/lounge/ - Lounge

Basic Description of Mechanics

Gameplay progresses over a series of Rounds which are themselves comprised of a number (TBD) of Player Turns

Rounds will each have some semi-random universal modifier applied to them

There's a moving "Target" that makes its way across a map over the course of the Round

The Target and Players start at the same location on the map

The Players all have the same goal but different abilities meant to help them achieve it

The map is made up of several locations, all have a number of movement spaces on them and have a gimmick of one kind or another (e.g. no doing "x" in the starting location, "y" actions are stronger/weaker in this location etc.)

The Players are competing to interact with this Target, with multiple successful interactions eventually winning them the game; the Players each have an individual score relating to the Target which gets altered through successful interactions with the Target, interactions with other Players and other externalities

If the Players land on the same space as each other they can "Fight"

After a Fight the losing Player goes back to the Starting Location and loses their next Turn

Challenges:

__Mathematically equalizing the chances of the players as much as possible regardless of the asymmetry in play style__

Every conceivable Character action or statistic will have to be quantified as a value relating to the Player's potential success

__Variables/Variable Count__

In the game as it is now the Characters have 8 individual "stats" associated with them directly and several more indirectly, which is way too many, and with numbers as high as 100 on top of that.

My way of addressing this while still being "in character" to the game is to cut these stats to less than half. I'm thinking about replacing the idea of point totals with tracks that get pulled into the positive or negative given in-game conditions and fiddling with what that could mean (rather than "negative number" think of it more like the spectrum of a pair of conflicting traits).

I will reduce digits to a maximum of 10 (the win condition) and below (Character stats on the track will be -5 to +5 with different Characters having different minimums, maximums and potential bonuses affecting this). This may be confusing so it's still something I'm thinking about.

__Constants/Constant Count__

Most obvious and pressing are big picture issues like number of Locations and Movement Spaces on the board. So far I believe 4 total on-board locations are sufficient, but Movement Spaces are to be determined. I'll have to figure this out by thinking about things like total potential game time

__Movement__

Currently the Target moves a random number of location spaces (in this case, up to 7 Movement Spaces-this is meaningless without determining the total number of Movement Spaces the map is made up of, but bear with me).

I think the Target should move a set number of location points per turn while being beholden to certain externalities such as the modifiers applied to the round, player actions etc.

Further questions around movement are: How Player movement works in general. Does the Player have to land directly on the Target to "interact" or can they stop to interact with the target even if they'd moved further (the latter being a character's special ability is a strong consideration). How to design the map so that Players have a good chance to interact with the Target and how to give them an even better chance to do so if they aren't able to for a turn.

__Fighting__

The current manner of doing it made no sense to the point it doesn't even beggar description. In my case I'll look to implement a sort of "Rock Paper Scissors+" system I'll elaborate on some other time.

These are just some of the things I'm thinking about for now, there's still obviously a lot more to consider.

Before you get bogged down with mechanics, is there any world lore that's ironed out?

>>100270
Yeah that stuff is pretty much all there. What my friend and his buddy had gotten started 10 years ago was just a poorly conceived but conceptually clever "idea" that never really went as far as it could have. Its biggest fault was it was just simply an idea and the mechanics were framed around it more to complement the idea but with blatant disregard for coherent gameplay and balance

(Unfortunately I have to keep a lot of those specific details to myself for this specific project as they aren't mine to reveal heh)

Coming up with stuff like that is the fun part, the real work is making it function. Like when I played RPG Maker on the PS1 I spent all this time on items and enemies only to realize I essentially hadn't started making the game yet. This is sort of a similar situation, but there's enough of a template to give the project a head start

I had an idea for a board game where you walk around a map and get a random monster follower that would be chosen for you in a deck of cards. Every monster would have their own unique abilities and it would cost you movement to activate them(if you rolled a 6 and an ability costs 3 movement, then you could only move 3 spaces for example). The objective of the game is to collect all the boss keys on the map and get the treasure at the end. You can kill other players to get their keys, but you have to get through their monster first(the goblin would would also be able to steal items from players you pass). There would also be items and equipment cards that you can get, similar to chance and community chest in Monopoly. If a player dies they restart at the beginning of the map and get to re-roll a new monster. I never got around to making it, because nobody would play it anyway LMAO!

Already thinking about scrapping the "stat track" idea because I feel like it might complicate things even more than having a superlative amount of stat types would lol.

"With this item and these character defaults I have 3 Yang, so that means I have -1 Ying! Which means...DUH!"

There might be some potential here but I'll really need to think about it. Doing it that way I'm not even technically eliminating variables either, I'm just displaying them in a different-and more confusing-manner. Ultimately I want this to be almost retard-proof like, say, Munchkin, one of the most basic donkey games of all time but admittedly one I'd had fun with here and there.

Thinking about __Movement__ again

There's no way having the Target move randomly other than through external pressures is desirable, the Target itself could be thought of as a "round timer" and making it too erratic seems ill-advised. Players will however move according to dice rolls and other externalities; Character defaults, Round Modifiers and so on.

I've settled on the need for the Player (barring exceptional circumstance like a card or character ability) to land directly on the spot of the Target or miss their potential interaction (i.e. you can't end up going a further distance and expect to get a guaranteed interaction, and without special circumstance can't "go back" or "wait" for the Target to catch up). Apart from that, the track needs to be set up in such a way that Player Characters can cut off the Target as well as confront each other.

In this regard I will include paved vs unpaved pathways between many movement spaces, the latter of which having a significant chance (50%) to apply a "debuff" of sorts to most Characters that take it, with maybe one of the current four Characters suffering no penalties as a special ability.

It stands to reason that the Target landing on a space already occupied by a Player who'd risked the unpaved road would illicit the same result

>>100280
That sounds pretty cool tbh

BEASTMASTER

>>100275
>(Unfortunately I have to keep a lot of those specific details to myself for this specific project as they aren't mine to reveal heh)
Come on, nobody is going to steal his idea that he probably is never going to get around to executing anyway. At least try to describe things vaguely.

>>100268
>>100281
I'm not sure I have a clear idea of how this game works, but centering the game around a target that moves every round sounds frustrating, especially when it's something the players need to keep track of themselves since it isn't automated.

>>100284
Think of a round like a race with a start and "finish line". The Target moves first and at a simple static rate (preliminarily I'll say it moves "3 Spaces" whereas the players will move in a more erratic fashion that will mathematically average to keeping at near pace to the Target). The Target follows a stable path but will end up getting manipulated by Player actions and abilities; the round ends either when the Target "passes the finish line" or perhaps after a certain number of turns.

Nothing is set in stone so some of this stuff could be tweaked. Maybe the Target has a head start of a few spaces, maybe it starts in the opposite direction, really could arrange it in multiple ways but I'm going to try and stick closest to the original vision for the time being. Well, actually in the original it used a grid movement system but that to me seems to make it inherently overcomplicated and unnecessary given the nature of the game

Tfw no irl buddies to play board games with