Game about duellists

image

Got this game The Combatants about duelling gents and gentess in the 16-17 century. Kind of a mix between player versus player duelling board game and something you could transform into storytelling with a focus on fencing.

What I do would like to get feedback on the rules, do you get how it is played.
Less about if you see this as either a storytelling/RPG hybrid or only a board game.

image

Comments

  • Hello, it's a beauty. I just glanced over the procedures, but it already looks tempting. I will need more time to grasp resolve order.
  • DeReel said:

    Hello, it's a beauty. I just glanced over the procedures, but it already looks tempting. I will need more time to grasp resolve order.

    Thanks!

    Any suggestions what would make it easier to grasp, more pictures, diagram, wordings?!
  • Not yet.
  • Did reword/rephrase the text about turn and resolve order.
  • In the other thread I mentioned that I saw influences of 3:16 and Diaspora but did you also check out Knizia's game En Garde? That also has the same theme as your game does. Kinda like The Combatants better in some ways but… check that one out too, could be interesting to compare? Sirling made a riff off it called Flash Duel.

  • Yes, I have seen that (the Knizia game) it does what it intends very well. Not really what I did intend with this experiment. If I did succeed with my attempt is up to others to decide.
  • 2097 said:

    Kinda like The Combatants better in some ways but…

    If you have any input, about rules, wordings or anything, just put a note here or in the document.

  • I meant that "I liked the Combatants better", not that the other game "is like Combantants, but better"
  • 2097 said:

    I meant that "I liked the Combatants better", not that the other game "is like Combantants, but better"

    Did read it like that. Still, if you have any comments they are welcome!
  • edited March 27
    OK. It reminds me a lot of the duel booklets, like Aces of Aces. The finer the simulation, the more complex management gets (like taking distance into account for damage).
    So it's a question of how much the cards help.
    I hinted at : not so much for damage.
    Time slots are fine to get rid of school priorities but are underused (action order and recovery and that's it : payback is low. I'd say the quickest is the one who hit the other is fine by me)
    Combat value is one pool, right ? So there's no need for neatly arranging the dice on each square.
    I would like a card to remind me the available actions.
    Over all, I would prefer more approximations but more integration (= payback) for each mechanic. Else, I am going to default to a computer game taking all the factors into account rather than handling them.
  • We all got a different taste, and not everyone needs to like this way of gameplay, the experiment is much about to make a "player-could-get good-at-playing-this" versus the normal the character got a skill level (which is preferable in most gaming with narrative/roleplay). (aka player skill vs character skill)

    Nice that you mention the Aces of Aces, even if it is far from it, I do have some small inspiration from that as well.

    Cards are much about display and visualisation, you could remember all without it.

    Cards with rules snippets and actions were in the pipeline but did not get a priority.

    Most actions/movements and attacks will shine in combos or sequences.
  • edited March 27
    Of course I don't expect my preferences to drive your design. In a nutshell, I find the game complex but not difficult to understand. I would forget some step while playing rather than getting stuck by a rule.
    Second reading : I still don't get the greyed zones after " if the other combatant act$ late in the turn."
  • Hmm, may have to change that sentence.

  • I understand the text, not the diagram.
  • By the way, the cards and the dice placements are a way to make it easier to play. The tactileness makes it a bit like a ritual, to make you not to think of (and not have to remember) rules.

    Still have to remove unesseceray words refrences from the main text, and put those as edge cases or unusual exceptions.
  • edited March 27
    DeReel said:

    I understand the text, not the diagram.

    The greyed out areas?! I guess that is what you meant. Will add some text to them to give context.
  • Yes, the order of actions diagram with greyed out cards
  • It references to the dice used in the different values (combat, actions, leftovers).
  • OK, Some editing needed, because this doesn't fit obviously under "Resolve order".
  • Will probably move this, shuffed stuff around now some time, you could say I still have to put some of the content in right place.
  • Another shuffle (and renaming paragraphs/headings
  • It now flows more naturally for me.
  • Great! Since I know it all, I tend to be blind to the order of the text or to missing parts.
  • DeReel said:

    Say things

    2097 said:

    Say other things

    You two should add your names or alias to the credits, since you made me rearrange the text and change wordings!

  • edited March 28
    Thank you, but I just followed the rules of the forum : "engaging with the community". I am here repaying the help that I got for designing my game.
  • No problem! ... and thanks!
Sign In or Register to comment.