[Action Cards] A rules gloss that fits on the back of a card

edited February 2013 in Story Games
Just posted a blog entry on the Action Card rules This grows from a game design thread started last week. Check it out to see what Action Cards are.


Here is what the rules are without going to the link.

The host deals 5 action cards per player.

The host goes first.

Play an action card or point to a scene card and make up a story about it.

Other players may suggest additions of changes.

Each player gets one challenge a turn.

Players may challenge to force a change. The challenger adn challenged roll 2 6-sided dice. High roll wins.

If the challenger wins they only get the challenged players card and discard their card.

If the challenged player wins they get both cards.

Play goes to the left around the table.

Play till all the scene cards are played.

The player with the most victory points wins.



The goal was to make challenging cost something. In this case I didn't put the cost on the challenger but factored it into the reward the challenged player could get if they win the challenge. This will make people think twice before challenging until the potential benefit gets big (as is does late in the game).

Thoughts?

Chris Engle

Comments

  • What are victory points?
  • Sorry - that was explained in the previous thread.

    The action cards are meant to make it easier for people to make things up by giving them the nub of an idea to build off of. Players have a hand of 5 cards so they have to make due with what they have. Each card has a number on it at is how many victory points using the card gives. Interesting story cards like betrayal, cowardness, and innuendo give a lot of points. More mundane things like charge, intimidate, and good luck give few points. The idea is that a token system will encourage players to use more interesting cards. At the end of the game the players add up the victory points they've gained and the one with the highest total "wins" the game.

    The initial problem people spotted in the first thread was that players could challenge for free - which could lead aggressive (asshole) players to be abusive. The rule I added in was to put a cost to challenging so players wouldn't do them frivolously.

    I think it's a very simple system to play that guides people to make narrations. I'm just trying to figure out if it has any obvious fun killers in it.

    Chris
  • Ok! I threw in some thoughts in the other thread.
  • Here is the new thread with a full gloss of the game I'm working on.
Sign In or Register to comment.