Fantasy Star Wars CCG 2.0

Discussion in 'Games: CCG, TCG, and Boardgames' started by Red84, Mar 19, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. LordHoban Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 7, 2003
    First of all, this game isn't magic, so the whole changing lifeforce to some number or something would ruin many of the intricate details of the game.

    I know deck limiting was thrown out, and a good thing. Not for Star Wars to force upon a player guidelines. I hated that in Young Jedi. And this is a 'customizable' card game, one of the most customizable, and it should remain that way.

    I could see the permanent pilot deal that gets cancelled as being viable...

    Attrition is simple to understand if explained well. If anything, we just need a rewrite of the rules that clears up any confusion. How hard is it to understand that attrition equals your drawn battle destiny? That destiny shouldn't be placed in Used until you are done with it, so that's not a value you really have to remember. It is right there in front of you.

    4 starting locations is too many. 3 (total), with certain restrictions is stretching it, but more plausable. For starting locations, they should all be for the same planet. This would prevent certain abuse of the rule (for darkside, I could start with Death Star, and 3 2/0 sites putting me at an activation of 10, by myself. Lightside is much the same with Coruscant Jedi Chamber.

    This is ridiculous. Some of the other suggestions go too far, changing too much, that we might as well dump it all and start from scratch, making the game you want, not the game that we're playing now, that we're supposed to enjoy as it is.

    I'm not saying that the game couldn't use some improvements, getting rid of excess rules like Mining, ok, I could go with that, but watch out, because what's to stop it there? Let's get rid of capturing, CPI, blowing up the death star, MPG (shield rules are 'too much'!)... My point, is where do you draw the line? How simple do you want to make this game? Personally, if I wanted the end result of where this appears to be heading, I'd go play Young Jedi again, or Jedi Knight. YJ was entertaining, but it gets old, and it's too simple (for which I can probably be quoted as saying from the very first time I saw it playtest by Charyl Perry in Houston, Texas -no game text when it initially shipped). Star Wars is rich in complexity, in strategy, which is why it's so great. You pay the price having such a rich, deep game by having a bunch of rules.

    Improvements are one thing, simplification for New Players is another, and completely unneccessary. If they want a simple game, there are plenty of CCGs out there that do the trick.

  2. Artie-Deco Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 2001
    star 3
    A nice post, LordHoban. Welcome to the forum.

    A few comments on your points....

    Improvements are one thing, simplification for New Players is another, and completely unneccessary.

    I disagree.

    I have a 20 year old game of Othello at home. On the box is a blurb you've probably all heard at one time in one form or another:

    "Easy to learn, a lifetime to master."

    There are two equally opposite errors you can make when designing a game: Make it too easy to master, and make it too hard to learn. SW:CCG, unfortunately, leans just a little too far into the latter category. And as you accurately observed, Young Jedi -- at least in its first two expansions -- leaned WAY too far into the former category!

    This thread, which we should emphasize is called "Fantasy Star Wars CCG", is simply an academic exercise to see what it would take to bring more balance to SW:CCG, similar to what Decipher has done officially to Star Trek CCG 2nd Edition. How can we make SW:CCG simpler to learn, while not taking away any of its strategic depth?


    I know deck limiting was thrown out, and a good thing. Not for Star Wars to force upon a player guidelines. I hated that in Young Jedi.

    In my defense, my proposition was nowhere near as drastic as the deckbuilding guidelines in Young Jedi. I had proposed the following (for those of you who do not want to page back through old posts):

    I'm not suggesting there be a fixed number of each card in your deck, like you have in YJ. I'm thinking of something more like this:
    "You must have at least 5 and no more than 15 of each of the following major card types: Character, Starship, Vehicle, Weapon (!!), Effect, Interrupt, Location." At a minimum, that only dictates 35 cards in your 60 card deck, that doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

    Also, "You may have no more than 6 [or some other number X] of any one card or persona in your deck". (Why "card or persona"? So that you can't have 6 Qui-Gon, 6 Master Qui-Gon and 6 Qui-Gon w/Lightsaber!)

    With these two rules, new players would have some guidelines at least as to how to build their deck. And, it would force some diversity in your deck. If people have to use weapons and vehicles in their decks, they'll try to find a way to make them useful.

    Much discussion ensued, and I was outvoted, but I still fail to see how the above rule change hurts the game. It can only help by (1) forcing players to consider a wider variety of cards (because every deck must have some weapons and vehicles for example), and (2) providing new players a guideline at least of where to start when building a deck.

    In other words, I understand that SW:CCG?s lack of deck building rules is one of its distinctive characteristics, but it does not add anything strategic to the game and only hinders new players entering the game.

    Attrition is simple to understand if explained well. If anything, we just need a rewrite of the rules that clears up any confusion. How hard is it to understand that attrition equals your drawn battle destiny?

    Even if explained well, attrition is not a "simple" concept. Comparing power to power is simple; drawing destiny to add to your power is simple; battle damage (equal to your power minus my power) is simple; attrition is not simple.

    Losing attrition would cause a loss of strategy, though. With attrition, you have a reason for initiating battle even if your opponent outpowers you. For that reason, I really wouldn't want to get rid of attrition permanently. But perhaps there could be a "beginners" version of SW:CCG that excluded attrition (among other things, perhaps), and an "advanced" version that included it.


    This is ridiculous. Some of the other suggestions go too far, changing too much, that we might as well dump it all and start from scratch, making the game you want, not the game that we're playing now, that we're supposed to enjoy as it is.

    The game has already been "dumped". "As it is", this game is dead.
  3. LordHoban Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 7, 2003
    First of all, the game is NOT dead... it's in the hands of the PC, who are doing a very good job of keeping it alive, at least for the time being.

    Young Jedi and Jedi Knights, yeah, I could see those games as being dead. Not much support for them, even by the PC since no one really wants to volunteer to help them along...

    I'm not saying you can't make an easier set of 'learning' rules to follow... sure, that could work... but I disagree with it being that hard to learn the basics of gameplay. Sure, a new player won't be tournament ready for awhile, but the best way to learn is to go to a tournament and watch how it's done, be thrown in the Lion's den, as you could say.

    What are the basics? Cardtypes. Probably not deal with Starting Effects (should be like stage 3), but Starting Interrupts are pretty straightforward. Leave Objectives out of it (they could be stage 2). Leave all epics out of it (I'd call them stage 4)...

    Starting out, eliminate all the added fluff rules. Stick to the basics and learning isn't that hard. If you have trouble understanding the basics, from the easiest standpoint, maybe this game isn't for you (not referring to anyone, specifically, but in general). That's the thing, this game is not for everyone. Some people are bound to struggle, but that isn't necessarily the game, especially if they have a good teacher, but probably them.

    That isn't an insult or anything to 'them', but I've seen some people struggle with the mechanics of 'Young Jedi'. Not everybody is a game player, especially if it doesn't have flashy effects. Board games just aren't that big anymore. Sure, they are there, they are played, but nowhere like the 80s and early 90s. Videogames have become too dominant, and, dare I say it, reduced the attention span of many people.

    But that doesn't mean board games are dead, especially in the 'geek' community, for which I'm apart of. Just like Star Wars CCG, it's there, even has championships where people actually attend.

    Young Jedi, in many ways, IS the simplified Star Wars, so if you want to start someone off on the major basics, go with that, then upgrade them to basic Star Wars. The biggest problem is not that Star Wars is hard to learn, but that there's never really been any boxed set that's done it justice in explaining it with any degree of a newbie in mind. It should be like a 4 step program, like you said with simple and advanced, but more involved. Kind of like nicotene patches. :)
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.