So I'm working on a game where players play as townsfolk in a world full of monsters. Players can play as miners, farmers, merchants, fishermen and many other roles and must cooperate in order to survive in the world.
I was thinking for a while that it might be interesting if a game of Go Fish could be used to determine success when fishing, but then I started to extend this idea to other actions as well.

First, players have three main stats:
Faster
Cheaper
Better

The goal of Go Fish is to get rid of all the cards in your hand by pairing up cards by rank to make 'books'. If you do not have a matching pair in your hand, you ask another player if they have any cards of a certain rank in their hand. If they do, you take that card and make a 'book' (a pair of cards with the same rank). If they do not, you 'Go Fish' by drawing a card.

Actions in this game have some combination of these three types of costs:
1) Time cost. You pay the time cost by drawing a certain number of cards. You complete actions by getting rid of the cards in your hand. This can take a few turns. When you have no cards in your hand, the action is complete.
Your 'Faster' stat can reduce time costs.
2) Work cost. You make 'books' by pairing up cards. Books are then used as payment for work costs. Your 'Cheaper' stat can reduce work costs.
3) Extra cost. The deck you play with contains a certain number of 'Trumps'. These don't pair up, but can be used to pay for extra costs. Extra costs are optional costs with varying effects. Your 'Better' stat can reduce these costs.

You get rid of cards in your hand by 'fishing' or 'bartering' with other players to try and get the cards you need to make a 'book' (this is supposed to represent the 'small town' theme and 'cooperation' elements of the game.)

Things to watch out for:
Exceeding your 'Limit'. If you have too many cards in your hand, your character blacks out.
The Fool card. This card has no rank and it is not a trump so it is very difficult to get rid of. You cannot complete actions with a time cost as long as this card is in your hand (your character will just work and work all day but never get anything done). Generally you have to figure out some way to get someone else to take this card from you. This mechanic is inspired by 'Old Maid'.

Hi Kevin,

I like it. Are you still thinking about it? If you haven't moved on, a couple of questions:

1. So, you envision the mechanic working for a player trying to catch fish to feed his family as well as for a player trying to kill a marauding werewolf?

2. If I'm trying to catch fish for my family, or kill a marauding werewolf, what are other players doing that they'd have cards in their hands that I could barter for?

3. If we're not doing different things, we're all fishing, or trying to kill the same werewolf, why would we even barter? Why wouldn't we just lay all our cards out and try to create the most books?

Paul

Still thinking about it, but trying to figure out how to work the kinks out.

I'm thinking about putting some limitations on 'bartering'. I do want players to be able to cooperate to complete tasks. For example, if two players are working together to fight a werewolf they ought to be able to pool their cards together to make books. Players should not, however, be able to barter their cards wherever and whenever.

Another idea I had was to kind of flip this around a bit...

Players begin each 'day' by drawing a certain number of cards in their hand. Cards in your hand represent the amount of time your character has to do work that day (lets say that every card represents about an hour by default).
When you begin a task, you draw a number of cards from the deck to create a 'task pile'. The number of cards in this pile represent the amount of time that it takes to complete that task.
You complete the task by pairing up cards from the task pile with cards from your hand.
When there are no more cards left in the task pile, the task is complete.
If other characters are near, they can assist you with the task by pairing up cards from their own hands with cards from the task pile.

When there are no more cards in your  hand, your character becomes 'exhausted' and has to rest before that character can get back to work.

Two vaguely unrelated thoughts on the process.

If the cards had differing values for differing actions or characters, for example clubs were doubled in acts of violence, then players might be reluctant to trade away cards they might need for their goals.

If co-operation was relatively blind, IE if the person who needed help had to actually ask for it and ask somewhat specifically for what he needed. And the player had to ask when performing a specific task. It could prevent everyone just laying out their hands and working out the ideal load for each player.

Those are good ideas Will.
I was also thinking maybe different ranks could represent different lengths of time.

Another idea I had after some playtesting was to incorporate a 'memory game' mechanic into this.
Depending on the situation the task pile and/or your hand may have to be placed face down.
This could be one way to handle combat.
Cards in your hand represent your HP while cards in the task pile represent the monster's HP.
When you are attacking or attacked by a monster, turn a card from your hand face up and then another player turns a card from the monster's task pile face up. If the two cards have the same rank, then whoever is attacking (you or the monster) gets the pair.
If the two face up cards do not share a rank, perhaps different effects may trigger. Maybe in this case, whoever reveals the higher rank gets some kind of advantage? Maybe in this situation, character stats may give bonuses to certain suites?

I like that, it has the nice side effect of having your options begin to narrow as you get more beat up.