Had a dumb little mechanic idea a week ago... for like a Wild West gunfighting type game

Each character would at least have this one stat called Draw. Some would have the good hand, with 15 draw. Others would have the Bad Hand with 10 draw. Before a fight both get to write down how much of their draw their gonna use. Sure the Good hand could ensure victory, but then he would have almost none left over and be shot by the next little guy he met, so conservation of draw points is important as they burn when you use em and take a while to regenerate. It kinda makes each round of combat like a poker match, as neither side knows how much the other is gonna use, and neither knows if the other is a good or bad hand, and neither know how much the other has left.
After both have dedicated how much draw they'll use, the GM checks it and the one with the higher wins, the one with the lower dies (or not if you have some drama point system, reroll system, or dramatic editing or luck stat or something). If theyre the same amount then either they both die, or they both miss.

Is that serviceable or is it too simple for use?

Hello,

Actually, I rather like that. It reminds me a bit of Pace, a game by Fred (iago), which you can probably run a search to find out more about, and also some aspects of the genius western game Dust Devils.

A mechanic all by itself, though, isn't much to go on. Think about the whole game or at least more than a few parts in action. What sort of play-experience do you see the people having around the table - what kind of fun, what kind of interactions?

Best,
Ron

There's actually a huge problem with it, unless I misunderstand what you mean by conserving points.

Players will be motivated to conserve their cards because they want to survive the next fight too.

GM characters have no such motivation. The GM can simply throw 10 cards from his bad hand every time just to bleed a player's good hand away.

I see a problem quite the opposite from Valamir's (so I'm probably wrong ;)
If combat is deadly, there's no point in conserving draw, since every fight might be the last, and the dead don't get to use the "draw" they saved. So players likely would likely "give their best" and hope they'll have enough time to regenerate (or try to run away, until they're ready again.)
Maybe you could clarify a bit on the mechanic.

I think both montag's and valamir's points are accurate and is what I was already thinking after the first post.

A further problem I see. It's not realistic in the least to the material you are drawing (sorry for the pun) from. In any western, in every fight the gun fighter gives it his all everytime he is never thinking of oh I should be a little less accurate or a little slower this time incase something that I don't know about is going to happen around the next corner.

The only way I can see a mechanic like this working is if you add a little something to it.....So here's a revision.

The draw hand is the number of cards a fighter can draw upon. However the fewer the cards he draws the faster he is, the more cards he draws the greater chance he'll have of making a good hand and increasing his accuracy but he'll be slower.

So in your scenario. Both fighters still secretly right down how many cards they are going to draw based on their hand. But drawing cards doesn't deplete your 'Draw' size so if your Draw is 10 you can always draw up to 10.

The GM plays 5 cards and this is the base hand. There are two ways to win the fight now.

Once they declare how many they are drawing the person who declared the least ammount of cards draws first.

If you draw first and beat the base hand you win and wound/kill your opponent. If however you draw first and don't beat the base hand then your opponent draws his cards and you compare yours vs his. Between the two of you whoever gets the base hand wins and wounds/kills your opponent.

You might also want to take a look at a card game like Texas hold 'em, where the dealer has a "flop" that can be used by either player to build his hand. That way either gunslinger knows something of what he's likely to see in his opponents hand, and can play more cards accordingly.

Another mechanic you may consider for brevity/familiarity is similar to the game of blackjack. The players each call for cards in turn and try to get 21 without getting over. Then the dealer tries for 21. If the dealer wins, both shots miss. If either player beats the dealer, the high hand kills his opponent. A hand that goes over 21 can be considered a botch: gun jams, looses his nerve, etc.

You'll want to modify the value of cards used, the breakpoint, etc to make sure that you're getting the right number of successful outcomes for the flavor of your game. You'll also want to figure some way of putting player/character skill into the mix, possibly by upping the # of hands that can be played by more skilled gunfighters. (Eg more skilled gunfighters have more than one hand in a single exchange.) Adding bets on each hand to the mix could also be interesting.

I really dig Kryyst's idea on the matter.

If I may suggest a further step up on your idea.

I can't remember the name of the game, but in Vegas I played a poker-based table game where one would get 7 cards. You'd use two cards to make a 'low' hand and five to make a 'high' hand. If you lost both hands to the dealer, then you lost your bet. If both your hands are better than the dealer's, then you win. If you win one and loose one, then you 'push', you neither win nor loose.

Here's my suggestion based upon that game.

Each gunslinger gets a number of cards equal to his or her Draw attribute. One or two cards are placed to the side to make the 'speed' hand, and the remaining cards are used for the 'accuracy' hand. Both participants reveal their speed hand first. The winner of the speed hand reveals his accuracy hand first, then the looser of the speed hand reveals his accuracy hand.

Now, I see two ways to resolve this. The down & dirty way would be, if one character wins both the speed and accuracy hand, then they out right kill the the other before being injured at all. The more complex way might be to apply the first shooter's damage, then resolve the second shooter's attack. If the first shooter has a good enough hand to kill or cripple the second shooter, then there is no return fire, or the return shot is not as effective as the cards might say... etc.

I think I like the Down & Dirty way better. If you have confidence that your GM isn't fudging the results, then you've got to have some solid balls to get into a fair gunfight. The cards could just whoop you.

While I'm thinking along these lines, using the cards in any format could have a neat little twist. Say one of the gunslingers want's to cheat? Armor plating, a mirror to blind the other gunfighter, etc. One could say the cheating character has "An Ace Up His Sleeve", eh? So maybe cheating should give the player an Ace to add to his hand?

Anyway, to directly address the topic, I too think that saving up for future gunfights is kinda... bad flavor for the situation. It just wouldn't quite feel right I think. On the other hand, drawing playing cards and setting out a poker hand (no matter what specific method used) to determine the results of a shoot-out sounds like it would be terrific.

Good luck to you in the development.

I can't remember the name of the game, but in Vegas I played a poker-based table game where one would get 7 cards. You'd use two cards to make a 'low' hand and five to make a 'high' hand. If you lost both hands to the dealer, then you lost your bet. If both your hands are better than the dealer's, then you win. If you win one and loose one, then you 'push', you neither win nor loose.

Something like Otherkind might work here. Your Draw score determines how many cards you get to draw. Then you assign cards to various aspects like Speed, Accuracy, Defense and such. The high card in speed goes first. Your accuracy card needs to beat the target's defense, etc.

For wrinkles, you could allow traits to modify the value of certain suits or enhance aspects. "Fast Draw" could increase the value of any card put into Speed, for instance.

If you delay the re-shuffle until after a few exchanges, then you can introduce the gambling effect that Crackerjacker suggested initially.