice) and their friends instruction to be 100% correct. RPGs, on the other hand, usually don't start unless theres some kind of reference handy. Its just not in the CG players mindset to have that with them. Thus, the CG rules need to be easy, obvious, and self explanitory, not so players don't need the rulebook but because, rule-of-thumb, players WON'T have a rulebook with them at all games.
Case in point, Last tournament I held for Twilight, I had an interesting situation. One of the kids spoke to me before the event all excited by his deck, how he had it so customized...and had me thoughly confused. At the tournament, I double checked the decks, and sure enough, his deck was illegal- violated one of THE most basic rules in deck construction. The kid in question proceeded to argue with me about it, but not too long- Pointed right in the rules where the deck construction clause was, right in plain sight, at the beginning of the booklet. He knew the system well, just there were parts he glazed over, and as I said, likely played with the rulebook out once. In an RPG, a player's first reaction (in my experiance) has been to whip out a rulebook and look it up or let it slide- with a CG, players don't do that, and you can't quite let things slide.


A CG is a different creature than an RPG, and CG players are different creatures than RPG players. Even folks who play both respond differently to both systems, because they are so radically different.
A CG player will not simply buy one deck. They'll look at the game, the system, run their own version of that list above through their mind, and either walk away, or buy a stack of cards. Thats the mentality.

I'm not going to argue with any of the points you've made. You have described the stereotypical CCG player to a "T".

There is no "independant CG" scene like there is for RPGs, so the control and innovation still lies with the suits, and this is what they produce.

Stereotypical or not, it hasn't answered my question. The CG players mentality doesn't turn my 'the basics is all you need' example into a blood sucking design. About the only basis for argument it gives is that all CG players are like alcoholics and that even by producing a light beer, that beer is an evil design since they'll buy tons of it, consuming it without thought.

It's a little 'think of the children!' for me. Anyway, I've said my piece so I wont waste forge space repeating it further, in arguement.

greedo1379 wrote: This however threw me a bit. This still just smacks of "you don't have a chance so why bother." Which seems especially strange since you are producing your own card game.

Stupid practical question:
Why not simply size the cards in such a way that they could be printed on sticky backed paper, cut out and placed over the face side of standard playing cards? They need to be smaller, to allow straitline cutting as opposed to the rounded corners of most regular decks, but that shouldn't cut down size for art and text too much.

For deck customization, why not simply give cards a point value, as they do with miniatures in GW wargames? Decks could then be simply compared on that value. Perhaps certain combos of cards could increase their value pointwise, especially if they are specifically designed to be used together.

As for expansisons and profit, simply have the things as low cost pdfs. Who cares how many copies are printed? Someone pays for the initial purchase, then prints as many as they need. If the game really takes off, then maybe the designer uses the profits to print an official copy of the game. This seems to be a method used by rpg designers who initially offer freebie rulesets (that build up a following), then release a pdf or hardcopy later for folks that want one. A recent thread in the publishing forums suggested this strategy had worked for indie rpgs. Why not for customizable card games?

Besides, a certain kind of gaming elitism sells really well. I've certainly played a lot of WH40k with non-GW minis and even paper proxies. But I wouldn't think of showing up at game shop or convention ( even a non-GW sponsored one) with something like that. People could certainly play with homemade decks with their pals, but "real" players would want to have the commercial stuff.

I think that the comments on having expansions on a regular basis is also telling, and does point to a marketing strategy. Having a core set available, with some expansions already in the queue is probably a good idea, especially if this was to be a commercial venture. Also, after a certain point, why not sell just the expansions and release the inital core pdfs as freebies? This is sort of the opposite of rpgs, which seem to release supplements to boost sales of core materials. Instead, it plays into the CCGamer urge to get the newest and bestest stuff firstest, while potentially expanding your market to new players. Again, I would compare this to the GW example, where they have released a number of their specialist games (Necromunda, Inquisitor, etc) as free downloads, presumably to sell off the backstock of miniatures and also prime their fans for future revised versions if the interest is there.

On the plus side, that strategy allows for a lot of playtesting prior to going to print. CCGs are imfamous for going to print without forseeing vicious card combos, and later having to adjust rules to make up for it.

As for some of the less pleasant aspects of CCGs, I seem to recall that it wasn't some part of an evil mastermind's secret plan for world domination. Instead, it was a combination of qualities that lead to a new form of hobby.
1) Cheap initial buy-in.
Sure we ended up spending gobs of money over time, but it was generally in bite-sized chunks. This made it easier to accumulate even on a limited budget.

2) It referenced baseball cards.
There was something inherently familiar about the packaging, and the joy of busting open a pack of cards to see what goodies were inside is hard to beat. I still think it should have been sold with a stick of hard bubblegum, though.
3) Short rules:
Not always particularly helpful, and we certainly ran into the same pitfalls of cursory understanding as mentioned above. However, the bulk of the rules fit in a short document meaning initial time to play was small. Most of the rules exceptions and variants are on the cards themselves.
4) It was competitive.
Even folks that don't "get" rpgs can still understand competition from experience with other games, thus a bigger market. Plus, it can be fun to show up your best pals and not feel bad about it.
5) It was portable.
Take a deck that fits in your pocket and head for your favorite coffee shop. A small two top is big enough to play most CCGs ( not Jyhad, but y'know...). Not a backpack of heavy hardcover books.
6) Play time is quick (generally)
A match up over lunchbreak? Sure, no problem.
7) Downtime hobby activity.
What? They bested your weenie deck? Think about it while watching Friends. I'm sure you'll come up with something to nail the SOB next time...
8) Rampant consumerism.
You're going to spend your gaming dollars somewhere. CCGs give at least a gambler's chance that doing so will lead directly to enhanced in-game capability. Buying extra rulebooks and supplements for your favorite rpg may or may not do this. Also, at least among my group of friends, costs are spread out among all players. No more Mr. GM buys 16 books, players buy their clanbook, maybe.
9) Infectious.
This relates to #8 and #1. If you ever played a CCG for a little while, you inevitably built up a collection of extra cards. Some were crap, but some were useful, but you just had them in greater than necessary numbers. Almost as inevitably, you'd meet someone who was curious about the game and you'd pawn off a bunch of that stuff on them. They'd be competitive, but not as competitive as you with your more complete collection. They'd want some payback, and thus another CCG junkie was born.
10) Most CCGs are designed for two people dueling ( again, not Jyhad).
You only need to make arrangements for play around one other person's schedule, not 4 or more. Combined with #6, this becomes even easier to do.

Err, soorry for the long post. Too much caffeine...
Robert
[edited for stuff...]

Nah, good post, good analysis.
#1 is a wonderfully idealistic vision. Thats what I loved about the older sets of Magic and older designs, such as the first few Pokemon sets (which actually are about as old as most of the Magic expansions I like to play) and even Overpower. You got some kick azz stuff, a little chaff, but mostly stuff you could use, it was great. The thrill of opening a pack and finding an awesome card thats perfect for your deck is a very nice rush.
You're right about the lack of an evil master plan. CCGs started, and many still play, all in good fun.

#8 and #9 at this point are the trouble spots for new games. Finding a way to do a decent PDF distribution would be key in breaking this down, and I'm really keen on finding a way to do it.
#8 is a bind because of the aforementioned titles which are saturating the market. The players are literally hooked and because of the cycle the companies employ, the players who are dedicated are locked in with it. I'll agree with the playtesting too- the companies are very poor at it. Actually, looking at the latest sets for Magic, I see little playtesting, no need for it when 98% of the set is a reworded, recosted reprint. The few real innovations are broken and quickly "edited" or banned, which is truly regretable. But, the companies are responding to problems in fan demand and their own enforced tournament cycle. Rather than allow all sorts of sets in the tourny scene and proceed to design for the sake of design, they lock in what can be used, essentially forcing them to reprint or revise cards to keep the fan base happy, another nasty cycle.
Whats made lasting titles so far in the market is the extensive tournament support. Yu-gi-oh sponsors events at retailers, Magic has World Tours, Pokemon has major events and tournaments, and each have hundreds or thousands of dollars in prize money to award. Even Upper Deck's VS system jumped right into the thick of things with a tournament system quite similar to Magic with the stated intent of taking them on on their own turf.
And that leads to #9. Infectious works when you have people who love playing, and any game can be infectious. Existing CG Gamers are a hard crowd to draw if you don't have the above. While very rare, new CG gamers however are a blast. They've seen them played, they've looked at the cards, but finally there is a game they actually GET. That was the coolest thing for me at GenCon.

Re: Print methods
As I said, I am VERY keen on finding a way to do this. Not only would it be a great boon to players and designers all over, it'd save *me* thousands of dollars, lol. It'd also give rise to the kind of innovation the market currently lacks, the kind of innovation the posters here at the Forge help provide for Indie RPGs. CCGs don't have that right now, because there is no way to effectively produce an indie title.
On a more serious note, I AM trying some things, and I'd like to see others do so I suppose. The methods you're suggesting are a little too crude and too much labor for your average CG Gamer. An Indie fan who wants to try something new maybe, but that much work to create a deck? Printing 60+ cards, cutting them out, sticking them to decks, thats alot of work.
My approach is take advantage of home office supplies. Avery business cards ^_^ Trying the approach with Twilight, and that CCRPG Hunters thread I referenced.

My *biggest* problem was with the initial concept of this thread, the idea of a collectable role playing game. I have my own issues with the current CCG market, but it really went against my grain to suggest artificially limiting something that, really, is unlimited. Hunters, oddly, shows some promise, even when it was started as an experiment to see what a collectable RPG would be. Who knows, maybe it'll fly, and it might even help point a way to a decent PDF CG model.
Like any other medium, when handled properly, a CCG is a wonderful game with its own benefits.

[ Addendum ] I just remembered something...Twilight was originally written to be distributed on the net, a downloadable text file, lol. Copy the rules text onto a 3x5 index card and play, lol. Gotta love old notes.

There is a thread over on rpgnet regarding card resorces. The link is in a post one or two down the page. Would this help?

http://rpg.net/showthread.php?t=163530

Robert

I got this from John Corradin of Days of Knights, and have been meaning to do it (to the point of having gotten the materials) in working with the proposed Multiverser CCG.

Most stores that sell cards also sell deck protectors. We got a couple packs of fifty pretty cheap. The beauty of the deck protector is you can print your cards on ordinary paper, cut them, and slip them in the protectors--this hides the back and standardizes the sizes and shapes of all the cards, while making them stiff enough for play.

In reading this, I've suddenly wondered whether there's a potential marketing strategy in a PDF approach done a bit differently.

Rather than attempt to print up several thousand cards for use in our playtesting and so create random decks, I'm planning on designing the cards and then letting the playtesters pick which ones they want--thus printing only the ones they choose. I'll probably group them nine to a sheet and print them in sheets--but I don't really have to do that. It could be possible to create each card as its own card-sized PDF and then sell them individually. It would be pennies a card or something, with pricing based on desired rarity. Players would then buy the individual cards they want, print as many as they desire of these, and build their own decks. There would be no weeding through the junk in scores of packs to get the good cards--you would just order the cards you thought you would use, and put them in the deck. I imagine order forms which would allow players to check all the cards they wanted, total the bill, and give them all the downloads. (More difficult, certainly, but perhaps more desirable would be some sort of software system that would compile the selected cards into multi-page documents so that there would be a single download, but I don't know whether there's anything capable of doing this in PDF format.)

Thoughts?

--M. J. Young

Re: Playtests
Thats the best way to do it. Twilight's decks were first index cards, then prints in slips, exactly like that. I gave my testers a list of the cards for the set, let them construct deck lists based on that, and ran them off.

Tip: To make life REALLY easy during design, use Microsoft Access to create the cards in a database for easy management and the report function to create a card layout. My database got complex for Twilight, but I have it constructed so that I can generate a new database for a deck, select the cards from a drop down menu, and run a report based on that database formatted to the cards. Quite fun, very very handy ^_^

I'm not sure if players would take to the process for actual use though, and thats my concern. Even my playtesters baulked at the work behind doing a playtest deck. If I presented them with a deck it wasn't minded so much, and they still loved the game, but just something about them doing it themselves bothered them.

I think it'll be important with PDF card games to make a definate distinction between "Collectable" and "Customizable". MJ, your process, which would work quite well I'd imagine if you have the players, places it firmly within the Customizable.
Cavet on customs done as such...you'll likely need something of a market before it'll really work. MJ's got a built in one with Multiverser. Newbies or traditional CCG players may be leary of putting that much work into an unknown. Someone accustomed to Indie games, though, might better appreciate it.

Re: Card material
Acutally, there ARE better sources. Newts is one I've looked at, but found a couple better. I have the link on my old PC (moving into a new one at the moment) and will provide it once I've got it again.
The drawbacks to inkjet cards printed as such is you have to be careful in the design. You'll want minimal printing on them actually, as much white space as you can get away with, otherwise the cards are too saturated
and don't stand up as well (results of a few dozen experiments ^_^)

EDIT:
Re: Software-
Just noticed that bit and realized you could do it, alot easier than you might think.
Using my database process, create a secured web database and a script that reads these order forms. It can then generate the cards based on the form, build the form to print 9 to a "sheet" and make it printable, either as a web document or as a PDF (I know PHP has a PDF extension for making PDF's based on web input).

Hi, this is my first post on the forge, and I have to say it's an awesome sight. I can't wait to get my hands on MLWM!

This thread on CCGs/RPGs is of particular interest to me - many years ago I embarked on such a project: Shadow of The Prince of Darkness CCRPG

They way I had it working was for PCs to be built from a points buy system, so that stats and character features were not part of the collectable aspect. The reasoning behind this was basically to avoid limiting player choice - you could build whatever character you wanted regardless of what cards you owned.

The collectable/customizible aspect was for each player to have their own personal deck of game cards, basically a combat deck.
Character stats act a the pre-requisite resources to enable one to play a particular card. So no resource screws! The bane of CCGs.

Each combat card would also have a generic card value printed for use as a fortune check device, so decks could be skewed, but primarily the value would be a balancing device as more powerful cards would have a lower printed value. Similar to the L5R CCG mechanic of focus value.

However, the task of creating and balancing an entire card set has thus far proven too much for me :-( Richard Garfield is a mathematician dammit.

So I returned to the system and modified it so that each player just used a standard deck of playing cards. Just finishing this system has taken me long enough as I've only worked on it intermittently. But it's done now!
Well at a playtesting stage anyways.

Reading the rest of this thread has re-kindled my interest in the project as a hybrid, and as the rules currently stand it would be pretty simple to re-introduce the CCG element.

I would really appreciate some feedback on my game, I'll post more details in the indie-game design forum.

I'm afraid the game is only available as a MS word document at the moment and its about 3 MB. But if you have MS word you can import your own pics onto the character sheets!

If anyone is interested in reading it remove the (nopythonrefs) and email me at

shadowofpod(nopythonrefs)@hotmail.com

Cheers all

Joe
Peas? Owt.