Card Based Combat? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Card Based Combat? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Edymnion
05-14-06, 06:01 PM Now this was a very interesting varient I found in Mutants and Masterminds, and I thought it deserved some discussion for D&D.

Basically, you would use playing cards to simulate dice, which is nothing new in and of itself. What is new is the idea of playing the game with "hands". That instead of just drawing cards at random to simulate random dice, you would draw a number of cards and have a hand of "rolls" available to you. So you could then use some strategy in when to play which card for combat rolls, skill check rolls, and all the rest. So you would have to stop and strategically plan on if you wanted that sure fire hit now, or save that high card for a skill check or save later on.

Now, there would definately be a few hurdles in converting it over to D&D, since M&M uses only a d20, while D&D uses all the major dice sizes, but I like the basic idea of combining straight up roleplaying mechanics with an element of card game strategy.
alchemyprime
05-14-06, 07:17 PM I like it... I think I may try that with a new goup of characters... Thnx for the idea!
Edymnion
05-14-06, 07:59 PM Only things to figure out would be the size of the hand, how often/when to draw new cards, and finding a way to prevent them from abusing it (like making bluff checks on commoners in the middle of nowhere to get rid of low cards).
Platonix
05-14-06, 09:07 PM since M&M uses only a d20, while D&D uses all the major dice sizes
Yeah, but anything other than a d20 is reserved for HP or damage dealt. They never decide success or failure. That's why it's called the d20 system. So maybe using cards to represent d20 rolls only would be fine.
jagggar
05-14-06, 09:16 PM I guess one way would be to have a small enough deck so that as soon as they spend their low rolls on commoner bluffs they'd be reshuffled into the deck (or you could just reshuffle at all times).

Does the DM also use cards or do they roll normally if they'd like?

Pulling this out of nowhere:
I could see having a hand for adventuring skill checks (maybe 5 cards or maybe determined by the class's skill points per level) and a hand for combat (maybe another 5) (attacks, saves, mid-combat skill checks) both drawn from the same deck. After each combat round, you'd draw untill you got a full combat hand. So you could get rid of crappy card 'rolls' by bluffing commoners, but then that would leave lower rolls for combat. Adjust number of cards as needed (upper-level play would a larger hand for multiple attacks).
But that's only gunna cover the d20. Don't know how you'd handle ##d6 spells though. You'd need a pretty big deck, then you'd use half of it on one spell.
Gilean
05-15-06, 10:25 AM Only things to figure out would be the size of the hand, how often/when to draw new cards, and finding a way to prevent them from abusing it (like making bluff checks on commoners in the middle of nowhere to get rid of low cards).This is a good guideline when GMing: Do not roll the dice unless both results are interesting/carry an inherent risk.
So, if bluffing the commoner successfully provides great story development to direction A, and failing at it propels the game into direction B, roll the dice. If it is only a matter of telling random lies, let the player succeed. Nothing gained, nothing to lose, so no rolling.
theblindman
05-15-06, 11:22 AM I really like this idea, and was going to say so yesterday when I was abruptly called away to dinner.

The bluffing commoners thing doesn't necessarily present a problem. There isn't really any reason why the players need to be holding a hand when they're just wandering around town. At the end of each significant section (whether this means "adventure," "locale," or "combat" is up to you) just have them discard their entire hand. Then, when a new combat (or whatever) starts, have them draw a new hand. Since the players might not be sure when the section ends, they have an incentive to use up their good "rolls." And on the rare occassion that players do want to bluff a random commoner in the middle of town, they can just draw a card from the top of their deck.

I've been assuming that each player would have their own deck, but maybe that wouldn't be feasible.

Anyway, one last thought. You could set up a variation on the spells-per-day mechanic by introducing "spell-level" cards into the deck for spellcasters. Players could draw cards labelled with a particular spell level (up to their highest level spell), and when they wanted to cast a certain spell they would have to discard a number of spell levels that sum up to the total level of the spell. You could even introduce metamagic feat cards, if you really wanted to mix it up. I have no idea how many cards of each level you would have to put into the deck to get an accurate simulation of the RAW, and it all depends on the size of the deck. Is this idea fundamentally flawed in some way?

And lastly, there maybe should be some stat that modifies the number of cards you can hold. Level or initiative are what come to mind, but there might be others as well.
AT-AT Assault
05-15-06, 11:24 AM Okay here's my suggestion.

Firstly, cards can only be used in situations that would earn you experience(so no bluffing the commoner or somesuch).

A player draws an amount of cards determined by an unmodified d20 roll. The player must use a card for every other check(if a player chooses not to use a card he rolls a d20 normally). Once a player runs out of cards, the player has to go through a "cool-down" period before the player can draw another hand. To determine this, divide the number of cards he drew for his last hand by 6(round up), and roll that number of d3's. That is how many rounds he must wait until he can draw another hand(this cool down time starts the instant the player runs out of cards).

Example: John rolls a d20 and gets a 15, so he draws 15 cards for his hand. As time wears on, John runs out of cards in the middle of his turn(he just took, lets say a move action; John is on Init count 9). Divide 15 by 6, round up(3). John rolls 3d3, and gets the average number, 6. John waits for 6 turns, and Init count 9 comes up. He takes an action, then rolls another d20 to draw cards again(he gets a 3, for 3 cards).

Lather, rinse, repeat.
Edymnion
05-16-06, 03:17 PM Huh, now here's an interesting twist.
What if we took it all the way, with a bit of inspiration from the CCGs? Have combat cards, magic cards, feat cards, etc. You could "buy" cards with xp or gp, and the entire way you go about combat would revolve around the cards.

Huh, I may have the beginnings of an entirely new system here.
Roleplaying meets CCG. If you want a magic user, you load up on magic cards. Melee fighter, you load up on attack and feat cards. Your level would dictate what level of card you could use (make up 20 levels for cards), and have each level cost something.

So you could have a Fighter/Wizard fairly easily by just mixing up the number of attack and magic cards. Sort of like Materia from FF7...
FlameLover
05-17-06, 05:54 AM I've tried working on a system with cards instead of dice before, and although it worked OK the one problem was drawing cards. I think that D&D, as is, just can't cope with using cards very well (in the manner you describe atleast). This is because, unlike in most card games, you don't have rigid limits on what you can do in a turn. Ok you have action limits, sure, but there is no limit on the amount of d20s you'll need to roll.

The only way I can see it being done is to draw, say, 5 cards and only draw a new hand once you've used up your old one. And you only play cards when what you're determining is important. And most importantly, they only keep for combat. If your out of combat, you may get to draw only 1 to 3 cards for exmaple. So instead of having a "hand" in town, you just draw one and play it if you want to pick a lock or bluff someone, etc.

EDIT: Whoops, forgot to comment on Edy's latest idea. I like it (I just got into Magic recently so I'm down for anything CCG). I know this might sound a bit too much like MAgic to some people, but i'd have both a simple Life score (basically hit points) and a Power score (symbolizing either combat, stealth or magic prowess). In that way high-level cards are better, but cost more commesuratley. You don't want level 3 cardfs at level 14 to always be useless. It might be good to have some cheap cards in there, just so that you can pay for them more easily. I dunno, just a thought.
DoctorRomulus
05-17-06, 09:15 AM Uhm,
like NO.
Gilean
05-17-06, 11:08 AM Edymnion (and FlameLover, too), you might want to take a look at Mana Burn (http://homepage.mac.com/whymme/ManaBurn/index.html). If you want to contact the designer, relevant RPG.net thread is here (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=252330).
Flamewarrior
05-17-06, 12:52 PM For another example of successful implementation, look at Dragonlance Fifth Age. Considering it used a freeform magic system, you might as well play it; either way, it can give you many good ideas.
StormKnight
05-17-06, 02:12 PM For another example of successful implementation, look at Dragonlance Fifth Age.
Shouldn't that be "For another example of unsuccessful implementation"?
;)
Ok, so I really didn't like that system. However, the Marvel SAGA game, which used a tweak variant of the same card-based system was great, and well worth taking a look at.

One of the concepts of both games was also that different suits corresponded to different kinds of tasks, and a cardplay matching the task was more effective that one not matching.
This indirectly encouraged using a variety of tactics in combat, since in a given round it might be better for you to take an action you weren't quite as good at but had a better card for.
Phoenix Knight
05-18-06, 05:57 PM It reminds vaguely of the (somewhat underappreciated) GameCube RPG Baten Kaitos.

It uses a unique card-system for battles. When your deck runs out, you spend a round drawing a new hand. You automatically replace whatever cards you play each round.
jagggar
05-29-06, 02:24 PM Other than wondering about the mechanics of a D&D card game, I thought up another idea.

If you drop the d20 aspect of the d20 system, you could use the 3d6 Bell Curve Roll method of resolution presented in UA (page 132-3). Each player's deck would have probably 24 cards, 4 each of the numbers 1-6. (You could play with a deck of playing cards!) Hand size would be 4 or 5 cards I think. Every roll you needed to make, you'd lay down the 3 cards you wanted to use and draw 3 more to replace them. Once you could draw no more cards, you'd shuffle your discard pile. Some feats/spells might let you have a larger hand or lay down 4 cards at a time (so you could get rid of low numbers without lowering your rolls).
TheSkinnySkeleton
05-29-06, 03:41 PM The method described in the last post sounds like a really cool idea!

The only problem would be that you'd have to modify the low-end of the bell curve slightly, as the minimum possible "roll" would be 4 instead of 3. This is because, with a 5-card hand, the lowest possible card combination would be 4 aces and a deuce, and the players would play two aces and a deuce for their "roll". Therefore, the miss chance would be *slightly* smaller, but only if the enemy was drastically weak anyways.

Another element you could use with this "bell curve card rolling" is to have the player play a fourth card seperately, and the suit represents the action taken. A spade could be a physical attack, a club could be a magical attack or a feat, a heart could be healing or perhaps a skill check roll, and a diamond could be magical buffs or defensive actions. Something like that. This could work well in a gestalt game, where PCs have many options available to them, and would be in an equal position to play a magic card or an attack card with no problems.

This would also add a bit more strategy as to which cards should be played in any given hand, instead of just choosing the highest numbers. If a player wants to melee attack, and their only spade is a 6, they could be forced into either attacking with a lower attack roll, or taking some different action with a higher attack roll.
starfire311
05-30-06, 11:57 AM I got a crazy brainstorm idea.... each player would have their own deck of cards. This cards would all have a d20 roll on them and a damage roll on them, based on the dice the player would have for their weapons. The player may have a tough time diciding to play the high D20 roll with low damage or the middle D20 roll with high damage.

this may get out of hand.

or each card could have several results of numerous Die types and when yuo play them for an action you resolve the die rolls in order based on what yuo need for the action

For example a card could say

D20: 18, 10, 12, 7, 9
D12: 3, 10, 7, 1, 9
D10: 1, 5, 3, 9, 8
D8: 8, 5, 3, 2, 7
D6: 5, 4, 6, 1, 3, 6
D4: 3, 4, 2, 2, 1

and the player is using this card to make an attack with his +1 Flaming Burst Kukri and he has +2D6 SA

So, the attack roll is an 18, and a threat, the confirmation is a 10 and is a crit.

So the player takes the 3 from the D4 for the kukri and the 4 from the D4 for the crit, the 5 for the D6 from the flaming, and the 1 from the D10 for the burst, and the 4 and 6 from the 2D6 for the SA.

for a total of 3+4+5+1+4+6= 23
Arikail
06-09-06, 02:10 AM Also, for those who were interested in a CCG meets RPG, you may want to check out a game called Dragon Storm, which is similar to the idea that Edymnion was talking about. Suprisingly enough, it's still being produced, as far as I can tell. Here's a link to their homepage:

www.dragonstorm.com

Just thought I'd mention it, for those who didn't know.
Cheza
06-09-06, 09:33 AM How would you prevent a player chooses high rolls for critical attacks, medium rolls for saves and low rolls for any unimportant check??
Phoenix Knight
06-09-06, 10:04 AM How would you prevent a player chooses high rolls for critical attacks, medium rolls for saves and low rolls for any unimportant check??
Part of the point is to change from something totally random to something where strategy of choices is involved.

Of course, however, a player is not guarunteed to have high cards at any given time.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Edymnion 05-14-06, 06:01 PM	Now this was a very interesting varient I found in Mutants and Masterminds, and I thought it deserved some discussion for D&D. Basically, you would use playing cards to simulate dice, which is nothing new in and of itself. What is new is the idea of playing the game with "hands". That instead of just drawing cards at random to simulate random dice, you would draw a number of cards and have a hand of "rolls" available to you. So you could then use some strategy in when to play which card for combat rolls, skill check rolls, and all the rest. So you would have to stop and strategically plan on if you wanted that sure fire hit now, or save that high card for a skill check or save later on. Now, there would definately be a few hurdles in converting it over to D&D, since M&M uses only a d20, while D&D uses all the major dice sizes, but I like the basic idea of combining straight up roleplaying mechanics with an element of card game strategy.
alchemyprime 05-14-06, 07:17 PM	I like it... I think I may try that with a new goup of characters... Thnx for the idea!
Edymnion 05-14-06, 07:59 PM	Only things to figure out would be the size of the hand, how often/when to draw new cards, and finding a way to prevent them from abusing it (like making bluff checks on commoners in the middle of nowhere to get rid of low cards).
Platonix 05-14-06, 09:07 PM	since M&M uses only a d20, while D&D uses all the major dice sizes Yeah, but anything other than a d20 is reserved for HP or damage dealt. They never decide success or failure. That's why it's called the d20 system. So maybe using cards to represent d20 rolls only would be fine.
jagggar 05-14-06, 09:16 PM	I guess one way would be to have a small enough deck so that as soon as they spend their low rolls on commoner bluffs they'd be reshuffled into the deck (or you could just reshuffle at all times). Does the DM also use cards or do they roll normally if they'd like? Pulling this out of nowhere: I could see having a hand for adventuring skill checks (maybe 5 cards or maybe determined by the class's skill points per level) and a hand for combat (maybe another 5) (attacks, saves, mid-combat skill checks) both drawn from the same deck. After each combat round, you'd draw untill you got a full combat hand. So you could get rid of crappy card 'rolls' by bluffing commoners, but then that would leave lower rolls for combat. Adjust number of cards as needed (upper-level play would a larger hand for multiple attacks). But that's only gunna cover the d20. Don't know how you'd handle ##d6 spells though. You'd need a pretty big deck, then you'd use half of it on one spell.
Gilean 05-15-06, 10:25 AM	Only things to figure out would be the size of the hand, how often/when to draw new cards, and finding a way to prevent them from abusing it (like making bluff checks on commoners in the middle of nowhere to get rid of low cards).This is a good guideline when GMing: Do not roll the dice unless both results are interesting/carry an inherent risk. So, if bluffing the commoner successfully provides great story development to direction A, and failing at it propels the game into direction B, roll the dice. If it is only a matter of telling random lies, let the player succeed. Nothing gained, nothing to lose, so no rolling.
theblindman 05-15-06, 11:22 AM	I really like this idea, and was going to say so yesterday when I was abruptly called away to dinner. The bluffing commoners thing doesn't necessarily present a problem. There isn't really any reason why the players need to be holding a hand when they're just wandering around town. At the end of each significant section (whether this means "adventure," "locale," or "combat" is up to you) just have them discard their entire hand. Then, when a new combat (or whatever) starts, have them draw a new hand. Since the players might not be sure when the section ends, they have an incentive to use up their good "rolls." And on the rare occassion that players do want to bluff a random commoner in the middle of town, they can just draw a card from the top of their deck. I've been assuming that each player would have their own deck, but maybe that wouldn't be feasible. Anyway, one last thought. You could set up a variation on the spells-per-day mechanic by introducing "spell-level" cards into the deck for spellcasters. Players could draw cards labelled with a particular spell level (up to their highest level spell), and when they wanted to cast a certain spell they would have to discard a number of spell levels that sum up to the total level of the spell. You could even introduce metamagic feat cards, if you really wanted to mix it up. I have no idea how many cards of each level you would have to put into the deck to get an accurate simulation of the RAW, and it all depends on the size of the deck. Is this idea fundamentally flawed in some way? And lastly, there maybe should be some stat that modifies the number of cards you can hold. Level or initiative are what come to mind, but there might be others as well.
AT-AT Assault 05-15-06, 11:24 AM	Okay here's my suggestion. Firstly, cards can only be used in situations that would earn you experience(so no bluffing the commoner or somesuch). A player draws an amount of cards determined by an unmodified d20 roll. The player must use a card for every other check(if a player chooses not to use a card he rolls a d20 normally). Once a player runs out of cards, the player has to go through a "cool-down" period before the player can draw another hand. To determine this, divide the number of cards he drew for his last hand by 6(round up), and roll that number of d3's. That is how many rounds he must wait until he can draw another hand(this cool down time starts the instant the player runs out of cards). Example: John rolls a d20 and gets a 15, so he draws 15 cards for his hand. As time wears on, John runs out of cards in the middle of his turn(he just took, lets say a move action; John is on Init count 9). Divide 15 by 6, round up(3). John rolls 3d3, and gets the average number, 6. John waits for 6 turns, and Init count 9 comes up. He takes an action, then rolls another d20 to draw cards again(he gets a 3, for 3 cards). Lather, rinse, repeat.
Edymnion 05-16-06, 03:17 PM	Huh, now here's an interesting twist. What if we took it all the way, with a bit of inspiration from the CCGs? Have combat cards, magic cards, feat cards, etc. You could "buy" cards with xp or gp, and the entire way you go about combat would revolve around the cards. Huh, I may have the beginnings of an entirely new system here. Roleplaying meets CCG. If you want a magic user, you load up on magic cards. Melee fighter, you load up on attack and feat cards. Your level would dictate what level of card you could use (make up 20 levels for cards), and have each level cost something. So you could have a Fighter/Wizard fairly easily by just mixing up the number of attack and magic cards. Sort of like Materia from FF7...
FlameLover 05-17-06, 05:54 AM	I've tried working on a system with cards instead of dice before, and although it worked OK the one problem was drawing cards. I think that D&D, as is, just can't cope with using cards very well (in the manner you describe atleast). This is because, unlike in most card games, you don't have rigid limits on what you can do in a turn. Ok you have action limits, sure, but there is no limit on the amount of d20s you'll need to roll. The only way I can see it being done is to draw, say, 5 cards and only draw a new hand once you've used up your old one. And you only play cards when what you're determining is important. And most importantly, they only keep for combat. If your out of combat, you may get to draw only 1 to 3 cards for exmaple. So instead of having a "hand" in town, you just draw one and play it if you want to pick a lock or bluff someone, etc. EDIT: Whoops, forgot to comment on Edy's latest idea. I like it (I just got into Magic recently so I'm down for anything CCG). I know this might sound a bit too much like MAgic to some people, but i'd have both a simple Life score (basically hit points) and a Power score (symbolizing either combat, stealth or magic prowess). In that way high-level cards are better, but cost more commesuratley. You don't want level 3 cardfs at level 14 to always be useless. It might be good to have some cheap cards in there, just so that you can pay for them more easily. I dunno, just a thought.
DoctorRomulus 05-17-06, 09:15 AM	Uhm, like NO.
Gilean 05-17-06, 11:08 AM	Edymnion (and FlameLover, too), you might want to take a look at Mana Burn (http://homepage.mac.com/whymme/ManaBurn/index.html). If you want to contact the designer, relevant RPG.net thread is here (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=252330).
Flamewarrior 05-17-06, 12:52 PM	For another example of successful implementation, look at Dragonlance Fifth Age. Considering it used a freeform magic system, you might as well play it; either way, it can give you many good ideas.
StormKnight 05-17-06, 02:12 PM	For another example of successful implementation, look at Dragonlance Fifth Age. Shouldn't that be "For another example of unsuccessful implementation"? ;) Ok, so I really didn't like that system. However, the Marvel SAGA game, which used a tweak variant of the same card-based system was great, and well worth taking a look at. One of the concepts of both games was also that different suits corresponded to different kinds of tasks, and a cardplay matching the task was more effective that one not matching. This indirectly encouraged using a variety of tactics in combat, since in a given round it might be better for you to take an action you weren't quite as good at but had a better card for.
Phoenix Knight 05-18-06, 05:57 PM	It reminds vaguely of the (somewhat underappreciated) GameCube RPG Baten Kaitos. It uses a unique card-system for battles. When your deck runs out, you spend a round drawing a new hand. You automatically replace whatever cards you play each round.
jagggar 05-29-06, 02:24 PM	Other than wondering about the mechanics of a D&D card game, I thought up another idea. If you drop the d20 aspect of the d20 system, you could use the 3d6 Bell Curve Roll method of resolution presented in UA (page 132-3). Each player's deck would have probably 24 cards, 4 each of the numbers 1-6. (You could play with a deck of playing cards!) Hand size would be 4 or 5 cards I think. Every roll you needed to make, you'd lay down the 3 cards you wanted to use and draw 3 more to replace them. Once you could draw no more cards, you'd shuffle your discard pile. Some feats/spells might let you have a larger hand or lay down 4 cards at a time (so you could get rid of low numbers without lowering your rolls).
TheSkinnySkeleton 05-29-06, 03:41 PM	The method described in the last post sounds like a really cool idea! The only problem would be that you'd have to modify the low-end of the bell curve slightly, as the minimum possible "roll" would be 4 instead of 3. This is because, with a 5-card hand, the lowest possible card combination would be 4 aces and a deuce, and the players would play two aces and a deuce for their "roll". Therefore, the miss chance would be slightly smaller, but only if the enemy was drastically weak anyways. Another element you could use with this "bell curve card rolling" is to have the player play a fourth card seperately, and the suit represents the action taken. A spade could be a physical attack, a club could be a magical attack or a feat, a heart could be healing or perhaps a skill check roll, and a diamond could be magical buffs or defensive actions. Something like that. This could work well in a gestalt game, where PCs have many options available to them, and would be in an equal position to play a magic card or an attack card with no problems. This would also add a bit more strategy as to which cards should be played in any given hand, instead of just choosing the highest numbers. If a player wants to melee attack, and their only spade is a 6, they could be forced into either attacking with a lower attack roll, or taking some different action with a higher attack roll.
starfire311 05-30-06, 11:57 AM	I got a crazy brainstorm idea.... each player would have their own deck of cards. This cards would all have a d20 roll on them and a damage roll on them, based on the dice the player would have for their weapons. The player may have a tough time diciding to play the high D20 roll with low damage or the middle D20 roll with high damage. this may get out of hand. or each card could have several results of numerous Die types and when yuo play them for an action you resolve the die rolls in order based on what yuo need for the action For example a card could say D20: 18, 10, 12, 7, 9 D12: 3, 10, 7, 1, 9 D10: 1, 5, 3, 9, 8 D8: 8, 5, 3, 2, 7 D6: 5, 4, 6, 1, 3, 6 D4: 3, 4, 2, 2, 1 and the player is using this card to make an attack with his +1 Flaming Burst Kukri and he has +2D6 SA So, the attack roll is an 18, and a threat, the confirmation is a 10 and is a crit. So the player takes the 3 from the D4 for the kukri and the 4 from the D4 for the crit, the 5 for the D6 from the flaming, and the 1 from the D10 for the burst, and the 4 and 6 from the 2D6 for the SA. for a total of 3+4+5+1+4+6= 23
Arikail 06-09-06, 02:10 AM	Also, for those who were interested in a CCG meets RPG, you may want to check out a game called Dragon Storm, which is similar to the idea that Edymnion was talking about. Suprisingly enough, it's still being produced, as far as I can tell. Here's a link to their homepage: www.dragonstorm.com Just thought I'd mention it, for those who didn't know.
Cheza 06-09-06, 09:33 AM	How would you prevent a player chooses high rolls for critical attacks, medium rolls for saves and low rolls for any unimportant check??
Phoenix Knight 06-09-06, 10:04 AM	How would you prevent a player chooses high rolls for critical attacks, medium rolls for saves and low rolls for any unimportant check?? Part of the point is to change from something totally random to something where strategy of choices is involved. Of course, however, a player is not guarunteed to have high cards at any given time.