<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.1.3" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rehabilitation #2: Top Trumps</title>
	<link>http://www.xorph.com/dispatch/2005/04/30/rehabilitation-2-top-trumps/</link>
	<description>Collaborative game design</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 12:38:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.3</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Kevan</title>
		<link>http://www.xorph.com/dispatch/2005/04/30/rehabilitation-2-top-trumps/#comment-107</link>
		<author>Kevan</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2007 13:17:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xorph.com/dispatch/2005/04/30/rehabilitation-2-top-trumps/#comment-107</guid>
					<description>Basic ludemetic hybrid: &lt;b&gt;Yahtzee Trumps&lt;/b&gt; - each player has one "box" for each stat, and is dealt cards one after the other, assigning each to a box of their choice, as they come. For each box, you score points equal to the card's stat that matches the box. (Perhaps adjusted somehow, if you're using a deck that has wildly disparate numbers for different stats.)

Thematically, perhaps, you're assembling a team of X characters or vehicles or dinosaurs to send on a mission ("aha, Gandalf, you can be our spellcaster"), and the most well-assigned team wins.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Basic ludemetic hybrid: <b>Yahtzee Trumps</b> - each player has one &#8220;box&#8221; for each stat, and is dealt cards one after the other, assigning each to a box of their choice, as they come. For each box, you score points equal to the card&#8217;s stat that matches the box. (Perhaps adjusted somehow, if you&#8217;re using a deck that has wildly disparate numbers for different stats.)</p>
<p>Thematically, perhaps, you&#8217;re assembling a team of X characters or vehicles or dinosaurs to send on a mission (&#8221;aha, Gandalf, you can be our spellcaster&#8221;), and the most well-assigned team wins.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Leonard</title>
		<link>http://www.xorph.com/dispatch/2005/04/30/rehabilitation-2-top-trumps/#comment-108</link>
		<author>Leonard</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2007 13:18:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xorph.com/dispatch/2005/04/30/rehabilitation-2-top-trumps/#comment-108</guid>
					<description>Wow, this might explain that deck of dinosaur cards I had where each card had some stats but nowhere was it explained what you were supposed to do with them. I don't think I even got as far as "play a game with them"; I just used them to learn how to draw dinosaurs (quite poorly).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, this might explain that deck of dinosaur cards I had where each card had some stats but nowhere was it explained what you were supposed to do with them. I don&#8217;t think I even got as far as &#8220;play a game with them&#8221;; I just used them to learn how to draw dinosaurs (quite poorly).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben</title>
		<link>http://www.xorph.com/dispatch/2005/04/30/rehabilitation-2-top-trumps/#comment-109</link>
		<author>Ben</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2007 13:18:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xorph.com/dispatch/2005/04/30/rehabilitation-2-top-trumps/#comment-109</guid>
					<description>As for wildly disparate numbers for different stats, you could simply say "Get one point for every player who has a lower value in that stat than you" or something.

But still, where would the strategy in that come from? I mean, I imagine it would mostly be "Hmmm, this card's best stat I haven't filled yet is Spellcasting, so into the Spellcasting box it goes."

Perhaps if different boxes were worth different amounts of points? "Hmmm, this guy has a moderate spellcasting, but not a GREAT one, and I can probably find a higher number for that box. Maybe I'll just assign him to the team's Floral Arrangement and hope I draw Gandalf later."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As for wildly disparate numbers for different stats, you could simply say &#8220;Get one point for every player who has a lower value in that stat than you&#8221; or something.</p>
<p>But still, where would the strategy in that come from? I mean, I imagine it would mostly be &#8220;Hmmm, this card&#8217;s best stat I haven&#8217;t filled yet is Spellcasting, so into the Spellcasting box it goes.&#8221;</p>
<p>Perhaps if different boxes were worth different amounts of points? &#8220;Hmmm, this guy has a moderate spellcasting, but not a GREAT one, and I can probably find a higher number for that box. Maybe I&#8217;ll just assign him to the team&#8217;s Floral Arrangement and hope I draw Gandalf later.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevan</title>
		<link>http://www.xorph.com/dispatch/2005/04/30/rehabilitation-2-top-trumps/#comment-110</link>
		<author>Kevan</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2007 13:18:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xorph.com/dispatch/2005/04/30/rehabilitation-2-top-trumps/#comment-110</guid>
					<description>Ah, yes, Yahtzee-type games do the different-point thing, don't they? Perhaps roll or decide some weightings for each stat, at the start of the game, then; "This mission really needs a strong dinosaur, could use a fast one, would help if it had a heavy one, and eh, doesn't matter which period they were alive in." - you'd get three points for every opposing dinosaur that your strong one beats, two for each fast one, one for weight, and the period box would be irrelevant.

What other types of game could be played? I vaguely remember pushing face-down cards around a tiled kitchen floor, twenty years ago, and not getting anywhere; would Stratego work? Or something less board-based, but still with face-down bluffing - a Netrunner-style base-guarding game? Hera and Zeus? (I've never played the latter, but it seems to be in the same sort of area.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah, yes, Yahtzee-type games do the different-point thing, don&#8217;t they? Perhaps roll or decide some weightings for each stat, at the start of the game, then; &#8220;This mission really needs a strong dinosaur, could use a fast one, would help if it had a heavy one, and eh, doesn&#8217;t matter which period they were alive in.&#8221; - you&#8217;d get three points for every opposing dinosaur that your strong one beats, two for each fast one, one for weight, and the period box would be irrelevant.</p>
<p>What other types of game could be played? I vaguely remember pushing face-down cards around a tiled kitchen floor, twenty years ago, and not getting anywhere; would Stratego work? Or something less board-based, but still with face-down bluffing - a Netrunner-style base-guarding game? Hera and Zeus? (I&#8217;ve never played the latter, but it seems to be in the same sort of area.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh</title>
		<link>http://www.xorph.com/dispatch/2005/04/30/rehabilitation-2-top-trumps/#comment-111</link>
		<author>Josh</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2007 13:19:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xorph.com/dispatch/2005/04/30/rehabilitation-2-top-trumps/#comment-111</guid>
					<description>I'm certain a kind of chess / Risk hybrid would work. Drawing from a deck, one must tactically assign start positions from the drawn cards, and the stats that each card is able to bring into play is defined by their start position - e.g. a card assigned to Rook can use Strength and Agility, the Bishop can use Agility and Wisdom, the Knight can use Speed and Agility, the Queen can use the whole lot etc.

Movement could be based on tradtitional chess positions, or derived from the strength of an active stat, like our Bishop being able to move diagonally a number of spaces equal to, or greater than, its Agility. I suppose conflict can be resolved in the usual Top Trumps manner, although I'd rather another combat method could be found... any ideas? The Risk aspect comes from the possibility of assigning many attackers to one defender, is that practical?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m certain a kind of chess / Risk hybrid would work. Drawing from a deck, one must tactically assign start positions from the drawn cards, and the stats that each card is able to bring into play is defined by their start position - e.g. a card assigned to Rook can use Strength and Agility, the Bishop can use Agility and Wisdom, the Knight can use Speed and Agility, the Queen can use the whole lot etc.</p>
<p>Movement could be based on tradtitional chess positions, or derived from the strength of an active stat, like our Bishop being able to move diagonally a number of spaces equal to, or greater than, its Agility. I suppose conflict can be resolved in the usual Top Trumps manner, although I&#8217;d rather another combat method could be found&#8230; any ideas? The Risk aspect comes from the possibility of assigning many attackers to one defender, is that practical?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

