Pro-Bending: The Card Game [WIP] [PEACH]

[Zap Dynamic]

Pro-Bending: The Card Game

http://www.ogeeku.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/legend-of-korra-launch-pro-bending-clip.jpg

I want to come up with some kind of combat simulation game to recreate Pro-Bending from The Legend of Korra. I don't have any experience with this stuff, so I'd love some help from anyone who's interested. Here's what I'm thinking:

Rules
Basic gameplay involves 2-6 players, each controlling 1-3 benders on two 3-person teams. Any player-to-bender ratio is acceptable, so long as there are three benders on a team. Players may choose whichever benders they prefer, but there may only be one of each bending art represented on a team.

Each match consists of 3 rounds. During a round, play proceeds to the left, and teams take turns drawing cards for their benders. Teams draw 3 cards for each bender still in play. After drawing cards, each bender on a team may play 3 cards before their next turn. Each team takes turns drawing and playing cards, and a round consists of both teams taking 10 turns each.

Each bender begins play with 3 Zone Cards. The object of the game is to take as many Zone Cards away from the other team as possible in the span of 3 rounds. Standard Victory is awarded to the team that has won the greatest number of Zone Cards in that time. Alternatively, victory is awarded to any team that manages to take every Zone Card from the opposing team in a single round. This is called a Knock-Out Victory, and it ends the game, even if it is achieved in round one.

Players may play cards in tandem, making them more difficult to defeat. To do this, the benders playing in tandem must have the same number of Zone Cards.

Gaining Zone Cards
Zone Cards are vital to Pro-Bending: TCG. If you lose all of your Zone Cards, you are removed from play for the duration of the round!

Whenever you successfully hit an opponent, their Zone Card becomes tapped. A tapped Zone Card counts against a Bender's ability to play a card in tandem with another Bender, but they haven't lost the Zone Card yet! Zone Cards can be taken from the other team only when each Bender on that team has a tapped Zone Card.

Stats
Each Bender Card indicates the starting Attack and Defense stats for each Bender. On your turn, you may add 2 points to a stat by subtracting 2 points from the other stat. You may never adjust a stat more than 2 points away from the starting value of that stat as indicated on a Bender Card. Needs Review.

Playing Cards
There are four kinds of cards in Pro-Bending: The Card Game. These are Action, Reaction, Cancellation, and Manipulation cards.

Each bender may play 3 cards per turn. Action cards may only be played on a bender's turn, and most Reaction and Manipulation cards are the same way. Cancellation cards may be played at any time.

Each bender has a hand limit of 5 cards. If a bender ever has more than 5 cards in hand, they must discard the surplus to their discard pile.

Certain cards modify Attack and Defense values, increasing your own chance of success, or hampering your opponent's. These cards may be played at any time, so long as the 3 card per turn rule is not violated.

Table Layout Note: this graphic is missing a draw pile for Stress Cards
http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2012/174/c/e/pro_bending_tcg_layout_thoughts_by_zapdynamic-d54m0rs.jpg

Deck Size
40 cards per bender deck. Let's examine this.
Because you tap Zone Cards, you can be hit a total of 6 times before you're removed from the game (provided you don't gain any of them back). With perfect offense, that means there will be 6 turns in a round, but you're more likely to see something like 12+ turns per round to achieve a TKO. On a side note, I think there should be a 10 turn limit per round, because a TKO should be a rare thing; winning a round by possessing the most Zone Cards should be the most common method of winning.

So. Each bender draws 3 cards per turn. That means that--if two teams share a bending art--6 cards are being drawn from a deck each turn. Thought: If you are playing a bender that's not represented on the other team, maybe you should only draw from a half-deck? Regardless, after the first 6 rounds, a total of 40 cards will be drawn by both players (including the starting hand of 5 cards each).

By setting the Bending Decks at 40 cards each, that means that each player will have 20 cards at their disposal by round 7. With 5 cards in their hand at any given time, that leaves a discard pile of 15 cards, which seems like plenty to give them exciting options in play. Also, that means that the first 6 turns of the first round (which will be jusst over half of that round) will be completely surprising.

It remains to be seen if it will be best to recombine the bending decks at the beginning of each round; my intuition says no, but my intuition isn't the smartest cookie. I think playtesting will be the best way to determine this sort of thing.


Terminology
Player – That’s you!
Bender – This is the character represented by a Bender Card.
Bending Arts – Firebending, Waterbending, Airbending, and Earthbending are the four bending arts.
Team – A unit of three benders. Each team may only have one of each type of bender, though they are free to choose any 3 of the 4 bending arts.
Match – A match consists of 3 rounds.
Round – A round consists of 10 turns. During a turn, each team attempts to take Zone Cards away from their opponents.
Turn – At the beginning of a team’s turn, they draw 3 cards from each bending deck for which they have a bender still engaged in play. Each bender may play 3 cards during their turn.
Zone Card – These are like hit points. Each bender begins play with 3 Zone Cards. If a bender is reduced to 0 Zone Cards, that bender is knocked out of the ring, and is removed from play until the next round.
Standard Victory – Standard victory is awarded to the team that has gained the most Zone Cards at the end of 3 rounds.
Knock-Out Victory – This is awarded to any team that can take away every Zone Card from the opposing team in the space of a single round. Knock-out victories end the game, even if they occur in the first round.
In Tandem - Benders on the same team may only play cards in tandem if they have the same number of Zone Cards in their possession. Cards played in tandem have their values increased by a number indicated on the card.
Tapped Cards - Zone Cards are tapped before they are lost. To tap a card, simply turn it 90 degrees.

Card Types
Bender Cards – Cards representing benders from each of the four elements. There needs to be at least two of each type. Should these cards be generic “Firebender” etc. cards, or should they represent specific characters, e.g. “Mako the Fire Ferret”?
Zone Cards - These serve as hit points for the different benders.
Action Cards – Whether attack, defense, or utility, these cards are played from the player’s hand. Perhaps weaker action cards can be played again and again (without discarding), and the most powerful cards can only be played once per match.
Stress Cards – Perhaps when a player loses a Zone Card, they may draw a card from the Stress Deck and play it face-up in front of them. These cards represent the escalation of battle, and grant bonuses to the bender who drew them. Maybe they should be temporary?
Bending Decks - Each bending art has its own deck of cards that is shared by every bender of that type in play.

Action cards are usually attack cards. They are played on their own, though they can be powered up by Manipulation cards. Firebender decks are the only decks with Action cards that can attack multiple targets.
Sample Card:
Fiery Blast
Image: A big fireball
Description: Attack with a +4 bonus
Attack Value: 4
In-Tandem Value: 6

Cancellation cards are usually defensive cards. They are played in response to other cards, and can affect both Action cards and Manipulation cards. Earthbender decks are the only decks that have Cancellation cards that can protect more than one bender.
Sample Card:
Disk Block
Image: In the foreground, a water blast shattering an earth disk right in front of a bender. In the background, there is an Earthbender throwing a punch. It is clear that he just saved his buddy.
Description: +4 to Defense. May be played against an attack against an ally.
Defense Value: 4
In-Tandem Value: 6

Reaction cards are responses to previous attacks. They are played the turn after an attack. The Reaction cards in Waterbender decks are more powerful for Waterbenders that have more Stress Cards.
Sample Card:
Momentous Lash
Image: A waterbender twirling away from an earth disk and readying a water blast at the same time.
Description: +4 to attack after successfully dodging an opponent's attack. Play immediately after a successful defense.
Attack Value: 4
+1 per Stress Card

Manipulation cards can help your allies and hinder your enemies. They are often played on their own, but they will always affect other cards. The Manipulation cards in Airbender decks are more powerful for Airbenders that have more Zone Cards.
Sample Card:
Air Pocket
Image: A tiny cyclone of air under an opponent's foot.
Description: -2 to an opponent's next attack.
Attack Value: -2
-1 per Zone Card

Ideas
Talking about the nature of playing cards “in tandem,” it might be good to take a page from Paint the Line, the Ping Pong card game from the makers of Penny Arcade. Each card has a “normal” value, as well as a “tandem” value. Thoughts?

There should be some means of attempting to cheat. Success means that you have an unfair advantage, whereas failure results in the loss of a Zone Card. Thoughts?

I like the idea of incorporating dice into the game, maybe just one. It adds an extra element of strategy, and makes stats for the various benders more meaningful.

I like the idea of having some sort of 4-way Rock, Paper, Scissors mechanic. In the show, the bending arts are balanced in terms of advantages toward some and disadvantages toward another, so it seems like a sensible thing to explore. One possible solution is to allow each bending art (or each team) to specialize in a particular style of play, a la Dominion’s Hand, Buy, and Action system.

The “Stress Deck” mentioned earlier is definitely worth exploring.

I want some kind of “Desperation Move” ability, whether that be a card that is randomly drawn, or an inherent ability represented on each Bender Card. I want to handle these abilities in such a way that it’s more valuable to use them at different times. For example, Firebenders are quick and decisive, so their Desperation Move is more powerful in the first three turns in the match. Waterbenders, on the other hand, are cool under pressure, and their ability grows stronger based on how many Stress Cards they’ve collected.

In general, I think it should be difficult (but not impossible) to take every Zone Card from your opponents in a single round. One of the ways this could work is if the various benders each hit their peaks and valleys at different points in the game. That way, instead of the strategy being strictly about trying to take away Zone Cards as quickly as possible, it would be about protecting your teammates until they can be most effective.

Instead of Team A drawing cards, then playing cards, then Team B duplicating that order, what if both teams drew their cards at the same time in the first phase, and played them at the same time in the second phase? Other rules still apply.


Classes: Each team must consist of three benders. Following is a list of the different kinds of benders, as well as a list of the cards in their decks, descending from greatest to least prevalence.

Firebenders are offensive, simple, and active.

Action
Manipulation
Reaction
Cancellation
Waterbenders are offensive, complex, and passive.

Reaction
Action
Cancellation
Manipulation
Earthbenders are defensive, simple, and passive.

Cancellation
Action
Manipulation
Reaction
Airbenders are defensive, complex, and active.

Manipulation
Cancellation
Reaction
Action


Earthbender

The "Mario" - Medium Attack, Medium Defense
A few medium-strength attacks, several group defenses.
High Stamina

Waterbender

The "Shiek" - High Defense, Low Attack
Can evade several attacks, but only has low-power attacks.
Medium Stamina

Firebender

The "Glass Cannon" - High Attack Low Defense
Has a couple of damage negations and a couple of powerful blasts.
Low Stamina.

Airbender (?)

The "Ghost" - Medium Attack Medium Defense
No powerful attacks, many defensive options, and several utility powers to affect the enemy.
Highest Stamina.


Does this seem like a fun project to anyone else?

[SirDalyus]

This could be a really fun idea. Have you played any of the fourth edition boardgames? The character generation In that would likely be a good starting point for this kind of game.

[Morph Bark]

I'm actually hoping to see how the Avatar d20 Project can account for pro-bending under its bending rules.

That being said, I will keep an eye out for this. I don't have any experience making card games though, so dunno if I can help in that regard (the only one I managed was really just a Yi-Gi-Oh! derivative, I've only successfully made board games, tabletop/live-action RPGs, adventure/puzzle computer games, dice games and Dragon Marbles).

[Craft (Cheese)]

You could go by the actual rules of pro-bending in the show, and require one firebender, one earthbender, and one waterbender for each team. You didn't see any all-earthbender teams, after all.

This isn't to say that you can't have character customization, I'd just do it with "Privileged" cards rather than a D&D-style character sheet. Think of the way the World of Warcraft TCG works: You start out with a Hero card (intentionally oversized compared to other cards) and you play Weapon and Armor cards to attach to them, as well as Talent cards as attacks they can use and Allies to help them fight.

Also, don't fall into the "like MtG, but" trap. So many newbie designers think the only possible form a card game can take is Magic: The Gathering with a few small alterations ("Oh, instead of Colors, every creature has a Clan" "Instead of drawing 7 cards, you get 6"). Now, MtG's a fairly well-designed game, and never be afraid to rip off a mechanic from another game if that mechanic would work well, but you should also realize that the design space is a lot bigger than that. Read about other games and steal as many ideas from other systems as you possibly can.

One other tip before I start tossing out ideas: Represent as many things with cards as possible. Don't require players to have extra stuff like a battle mat to keep track of who's where, tokens to keep track of damage/resources, or dice. Nothing's more annoying than a card game where you need more than cards to play.

- Who says all card games need to be played with pre-constructed decks? There exist "Deckbuilding games" where both players start out with an empty deck, then add more cards to their deck as the game goes on. Both players pick from the same (limited) pool of cards to get, so you not only have to beat down your opponent but also compete to get the best cards before they do. Not saying the deckbuilding paradigm is right for this game, but it's something to think about.

- Consider alternative turn structure/resource systems. Perhaps an "exchange" based system where instead of turns, all players act at the same time? It'd much more accurately represent what actually goes on here than the normal phase-based system every card game on the planet uses.

- A "combo" system would be absolutely perfect for this: A system for more powerful maneuvers you can perform using two (or even all three) character simultaneously.

- You already have an interesting source of tradeoff from the material itself: Between knockdown (making the opponent fall over, scoring a single point when all three opponents are down) and knockback (making the opponents fly off the back of the stage, earning you two points). Don't let that go to waste!

- In all things, exploit asymmetry in your design. The usual "offense/defense/speed" triangle is boring: Magic's colors are each good at completely different areas of the game that both players all have to manage simultaneously, and this is a great design. "Do I want more Mana to spend, or do I want more cards in my hand?" is a way more interesting choice than "Do I want to deal more damage, or take less?" The more fundamentally different Water/Earth/Firebending are, the better off your game will be.

- Bake failsafes into the core of the game. Resets (think things like Magic's Wrath of God) that help a losing even the playing field if things get a little out of control. If you think this will help less skilled players overcome better ones, you'd be wrong: If A really is better than B, A will be able to get right back to dominating B even after B resets, but if B was able to get an edge over A due to a simple fluke, that reset will help A undo the bad luck. Resets help smooth out spikes that come about as a result of random chance (which come about even in perfect information games). This is why competitive matches are often 2/3 or 3/5.

[Madara]

- Who says all card games need to be played with pre-constructed decks? There exist "Deckbuilding games" where both players start out with an empty deck, then add more cards to their deck as the game goes on. Both players pick from the same (limited) pool of cards to get, so you not only have to beat down your opponent but also compete to get the best cards before they do. Not saying the deckbuilding paradigm is right for this game, but it's something to think about.
+1



- In all things, exploit asymmetry in your design. The usual "offense/defense/speed" triangle is boring: Magic's colors are each good at completely different areas of the game that both players all have to manage simultaneously, and this is a great design. "Do I want more Mana to spend, or do I want more cards in my hand?" is a way more interesting choice than "Do I want to deal more damage, or take less?" The more fundamentally different Water/Earth/Firebending are, the better off your game will be.
+1


Now for some input: I played a game last year at Con. I forget the name, but it was a quick pickup PvP game. They did stats like such. You get 20 points

Attack:
Defense:
Speed:
Accuracy:
Health:

Everyone has the same total, and spends it on the abilities in any way they want at the beginning of the game.

Let's make a sample firebender
Attack: 6
Defense: 3
Speed: 5
Accuracy: 3
Health: 3
(Max in any stat is 6)

I think having a short list of stats would be very effective. They had small whiteboard cards which you wrote the stats on at the beginning and could erase at the end and reuse later. No dice/ one normal (d6). Let's say you attack someone, you roll against your accuracy on 1d6. If you hit and they have 5 defense(Earthbender), the firebender does one damage to their health. The speed would determine order in a round, or if you have a board to play on, your movement around the board.

Another detail would be to make maneuver cards(as mentioned above) for each of the bending types(Fire, Earth, and Water). You would keep the cards hidden until used. At the beginning of the game, each player would select X number of maneuver cards that they could use during the game.

Those are my thoughts so far, the stats are just an example, you'd probably adjust them and the point values for the game. As you can see, I don't suggest a "Collectable Trading" or anything with tons of stuff. Make it something that can vary, but doesn't need lots of cards.

[Madara]

Here's an image I worked up, just to start. I would've cut out the white space but I had some computer problems.

http://i1261.photobucket.com/albums/ii583/Brian_Merchant/Probendercard.png

[madock345]

something to keep in mind would be the zone system. what bonuses or penalties are associated with being in each zone?

also, maybe a entirely separate sub-system for resolving the one on one tie-breaker duels, they are fought in a completely different style.

[Kadzar]

Well, first off, my personal opinion is that Airbending shouldn't be a part of this in any way, since the Airbender population isn't high enough for them to become a regular part of the game.

Now, I think a very basic part of the game is the idea that each player plays a team with an Waterbender, Firebender, and Earthbender. Having each player play an individual character sounds nice in theory, but, realistically, a game that needs exactly six players to play a game is going to be difficult to organize. If you're really committed to the idea of each player being an individual character, that's alright, but I worry that such a thing would be difficult to set up from a logistical standpoint.

Also, I kind of prefer the idea of playing the team rather than the character, because then you can play the game more as a manager. Although I don't really know anything about the WoW card game, I quite like the idea of Hero cards of some sort, especially if these Heros have a widespread effect on the gameplay, so that a setup used with one character would be very different when you just swap the character with another. This should be a product of more than just different stat levels.

Just a thought, but maybe there should be some way to cheat in-game, either as a general rule or part of a certain build, so that you can potentially gain some advantage at the risk of being penalized.

Oh, and finally, if you want advice about how to make an non-standard card game, here's an article (http://penny-arcade.com/report/editorial-article/ping-pong-as-card-game-the-design-of-penny-arcades-paint-the-line) written by a guy who made a card game about playing ping pong.

[Craft (Cheese)]

Well, first off, my personal opinion is that Airbending shouldn't be a part of this in any way, since the Airbender population isn't high enough for them to become a regular part of the game.

Now, I think a very basic part of the game is the idea that each player plays a team with an Waterbender, Firebender, and Earthbender. Having each player play an individual character sounds nice in theory, but, realistically, a game that needs exactly six players to play a game is going to be difficult to organize. If you're really committed to the idea of each player being an individual character, that's alright, but I worry that such a thing would be difficult to set up from a logistical standpoint.

Wait wait wait, that's what he meant? I assumed it'd be a dueling game where each player has a full team. Maybe 3 vs. 3 can be a variant, but I would not require it in the base game.


Also, I kind of prefer the idea of playing the team rather than the character, because then you can play the game more as a manager. Although I don't really know anything about the WoW card game, I quite like the idea of Hero cards of some sort, especially if these Heros have a widespread effect on the gameplay, so that a setup used with one character would be very different when you just swap the character with another. This should be a product of more than just different stat levels.

Alright, keep in mind that I haven't looked into the WoW card game since around the time it first came out, so I'm willing to bet things have changed significantly since then. But here's how Heroes in WoW work:

- Each player selects 1 Hero card to go with their deck. The hero starts the game in play and isn't a part of the player's deck itself. Each Hero has a Race, Class, Hit Points, and a special talent unique to each hero. Each player tries to kill the other player's hero by bringing their hit points down to 0.

- Some cards are Neutral in that you can use them in any build (Quests, for instance), but most cards are restricted based on the Race/Class of your hero. You can't, say, use Magic Missile with a Hunter Hero.

- Though you can also bring in Allies to help the hero fight, the hero is the main star of the show and most cards center around them. Weapons and Armor cards, for instance.


Just a thought, but maybe there should be some way to cheat in-game, either as a general rule or part of a certain build, so that you can potentially gain some advantage at the risk of being penalized.

Definitely! And the special talent of the Wolfbats should be "bribe the judges" ;p




So anyway, while I was sleeping last night I came up with an idea for this game: I call it the Stress system.


Each player has a "Stress Deck" separate from their main "Move Deck." When a bender takes damage from a successful attack, draw a card from the stress deck and place it somewhere face-up. Be sure to keep track of what stresses are applied to which bender.

Some moves, when they hit successfully (within some sort of blocking system), bring a character into a "Knockdown State." While in the knockdown state, a character can't make any moves, but they lose Stress over time. When a character loses stress, shuffle it back into the Stress Deck. When a character has no stress left, they get back up and leave the knockdown state. If all three of your benders are knocked down at once, you lose the round and your opponent gains 1 point.

Stress cards don't do anything while they're face-up, but they have a beneficial effect that gets triggered when you turn them face-down. There are special moves called "Desperation Moves." When you unleash a desperation move, that bender turns all of their stress cards face-down, and all of the effects from their stresses trigger at once. Face-down stress still contributes to the knockdown period, however.



The stress system has three positive aspects:

1. It adds a "push your luck" element for attackers. Do you attempt to knock down everyone at the same time with very little stress, or do you pile the stress on first to ensure they stay down for a while? But the longer you wait to go for the knockdown, the more powerful their desperation moves get.

2. The more stressed you are, the more effective your big desperation moves are. This gives an easy method for a player who's falling behind to make a comeback, keeping the game interesting.

3. It's an easy and simple method to keep track of damage that doesn't involve calculators, scrap paper, "forgetting" life totals, or damage counters. Always a plus.

[Knaight]

I'd consider taking a look at Dominion as a basis, for a few reasons.
1) Dominion currently has three variables: Hand, Buy, and Action. By default, everyone has the same number of these, but that can be tweaked, allowing easy character/team customization. Large Buy teams learn techniques quickly and can build up strategies, but probably work largely off of cheaper cards. Large Hand teams have the talent, and are fairly versatile, but lack the speed of building or playing other teams have. Large Action teams can do several things per turn, and as such represent teams particularly good at teamwork. The core concept here is simple, but fairly deep, and worth trying.

2) The current system for winning involves collecting land, but there are ways to take that way. Given that gradually getting better positioning, but being able to take that away is exactly how pro bending operates, it's a useful core mechanic. Moreover, the more land/positioning you have, the more your deck is cluttered and ineffective, which provides a nice tactical dimension as well as giving an advantage to defense, which works with the narrative of the bending matches from the show.

3) The cards available change by game to some extent (there are 10 types of action cards you can buy per game, and 26 types action cards total, right off the bat). If every team has a characteristic card type, that adds another small bit of distinction. For instance, take the Wolfbats - every match they are in might involve a card for cheating, which would normally only show up every few matches for everyone else.

[Zap Dynamic]

Thanks for the feedback, folks! Here's what I'm thinking in light of what you've said:

On Airbending
I imagined this game taking place at some undefined point in the future, when the airbender population has risen again, and there is no shortage of benders of all stripes for Pro-Bending matches. The reasoning behind this is purely for the sake of variety and strategy. Teams still consist of three characters each--and I like the idea that you can't "double up" with your bender selection--but with four benders to choose from, who knows how many strategic options that could create?

Similarities With Other Games
Of the games that have been mentioned, I've played Dominion and M:TG both a handful of times. I've never played Yu Gi Oh or WOW:TCG. When I was thinking about how this game could be represented, I was thinking about drawing from Bang!, Risk, and Chess.

That said, I like a lot of the ideas that have been mentioned, and I think they can come together to create a pretty cool game.

Players
Ideally, it would be nice if this game were for 2-6 players. Maybe it's just two players facing off with their three benders, maybe it's three vs. one, or maybe it's a big, brutal, 3v3 slugfest.

I think it would be best if the game were balanced for at least 2 players on a side. What I mean by this is that managing characters should be easy enough that 1 player could, manage 3 characters, generally the character management should be complex enough that it's not boring during a 3v3 match.

Mechanics
Playing off of a few ideas that have been expressed:

Every character has his stat sheet, and it may be as simple as "firebender," instead of "Mako of the Fire Ferrets."
Each character has a set number of reversible offense/defense cards. Like in Arkham Horror, there's an upkeep phase where players can elect to assign as many to offense/defense as they choose, perhaps with restrictions based on bending alignment.
Players draw cards to their hand in an attempt to get offensive and defensive options. Maybe each character starts off with 1-2 specialty cards that reflect their bending art?
There is a finite number of "zone" cards. Each character starts play with an equal number of them, and gameplay is about attacking characters to win their zone cards. Victory is awarded to the team that secures all of the opposing team's zone cards.
Maybe Zone Cards give certain advantages. When you have more, the idea is that you have more space to work with, maybe granting you bonuses to attack and defense. When you have less, you could lose those bonuses or something.
The standard gameplay is "best 2 of 3 bouts." Ideally, each bout should last 15-20 minutes. I think this game should be fast-paced, light, and fun.
I'm all about asymmetry, but I'm a little unfamiliar with implementing it. Does anyone have ideas about how to make each bending art asymmetrical, while still being balanced and true to the series?


That's all I can think of right now, but I'm certain there's something I forgot. Again, thanks for the help everyone!

[Saidoro]

Players
Ideally, it would be nice if this game were for 2-6 players. Maybe it's just two players facing off with their three benders, maybe it's three vs. one, or maybe it's a big, brutal, 3v3 slugfest.
I think it would be best if the game were balanced for at least 2 players on a side. What I mean by this is that managing characters should be easy enough that 1 player could, manage 3 characters, generally the character management should be complex enough that it's not boring during a 3v3 match.
How about each player draws one card per turn. It doesn't handle unbalanced teams but it does ensure that adding more players doesn't just split the decisions.


Maybe Zone Cards give certain advantages. When you have more, the idea is that you have more space to work with, maybe granting you bonuses to attack and defense. When you have less, you could lose those bonuses or something.
I dislike this one. It risks the monopoly problem, where you can effectively lose in the first few rounds when you lose an important zone, but still have to play through the rest of the game as a formality.

I think this game should be fast-paced, light, and fun.
All very admirable goals which don't really tell us much about the specifics of your plan.:smalltongue:

I'm all about asymmetry, but I'm a little unfamiliar with implementing it. Does anyone have ideas about how to make each bending art asymmetrical, while still being balanced and true to the series?
Define the arts by what they can't do. Maybe fire is really good at blowing up earth disks but can never block more than one attack per defense card. Maybe air's lack of either the burning effects of fire or the mass of earth or water means it can never zone people back on its own(though that won't stop it from helping other attacks or being aggressive in other ways.). You'll need to get a bit more detail on what sorts of things cards are allowed to do before you can really do much with your asymmetry. It's really something you'll have to keep in mind throughout production of the cards.

[Zap Dynamic]

How about each player draws one card per turn. It doesn't handle unbalanced teams but it does ensure that adding more players doesn't just split the decisions.

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean that each player draws one card to their hand per turn? If so, I don't think I agree. If you've got a 2-player game going (where each player controls three characters), then you're going to be able to draw 1 card for use amongst those three characters each turn, which would slow the game down a lot. On the other hand (like you mentioned), you'd also have 3v1 situations were the team with more brain-power at hand is also getting 3x the cards of the opposing team, which seems pretty unfair.

I think things that drawing cards should be defined by the characters. Maybe certain bending arts can draw greater or fewer cards (Airbenders, for instance, whose abilities deal little damage but provide for interesting combos, might be able to draw 2 cards per turn, to give them more options), but even that seems wonky.



I dislike this one. It risks the monopoly problem, where you can effectively lose in the first few rounds when you lose an important zone, but still have to play through the rest of the game as a formality.

I hadn't thought of the Zone Cards representing specific zones.
Here's how it might work:

Each character begins play with 3 Zone Cards.
If a character is succesfully hit, they must give one of their Zone Cards to the player that hit them. This represents the character being knocked back into the next zone of the arena.
When a character is down to their last Zone Card, they enter Desperation Mode. They may choose to grant a +2 bonus to either attack or defense, but at the cost of a -2 penalty to the other stat.
Alternatively, maybe Zone Cards work like lands in M:TG, where you must possess a certain number of them to play larger, more powerful cards.


To reflect the "3-minute round" nature of Pro-Bending, would it be worthwhile to think about adding a round limit to the game? Victory conditions might be:

The first team to collect all the Zone Cards wins.
OR, whichever team has the most Zone Cards at the end of Round 8 is the winner of that Bout.



Define the arts by what they can't do. Maybe fire is really good at blowing up earth disks but can never block more than one attack per defense card. Maybe air's lack of either the burning effects of fire or the mass of earth or water means it can never zone people back on its own(though that won't stop it from helping other attacks or being aggressive in other ways.). You'll need to get a bit more detail on what sorts of things cards are allowed to do before you can really do much with your asymmetry. It's really something you'll have to keep in mind throughout production of the cards.

Good thinking. Initial ideas:

Firebending is about relentless attack. Firebenders have decks with a variety of options to overcome defenses, but lack robust defensive options themselves.
Earthbending is about stubborn defense. Earthbender decks have defensive options for themselves and their allies, but lack a variety of attack options.
Waterbending is about turning an opponent's energy against them. Water decks have a good balance of attack and defense. Waterbenders can gain momentum, where successfully avoiding X number of attacks grants a bonus to actions immediately after.
Airbending is about crafty avoidance. Air decks are filled with defensive options, as well as a decent set of abilities to grant bonuses (or penalties) to other players, but lack formidable attack options.


In terms of balance, I want to give each character a realm where they shine, but also a realm where they need to rely on their teammates.

[Madara]

I suggest making it so each bender on a side can "assist" another bender in the same zone or such by playing one of their cards to help them. This would allow large group games to maintain a "team" feel.

[Saidoro]

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean that each player draws one card to their hand per turn? If so, I don't think I agree. If you've got a 2-player game going (where each player controls three characters), then you're going to be able to draw 1 card for use amongst those three characters each turn, which would slow the game down a lot. On the other hand (like you mentioned), you'd also have 3v1 situations were the team with more brain-power at hand is also getting 3x the cards of the opposing team, which seems pretty unfair.

I think things that drawing cards should be defined by the characters. Maybe certain bending arts can draw greater or fewer cards (Airbenders, for instance, whose abilities deal little damage but provide for interesting combos, might be able to draw 2 cards per turn, to give them more options), but even that seems wonky.
I got the impression that cards stayed on the field after being played and I assumed players would start the game with a number of cards in hand and that players couldn't pay their entire hand at once. The system I proposed was never meant to handle 3v1 situations.
You probably shouldn't make base card draw character defined, it's not that it's thematically bad it's just I think the grain may be too coarse. The difference between drawing one card per round and two or even 3 and 4 is pretty massive and I worry that it would be very hard to balance. That's not to say you can't make cards which draw you more cards, though. Using tactical positioning to gain more options seems like an airbender trick.

Each character begins play with 3 Zone Cards.
If a character is succesfully hit, they must give one of their Zone Cards to the player that hit them. This represents the character being knocked back into the next zone of the arena.
When a character is down to their last Zone Card, they enter Desperation Mode. They may choose to grant a +2 bonus to either attack or defense, but at the cost of a -2 penalty to the other stat.
So they're a hit point stand in, basically?

Alternatively, maybe Zone Cards work like lands in M:TG, where you must possess a certain number of them to play larger, more powerful cards.
Don't do this. It has the monopoly problem I mentioned early while simultaneously being very obvious to the losing player, potentially breeding frustration. Players should retain the ability to make meaningful decisions throughout the game, they should just be closer to failure, probably messing with their priorities.


To reflect the "3-minute round" nature of Pro-Bending, would it be worthwhile to think about adding a round limit to the game? Victory conditions might be:

The first team to collect all the Zone Cards wins.
OR, whichever team has the most Zone Cards at the end of Round 8 is the winner of that Bout.

Sounds good.

Good thinking. Initial ideas:

Firebending is about relentless attack. Firebenders have decks with a variety of options to overcome defenses, but lack robust defensive options themselves.
Earthbending is about stubborn defense. Earthbender decks have defensive options for themselves and their allies, but lack a variety of attack options.
Waterbending is about turning an opponent's energy against them. Water decks have a good balance of attack and defense. Waterbenders can gain momentum, where successfully avoiding X number of attacks grants a bonus to actions immediately after.
Airbending is about crafty avoidance. Air decks are filled with defensive options, as well as a decent set of abilities to grant bonuses (or penalties) to other players, but lack formidable attack options.


In terms of balance, I want to give each character a realm where they shine, but also a realm where they need to rely on their teammates.
Basically, yes. You'll want to get more in detail and hopefully less symmetrical later but this is about as much as can be done while we still don't know what an actual attack card will look like.

[Zap Dynamic]

I suggest making it so each bender on a side can "assist" another bender in the same zone or such by playing one of their cards to help them. This would allow large group games to maintain a "team" feel.

I like this idea, but I'm not sure exactly what you mean. However, I think the reason why I'm not sure is because we haven't done anything to develop individual attack/defense cards, so... my fault! :smalltongue:


I got the impression that cards stayed on the field after being played and I assumed players would start the game with a number of cards in hand and that players couldn't pay their entire hand at once. The system I proposed was never meant to handle 3v1 situations.

That's the way it started out. Sorry about throwing you a curveball there. :smallredface: I think it would be one of two ways:

Limited Hand
Benders draw a set number of cards at the beginning of each bout, and may play 1-2 each round.
After drawing their cards, they may elect to discard a few of them (which would depend on how many they're allowed to draw in the first place) and draw replacement cards.
When a bender plays a card, they place it face up in front of them. They may continue to use this card in subsequent rounds, but only once per round.
Advantages: This is a simple system, e.g. you don't have to worry about remembering to draw cards each turn. Additionally (just like in a Pro-Bending match), your opponent "learns" about you each time you play a card. You've shown that you know a particular move, and they can plan to defend against that in the future.
Disadvantages: It seems really simple, maybe to excess. Also, it could create stalemates, where players have a set of cards in front of them that allow them to negate attacks indefinitely. A solution might be to roll a single d6 each time an attack is made to determine success. Defensive cards could determine the DC for the roll, attack cards to provide bonuses to the roll, and utility cards could modify both cards in various ways.

Refreshing Hand
At the beginning of play, each bender draws 3-4 cards. They may not discard these cards to draw new cards.
Each turn, they draw 1-2 cards and play 1-2 cards. When a card is played, it is sent to the discard pile.
If a player runs out of cards to play, they are considered to be exhausted, and have no offenses or defenses at their disposal for the duration of the bout.
Advantages: Drawing, playing, and discarding cards each turn is more dynamic, and provides a more action-oriented playing experience (which I think is well-suited to the nature of Pro-Bending). The idea that benders can "run out of juice" is demonstrated in the show, and this playstyle enforces that.
Disadvantages: Players can't effectively "learn" the moves of their opponents, because cards are discarded after use. That's an element that I'd really like to preserve.

Thoughts about these two methods? Suggestions for additional methods?


So they're a hit point stand in, basically?
That was my thinking, yes. In the show, benders seem to be knocked back into the next zone if they can't dodge or block an attack, it makes sense that Zone Cards would function like hit points. I'm not terribly thrilled about there being only 3 HP per person, but I think that can be taken into account when designing the various attack/defense cards, right? In other words, it should be fairly tricky to successfully take away someone's Zone Cards. The game should be more about whittling away at your opponent's stock of cards, so that you can eventually take away their Zone Cards.


Don't do this. It has the monopoly problem I mentioned early while simultaneously being very obvious to the losing player, potentially breeding frustration. Players should retain the ability to make meaningful decisions throughout the game, they should just be closer to failure, probably messing with their priorities.
Consider it "not done." How would you feel about some kind of special move that's triggered during the last, say, 3 rounds of a bout? We could call them "Gambits" or "Endgame Moves" or something. Maybe each character card has 2-4 of these moves, and the player can choose to use one of them per bout. Examples from the show are spoilered below for the safety of all eyes that have not had the pleasure to watch Korra. :smalltongue:
I'm picturing the moment when Mako leapt through the dust created by so many shattered earth disks to knock the Earthbender into the drink. I'm also picturing the moment where Korra pulls Airbending lessons out of thin air to gain a dramatic victory.

As far as developing the details of the different cards, I'm not sure how to proceed. My intuition is that it's better to lay out the ground rules like we've been doing (cards per hand, method of playing cards, details about the bending arts, etc.) to establish the middle ground for the game, then to develop attack and defense cards that span out from that middle ground in balanced fashion. That said, I've never made a board card game before; does this seem like a good method?

[Madara]

As far as developing the details of the different cards, I'm not sure how to proceed. My intuition is that it's better to lay out the ground rules like we've been doing (cards per hand, method of playing cards, details about the bending arts, etc.) to establish the middle ground for the game, then to develop attack and defense cards that span out from that middle ground in balanced fashion. That said, I've never made a board game before; does this seem like a good method?


Is it a card game or a board game? I think the confusion is growing.

That said. You should have the established stuff in one post, so we have something to work off of. I'm thinking we should come up with some example cards for each category: Attack, Defense, Special or w/e


At the beginning of play, each bender draws 3-4 cards. They may not discard these cards to draw new cards.
Each turn, they draw 1-2 cards and play 1-2 cards. When a card is played, it is sent to the discard pile.

I say everyone draws at once each round. Let's say they draw 5 cards from a deck, Dominion style. Someone goes first and uses an attack card, to which the other person must respond with a defense card. Defense cards can only be used in response to attacks. This continues until the end of the round, where everyone discards the rest of their hand(like dominion) and then they draw for the new round.

When the deck runs out, they shuffle their discard and use it as a deck(Dominion style)


Zone Cards would function like hit points

What if Zone Cards aren't part of the deck? If you fail to defend yourself, or your defense isn't enough, you lose a zone card to another player.

[Zap Dynamic]

Is it a card game or a board game? I think the confusion is growing.

Bah, sorry about that. I meant to write "card." I'll edit it now, and I'll work on updating the OP with the established stuff by later this evening.


I say everyone draws at once each round. Let's say they draw 5 cards from a deck, Dominion style. Someone goes first and uses an attack card, to which the other person must respond with a defense card. Defense cards can only be used in response to attacks. This continues until the end of the round, where everyone discards the rest of their hand(like dominion) and then they draw for the new round.

When the deck runs out, they shuffle their discard and use it as a deck(Dominion style).

I like the idea of a "draw phase" where every player draws at once, but the rest I'm not so sure about. On the one hand, I think it's a good way to give everyone a fresh set of options each round. On the other hand, it seems like drawing a fresh hand every round is going to slow the game down (it seemed to do that for Dominion, anyway), and that's the last thing I want to do. I want this game to float like a butterfly and sting like a bee, perhaps even to the point that there's a mandatory time limit (3-5 seconds?) for each bender's turn.


What if Zone Cards aren't part of the deck? If you fail to defend yourself, or your defense isn't enough, you lose a zone card to another player.
I hadn't really pictured them being a part of the deck in the first place. Instead, each player would begin play with their character card and three Zone Cards in front of them, as well as a hand full of cards (probably something like 4-8 cards).

----

Here's an idea to represent one of the more involved rules of Pro-Bending: Zone Control.

In the show, if all benders on Team A are knocked back from Zone 1 into Zone 2, Team B may advance to Zone 1. If Team A manages to knock all of Team B out of Zone 1, they are allowed to advance back into that zone.


So. Let's say all the benders on Team A start out with 3 Zone Cards. If all of them are reduced to 2 Zone Cards, they are effectively knocked back 1 Zone. Maybe every bender on a team being in the same Zone grants some sort of teamwork bonus (someone mentioned being able to share cards earlier), but that's not the focus of this idea.

Team A has lost 1 Zone Card each to Team B. For the purposes of this idea, those Zone Cards are distributed evenly amongst Team B (and maybe that's the way it always ought to be). At this point, if Team A knocks a member of Team B back 1 Zone, that Zone Card is placed off to the side, as is each Zone Card taken from Team B. If Team A manages to take a Zone Card from each player on Team B, then Team A may distribute those 3 cards that were placed off to the side amongst themselves.

Is this needlessly complicated? It seems that way to me, but I wanted to put it out there anyway.

[Zap Dynamic]

Just updated the OP with rules etc. as they stand right now. Really interested in getting some feedback!

[Madara]

Rules
Basic gameplay involves 2-6 players, each controlling 1-3 benders on two 3-person teams. Any player-to-bender ratio is acceptable, so long as there are three benders on a team. Players may choose whichever benders they prefer, but there may only be one of each bending art represented on a team.

OK, this will work pretty well. Unless there are 4 players, that'll be awkward but you'll just have one person using two.

Each match consists of 3 rounds. During a round, play proceeds to the left, and teams may choose to draw 3 cards (in any combination) from any deck for which they have a bender in play. After drawing cards, a team may play any 3 cards they would like. Each team takes turns drawing and playing cards, and a round consists of both teams taking 6 turns each.

So the team draws three total cards, for all their benders. This works well for the 1v1 game and the 3v3. Does each bender have a separate hand of cards? What about when its 1v1? If they do, then this matters, if not than the drawing doesn't matter as much. I like that you add round length.

Each bender begins play with 3 Zone Cards. The object of the game is to take as many Zone Cards away from the other team as possible in the span of 3 rounds. Standard Victory is awarded to the team that has won the greatest number of Zone Cards in that time. Alternatively, victory is awarded to any team that manages to take every Zone Card from the opposing team in a single round. This is called a Knock-Out Victory, and it ends the game, even if it is achieved in round one.

This works well, and I believe it portrays the show well.

Players may play cards in tandem, making them more difficult to defeat. To do this, the benders playing in tandem must have the same number of Zone Cards.
Yeah...this is where it gets confusing. You'll need to explain the benefits of tandem more.



Terminology
Player – That’s you!
Bender – This is the character represented by a Bender Card.
Bending Arts – Firebending, Waterbending, Airbending, and Earthbending are the four bending arts.
Team – A unit of three benders. Each team may only have one of each type of bender, though they are free to choose any 3 of the 4 bending arts.
Match – A match consists of 3 rounds.
Round – A round consists of 6 turns. During a turn, each team attempts to take Zone Cards away from their opponents.
Turn – At the beginning of a team’s turn, they may draw 3 cards from any bending deck. A team may only draw from a deck for which they have a bender engaged in play. Once a team has drawn, they have 5 seconds to play any 3 cards they would like.
Zone Card – These are like hit points. Each bender begins play with 3 Zone Cards. If a bender is reduced to 0 Zone Cards, that bender is knocked out of the ring, and is removed from play until the next round.
Standard Victory – Standard victory is awarded to the team that has gained the most Zone Cards at the end of 3 rounds.
Knock-Out Victory – This is awarded to any team that can take away every Zone Card from the opposing team in the space of a single round. Knock-out victories end the game, even if they occur in the first round.
In Tandem - Benders on the same team may only play cards in tandem if they have the same number of Zone Cards in their possession. Cards played in tandem have their values increased by a number indicated on the card.
A useful catalog of terms, quick and easy reference. Tandem gets a little more explanation, but I suppose it'll make more sense once there are some cards.



Card Types
Bender Cards – Cards representing benders from each of the four elements. There needs to be at least two of each type. Should these cards be generic “Firebender” etc. cards, or should they represent specific characters, e.g. “Mako the Fire Ferret”?

I think it should be generic. However, I disagree with the drawing of Bender cards. I say all the bender cards should be in one deck. Since you draw 3 for the team, it shouldn't be a problem. Card games often have times when you don't get usable cards.

Zone Cards - These serve as hit points for the different benders.
Action Cards – Whether attack, defense, or utility, these cards are played from the player’s hand. Perhaps weaker action cards can be played again and again (without discarding), and the most powerful cards can only be played once per match.
Stress Cards – Perhaps when a player loses a Zone Card, they may draw a card from the Stress Deck and play it face-up in front of them. These cards represent the escalation of battle, and grant bonuses to the bender who drew them. Maybe they should be temporary?
We're getting a lot of Card types that are all in separate decks. Don't make the bonuses too big, otherwise its beneficial to lose a zone card. Maybe give them a chance to draw a Stress Deck card by rolling 4 or higher on a dice?

Bending Decks - Each bending art has its own deck of cards that is shared by every bender of that type in play.

I say have one deck for all benders. Sometimes you won't get cards that you can use, such is the game. As of now you have about 5-6 decks. That's pretty complicated.


Ideas
Talking about the nature of playing cards “in tandem,” it might be good to take a page from Paint the Line, the Ping Pong card game from the makers of Penny Arcade. Each card has a “normal” value, as well as a “tandem” value. Thoughts?

I'm not familiar with Paint the Line, but I think that seperate Tandem values would be appropriate.

There should be some means of attempting to cheat. Success means that you have an unfair advantage, whereas failure results in the loss of a Zone Card. Thoughts?

Specific action cards could be "Cheat" cards. They're really good, but you roll a dice and on a 4 or lower, you lose a zone card.

I like the idea of incorporating dice into the game, maybe just one. It adds an extra element of strategy, and makes stats for the various benders more meaningful.
Do the benders have stats? In the current rules, it doesn't seem like it.

I like the idea of having some sort of 4-way Rock, Paper, Scissors mechanic. In the show, the bending arts are balanced in terms of advantages toward some and disadvantages toward another, so it seems like a sensible thing to explore. One possible solution is to allow each bending art (or each team) to specialize in a particular style of play, a la Dominion’s Hand, Buy, and Action system.

Each bending art does +X when against its opposing element.

The “Stress Deck” mentioned earlier is definitely worth exploring.

I want some kind of “Desperation Move” ability, whether that be a card that is randomly drawn, or an inherent ability represented on each Bender Card. I want to handle these abilities in such a way that it’s more valuable to use them at different times. For example, Firebenders are quick and decisive, so their Desperation Move is more powerful in the first three turns in the match. Waterbenders, on the other hand, are cool under pressure, and their ability grows stronger based on how many Stress Cards they’ve collected.

Makes sense, and sounds fairly unique. As I said before, only give them a chance at drawing a Stress card. Maybe give waterbenders a bonus when rolling to collect a stress card?

In general, I think it should be difficult (but not impossible) to take every Zone Card from your opponents in a single round. One of the ways this could work is if the various benders each hit their peaks and valleys at different points in the game. That way, instead of the strategy being strictly about trying to take away Zone Cards as quickly as possible, it would be about protecting your teammates until they can be most effective.

Instead of Team A drawing cards, then playing cards, then Team B duplicating that order, what if both teams drew their cards at the same time in the first phase, and played them at the same time in the second phase? Other rules still apply.
I think they draw at the same time, but play at different times, in order around the table, maybe by bending type? Firebenders, then Waterbenders, then Earthbenders?




Classes: Each team must consist of three players, and mechanics should encourage cooperation amongst bending styles.
Earthbender

The "Mario" - Medium Attack, Medium Defense
A few medium-strength attacks, several group defenses.
High Stamina

Waterbender

The "Shiek" - High Defense, Low Attack
Can evade several attacks, but only has low-power attacks.
Medium Stamina

Firebender

The "Glass Cannon" - High Attack Low Defense
Has a couple of damage negations and a couple of powerful blasts.
Low Stamina.

Airbender (?)

The "Ghost" - Medium Attack Medium Defense
No powerful attacks, many defensive options, and several utility powers to affect the enemy.
Highest Stamina.

As I said before, I'm not sure how the classes work out in the card game. I think it would just be that Waterbender type cards are usually defense cards?



Does this seem like a fun project to anyone else?

Feedback in bold Green

[Craft (Cheese)]

Question: By "one deck for each bender" do you mean that a single player controlling a team of 3 would have 3 decks to manage?

That's... actually a pretty cool idea! Whenever the player draws cards they choose which deck they draw from. "Do I want more cards for my waterbender, or more cards for my firebender?" is an interesting choice, and less random than simply drawing from a single monolithic stack.

[Zap Dynamic]

Responding within my quotes was a great help when it came to reading your comments, but now that I have to respond they won't show up. Praise be to copy/paste!:smalltongue:

Madara's Stuff

OK, [the player setup] will work pretty well. Unless there are 4 players, that'll be awkward but you'll just have one person using two.
I thought the same thing. I think the most ideal configurations for play would be 1v1, 1v3, and 3v3. That said, I figure we might as well leave the option open for other configurations. I've been playing a lot of Arkham Horror recently, and while it's not exactly the same situation, it's totally possible to play 2+ characters without much hassle. I figure a 2v2 situation in this game would be like having one experienced player on each team (they'd each be controlling two benders), and one newbie who's just got their single bender.


So the team draws three total cards, for all their benders. This works well for the 1v1 game and the 3v3. Does each bender have a separate hand of cards? What about when its 1v1? If they do, then this matters, if not than the drawing doesn't matter as much. I like that you add round length.
I would imagine that players would hold all the cards for however many benders they're controlling in a single, unified hand. That said, it's actually pretty beneficial to show your cards to your teammate(s), so it might be worthwhile for a team (no matter how many players) to have just one hand between them. That said, I don't think it's necessary to state that in the rules; people will arrive at whatever details suit them best.


A useful catalog of terms, quick and easy reference. Tandem gets a little more explanation, but I suppose it'll make more sense once there are some cards.
Thanks! I don't think that this game is complex enough to really need a glossary, but it never hurts! And yes, we'll need to start creating cards for "tandem" values to make much sense.


I think it should be generic. However, I disagree with the drawing of Bender cards. I say all the bender cards should be in one deck. Since you draw 3 for the team, it shouldn't be a problem. Card games often have times when you don't get usable cards.
Similar to WOW:TCG's hero cards and Arkham Horror's investigator cards, I figured that these would be larger than the other cards in the game, and could be chosen at random or selected according to preference.


We're getting a lot of Card types that are all in separate decks. Don't make the bonuses too big, otherwise its beneficial to lose a zone card. Maybe give them a chance to draw a Stress Deck card by rolling 4 or higher on a dice?

I say have one deck for all benders. Sometimes you won't get cards that you can use, such is the game. As of now you have about 5-6 decks. That's pretty complicated.
All good ideas. As I picture it, these are the decks we'd have on the table:
Draw Pile (which could be all the bender cards together, or separate piles for each… there are pros and cons with both)
Stress Cards
Discard Pile (again, either a separate deck for each Bending Art, or one unified deck)
Zone Cards wouldn't have their own deck, because they'd be played in front of the players to represent HP. With that in mind, we're looking at a maximum of 9 decks (right now... I'm leaving the possibility open for more kinds of cards) and a minimum of 2. One part of me agrees that 9 is too many decks, but another part of me has played Arkham Horror and Dominion, and thinks that 9 isn't as bad as it could be. More on my thoughts below.


Question: By "one deck for each bender" do you mean that a single player controlling a team of 3 would have 3 decks to manage?

That's... actually a pretty cool idea! Whenever the player draws cards they choose which deck they draw from. "Do I want more cards for my waterbender, or more cards for my firebender?" is an interesting choice, and less random than simply drawing from a single monolithic stack.
My thinking exactly. Briefly, here are the pros and cons I see for each method.
Many Decks
Players know exactly what deck they're choosing from. If they need more offensive options, go with Fire. If their Waterbender has a lot of Stress accumulated, go with Water. If they need more defensive options, Earth, etc.
Having more decks on the table can be intimidating to new players. I don't think this is a huge concern, because the decks will be pretty clear as far as who needs to draw from what.
In my mind, laying out the cards in a line between the two teams creates a nice visual break. It forms the line across which the two teams battle.
Possible workaround: To minimize the clutter in the middle of the table, what if each player had their own discard pile? Example: Team A and Team B both have a Waterbender. Both Waterbenders draw from the Water deck in the middle of the playing area. When each bender plays a card, they discard to their own, private discard pile. On one hand, this brings back the notion of "now I know what tricks my opponent has in his bag," which I like. On the other hand, if you get crappy draws, you're stuck with them. I'm not convinced that that's such a bad thing, though. Also, because the rounds aren't very long, there's a good chance that you'll never need to reuse the cards in your discard pile. Thoughts?
Unified Deck
Moreso than separate bending decks, a unified deck amps up the feeling of "oh, man... will I get the card I need to win?" I'm in favor of this game being fraught with adrenaline at every possible point.
If you've got two teams with different sets of benders, then there's the possibility that you'll be drawing cards that are not just non-ideal, but outright useless. For instance: Team A has an Airbender, and Team B has an Earthbender instead. If Team A draws an Earth card, they simply can't use it. The same is true if Team B draws an Air card.
One way to solve this problem is to have one deck, and make every card generic. Any kind of Bender can use any kind of card, but certain cards grant bonuses if they are played by a particular bender. Attack cards, for example, are better used by Firebenders, Defense by Earthbenders, and Utility by Airbenders. On one hand, this simplifies the game. On the other hand, it takes away the option of more personalized card art, and it implies three different values on each card: the standard value, the modified value if used by the appropriate bender, and the tandem value if used in conjunction with another bender in the same zone. It might even imply a fourth: the value if used in tandem by the appropriate bender. That could be a really cool system, but it's definitely more complicated than we've got. Thoughts?


Bending Advantages
First, a diagram:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v237/celest1/allconnecter.jpg
According to the picture above (care of Uncle Iroh!), Earth and Air are opposites, as are Fire and Water. How can we represent this in game terms?

At first, I thought that Firebenders and Waterbenders should have a bonus when fighting against each other, and Air and Earthbenders should behave the same way. Then I thought that these oppositions might make them equally matched instead. I've thought about it a lot, and I don't have any answers.

What I do know is that each Bender needs to have a strength and a weakness. I'd like it if those two things were tied together into the same mechanic. Here's what I propose:
Firebender aka The Glass Cannon
Firebenders are your basic offensive unit. They have a wealth of low, mid, and high-power attack options, but are fairly squishy, and lack robust defenses. Their special ability is best executed when they have no Stress Cards, and they can only gain Stress Cards on a roll of 6. They are focused on hurting the other team, and need to rely on their own team to avoid damage.
Earthbender aka The Tank
Earthbenders are your basic defensive unit. They have a couple of mid-power attacks, but most of their cards are about defending others as well as themselves. They gain Stress Cards by rolling a 5 or 6. An earthbender's special ability is best executed when their teammates have few Zone Cards. They are focused on protecting their teammates, and rely on them to hurt their opponents.
Waterbender aka The Lancer
Waterbenders are a more complicated class. They begin play well-balanced between offense and defense, but their bending arts are all about flowing with and capitalizing on the situation. A waterbender's special ability is best executed when they have a few Stress Cards, and they gain Stress Cards on a roll of 4, 5, or 6. They are focused on biding their time, and unleashing a fierce attack late in the game.
Airbender aka The Wizard
Airbenders are another more complicated class. They have very few offensive options, but a good stock of personal defensive options. Where they shine, however, is in utility powers that allow them to hamper their opponents. Their special ability is best triggered when the opposing team has as few Zone Cards as possible. They can gain Stress Cards on a roll of 5 or 6. They are focused on hampering the performance of their opponents, and must rely on their teammates when it comes to dealing damage.

I tried to word all of this in such a way that we could use either deck management method detailed above without needing to change anything.

[Madara]

So are stress cards beneficial?



Firebenders are your basic offensive unit. They have a wealth of low, mid, and high-power attack options, but are fairly squishy, and lack robust defenses. Their special ability is best executed when they have no Stress Cards, and they can only gain Stress Cards on a roll of 6. They are focused on hurting the other team, and need to rely on their own team to avoid damage.

So they work better without stress cards, and they only gain them on a roll of six. This doesn't really limit or weaken them. I thought that stress cards were beneficial, representing doing well under pressure, like a waterbender.


Also, I still don't agree with adding airbenders. Oh, and I'm going to create a diagram for you to represent this:


All good ideas. As I picture it, these are the decks we'd have on the table:

Draw Pile (which could be all the bender cards together, or separate piles for each… there are pros and cons with both)
Stress Cards
Discard Pile (again, either a separate deck for each Bending Art, or one unified deck)



Edit: Here is the diagram
http://i1261.photobucket.com/albums/ii583/Brian_Merchant/Probendingcardlayout.jpg?t=1340302374

Hands are not shown.

[Zap Dynamic]

So are stress cards beneficial?

Short answer: yes.
Long answer: it will depend on whether or not we introduce additional mechanics (particularly stats for the benders), but I picture each Stress Card having a value like "+1 to defense" or "+1 to attack."



So they work better without stress cards, and they only gain them on a roll of six. This doesn't really limit or weaken them. I thought that stress cards were beneficial, representing doing well under pressure, like a waterbender.

I hadn't though about the implications here. Thanks for pointing it out! Basically, I figure Stress Cards provide bonuses that could make all the difference, even though they're not inherently very powerful. At best, a person is going to be able to have two active Stress Cards (thoughts on this further down), because gaining them is tied to losing Zone Cards, and once you lose three Zone Cards, you're out.

The idea was that Stress Cards give you a bonus, so it should be difficult to acquire them, and doubly so for firebenders, because (more in terms of game balance than anything else) they can't take the proverbial heat. Also, I picture Special Abilities as moves that you have access to throughout the Match, but can only use once per round (maybe even per match). To keep all the players from using their specials right out of the gate (a reckless bid to win it all), I want the different abilities to be timed such that they shouldn't be used together. Firebenders are the ones that I picture using their abilities near the beginning, when they're fresh and have taken no damage. Maybe a better way to represent it would be to say that the special ability of a firebender is most powerful when they have all their Zone Cards, circumventing the Stress Card thing entirely?

Here's another thing: there might not be much incentive to gain Stress Cards if they're not all that powerful and you can only get 2 anyway.

The Fix:
Instead of outright losing your Zone Card any time you're hit, maybe it would be better to "tap" your Zone Cards first? It would effectively double your HP, and you could roll for a Stress Card every time. I'm picturing moments in the show where someone's hit hard enough to be staggered, and the hit right after that sends them into the next Zone. It might even be worth it to explore the possibility of tapped Zone Cards being easier to take away than regular Zone Cards.



Also, I still don't agree with adding airbenders.
Why not? Just because they're not in the show?


Edit: Here is the diagram
http://i1261.photobucket.com/albums/ii583/Brian_Merchant/Probendingcardlayout.jpg?t=1340302374
Thanks for the diagram! Any comment on whether it would be better to have a unified draw pile or separate piles for the different bending arts?

Throughout this post, I've been thinking that a lot of these questions would be easier to answer after playtesting it. We can still come up with helpful stuff, but we need to get a prototype together to see what works at the table and what doesn't.

Before we start that process, though, I think there are at least a few questions that we need to get out of the way:

Stats: Whether they're present in the Bender Cards, the cards played from one's hand, or both, I think we need to have some kind of stats. I think it could be as simple as Attack and Defense. Maybe cards played from the hand have particular attack values, and Bender Cards modify them? Firebenders always get +1 attack, Earthbenders always get +1 defense, Airbenders always get -1 Attack, etc. Thoughts?
Dice: Do we want them? If so, my personal opinion is that one is all we need. If we use them, then an attack card might say something like "You need a result of x or better for this card to be effective," a Bender's Defense stat would make that more or less difficult, and a Bender's Attack stat would make the DC on the card easier.
If we want dice in the game, what should they be? d6? d12? d20? We could balance it for anything. Personally, I like the idea of something larger than a d6.

I'm sure there are more questions we need to consider, but this is all I've got right now.

[Madara]

Short answer: yes.
Long answer: it will depend on whether or not we introduce additional mechanics (particularly stats for the benders), but I picture each Stress Card having a value like "+1 to defense" or "+1 to attack."

I think stress cards should be more than that, like they let you take an extra action, or dodge one attack. Make them more powerful, to counter-act the losing of Zone Cards.


I hadn't though about the implications here. Thanks for pointing it out! Basically, I figure Stress Cards provide bonuses that could make all the difference, even though they're not inherently very powerful. At best, a person is going to be able to have two active Stress Cards (thoughts on this further down), because gaining them is tied to losing Zone Cards, and once you lose three Zone Cards, you're out.

Since they're so hard to get, I think you could get away with giving out one time use super-abilities.


The idea was that Stress Cards give you a bonus, so it should be difficult to acquire them, and doubly so for firebenders, because (more in terms of game balance than anything else) they can't take the proverbial heat. Also, I picture Special Abilities as moves that you have access to throughout the Match, but can only use once per round (maybe even per match). To keep all the players from using their specials right out of the gate (a reckless bid to win it all), I want the different abilities to be timed such that they shouldn't be used together. Firebenders are the ones that I picture using their abilities near the beginning, when they're fresh and have taken no damage. Maybe a better way to represent it would be to say that the special ability of a firebender is most powerful when they have all their Zone Cards, circumventing the Stress Card thing entirely?

I say you need an attack card in order to attack. Different attack cards give you bonuses, or penalties and allow you to make an attack on another bender. This would limit the all-out push at the beginning because you wouldn't have enough attacks. As for the firebender thing. Special card example:
Firey Blast-Blast
You make an attack against another bender with a +1 for every Zone Card you have.


Here's another thing: there might not be much incentive to gain Stress Cards if they're not all that powerful and you can only get 2 anyway.

As I said above, you can get away with making them more powerful.


The Fix:
Instead of outright losing your Zone Card any time you're hit, maybe it would be better to "tap" your Zone Cards first? It would effectively double your HP, and you could roll for a Stress Card every time. I'm picturing moments in the show where someone's hit hard enough to be staggered, and the hit right after that sends them into the next Zone. It might even be worth it to explore the possibility of tapped Zone Cards being easier to take away than regular Zone Cards.

Wait. There's HP now? I like the 'tapping' zone cards. But let's say that a Tapped Zone card isn't counted as being had by you, but the other team doesn't get it until all your teammates lose a Zone Card.



Why not? Just because they're not in the show?

A little bit that, but also because it would work better with just the 3 benders. You wouldn't have the problem with the unideck of getting a card your whole team can't use, and there would be less total cards, allowing you to focus on three rather than four.


Thanks for the diagram! Any comment on whether it would be better to have a unified draw pile or separate piles for the different bending arts?

I'm pretty split on this. Right now, I lean toward one whole deck, but I can see either one working well. Or maybe have a "general deck" and specific bender decks.


Throughout this post, I've been thinking that a lot of these questions would be easier to answer after playtesting it. We can still come up with helpful stuff, but we need to get a prototype together to see what works at the table and what doesn't.

Which means we need to make actual cards.


Before we start that process, though, I think there are at least a few questions that we need to get out of the way:

Stats: Whether they're present in the Bender Cards, the cards played from one's hand, or both, I think we need to have some kind of stats. I think it could be as simple as Attack and Defense. Maybe cards played from the hand have particular attack values, and Bender Cards modify them? Firebenders always get +1 attack, Earthbenders always get +1 defense, Airbenders always get -1 Attack, etc. Thoughts?
Dice: Do we want them? If so, my personal opinion is that one is all we need. If we use them, then an attack card might say something like "You need a result of x or better for this card to be effective," a Bender's Defense stat would make that more or less difficult, and a Bender's Attack stat would make the DC on the card easier.
If we want dice in the game, what should they be? d6? d12? d20? We could balance it for anything. Personally, I like the idea of something larger than a d6.
1. I like the Idea of stats varying. I think it would work well on bender cards if we did the white-board style like before, or find another way to do that.
2/3. Yep, dice seem to be a necessary thing here. I think d6 would be best for a general audience, since everyone has those. I think most things should be an opposed check. With the opponent being able to play a defense card.



I'm sure there are more questions we need to consider, but this is all I've got right now.

That's fine, we'll make plenty of progress. :smallsmile:

[Madara]

Any thoughts on sample cards? What you want the layout to be like and such?

[Zap Dynamic]

I've toyed around with the idea of what a card might look like, but haven't done any real concrete thinking. The cards from Paint the Line have a nice layout:
http://www.gamehead.com/sites/default/files/styles/gh_lightbox/public/images/product_files/410258/paint-the-line-glam.jpg
Title at the top, illustration just below, description beneath that, type of card (bending art, in this case) in the bottom middle, and Standard and Tandem values on either side of that. I may be able to toy around with Photoshop (or Paint or whatever) this weekend and rough something up.

Onto the rest of the stuff:
Instead of quoting, I'll just respond by topic, since a lot of what you said has to do with just a few topics.

Zone Cards
When I said "effectively doubles your HP," I meant that Zone Cards are basically your HP, since you are taken out of the game when you lose all of them. Sorry about the confusion. :smallsmile:

I like the idea of "tapped" Zone Cards not being given to the other team until everyone on your own team has lost one. That matches up nicely with the show, but we do need to be careful. If it takes one hit to tap a Zone Card, and another hit to take it away from someone, where does it go between that second hit and the time it takes for all your other teammates to lose their Zone Cards? Off to the side? Maybe it would be like this:


Gaining Zone Cards
Zone Cards are vital to Pro-Bending: TCG. If you lose all of your Zone Cards, you are removed from play for the duration of the round!

Whenever you successfully hit an opponent, their Zone Card becomes tapped (Note: add "tapped" description to Terminology). A tapped Zone Card counts against a Bender's ability to play a card in tandem with another Bender, but they haven't lost the Zone Card yet! Zone Cards can be taken from the other team only when each Bender on that team has a tapped Zone Card.

The idea here is that you've got to knock all of your opponent's back 1 Zone before your team can advance. The strategy this creates is that you need to make sure that at least one of the Benders on your team doesn't have a tapped Zone Card, because that way you prevent the other team from gaining the Zone Cards. Make sense?

Stress Cards
Do you picture Stress Cards as permanent gains, or something that you gain and then discard in order to use? I was picturing them as permanent (for the round in which they are gained, anyway), but if they're going to be more powerful (attack twice in one round, negate an attack), then maybe they should be gain and discard to use. Thoughts?

Special Abilities
Instead of separate cards that players draw from the deck, I had pictured Special Abilities being printed on the character card. That said, I'm fine with those abilities modifying standard attack cards (e.g. you need an normal attack card to use it), rather than being actions in their own right.

Stats
First of all, let's just throw some possible stats out there:

Firebender:
7 Attack
3 Defense
Waterbender:
5 Attack
5 Defense
Earthbender:
3 Attack
7 Defense
Airbender:
4 Attack
6 Defense

I like the idea of being able to adjust your score (e.g. "Oh no! They're ganging up on me! I'd better switch to defensive mode!"), but I want to maintain the idea that the various Benders excel in different areas. With that in mind, here's a possible rule:


Stats
Each Bender Card indicates the starting Attack and Defense stats for each Bender. On your turn, you may adjust this add 2 points to a stat by subtracting 2 points from the other stat. You may never adjust a stat more than 2 points away from the starting value of that stat as indicated on a Bender Card.

I've been trying to think of a way to represent these in a way that will allow them to be adjusted, while adding as few materials to the game as possible. At first I thought it might work to use cards with a different color on each side representing Attack and Defense, but with 6 Benders on the field, you're looking at an additional 60 cards. Then I thought some kind of two-sided token might work, but that still adds clutter. If we use a white board, people are going to have to buy new markers eventually, and it would be nice if the game didn't cost anything past the initial investment. Thoughts?

Airbenders
Here are my thoughts. Pro-Bending in the show has no Airbenders because there are only a handful of living airbenders in the world at the time. However, I can't imagine a future in this world where the Airbender population has rebounded and they are barred from play. The theme of the meta-series is all elements existing in harmony, and Airbender children are demonstrated to play games all the time, so it just doesn't seem like an option.

Part of me thinks that it would be fine to release the game with only Fire, Water, and Earth right now, with the possibility for an Airbender expansion later on, but the other part of me wonders why there's a need to hold off. As of right now, this is a freeware fan project, so no money could be gained by releasing it later. If they're going to be a part of the game eventually (and I think they should be), then why not do it from the beginning? In my mind, solving the problem right now is better than putting it out of mind, only to have it creep in later on.

Having all four elements available for play fulfills the Four-Man Band trope present in both shows, and also allows for greater strategic variety. 4v4 Pro-Bending is certainly a possibility, but--right now--having 4 styles and only 3 positions allows for even more strategic variety, which is pretty appealing. Plus, I think I'm starting to favor the idea of separate bending decks more, which circumvents the "I just drew a card that I can't use" problem. Again, I may be able to sketch out my ideas for a table layout this weekend.

[DaTedinator]

So, I've been lurking for a little while, and before I jump in, can I say that this is a great idea? Because this is a great idea.

Now for the jumping in. I'm not a huge card game player, though I have played a few games or Arkham Horror, along with a smattering of other, simpler games from back in the day (Pokemon, Yugioh, etc.). So, my thoughts may not be especially useful, but, I have them, so I thought I'd share them.

Airbenders: While I like the idea of including them, this seems like a big project that would be a *lot* simpler without them. If I were you, I'd stick with the standard three benders for now, and then maybe, once the game is actually designed and the rules are ironed out, bring airbenders in as some sort of expansion pack. Oh wait, I've been Ninja'd, you suggested that yourself. Well, just know that I'm behind that idea.

Zone cards: Alright, this is may not be a good idea, but what if zone cards, instead of being a per-bender thing, are a per-team thing? I just feel like that could simplify things a whole lot, and with the use of a die and a tapping mechanic, could still represent the situation well enough.

To expand on that idea, maybe, instead of each different type of bender having a different roll they need to get a stress card (Firebenders get a stress card on a 6, earthbenders on a 5+, waterbenders on a 4+), the die roll represents *who* gets the stress card. So whenever a zone gets tapped (or lost or both), you roll a die; on a 1-3, the waterbender gets a stress card, on a 4 or 5, the earthbender does, or on a 6, the firebender does.

Alternatively, if you keep zone cards tied to individual benders, what if the zone cards themselves are the stress cards? Each zone card has either:
A high-risk special ability that, if it fails, costs you the card (representing you leaving yourself too open, and getting knocked back a zone).
A special function that occurs whenever you lose the card (an counterattack, or some sort of defense that could let you keep the card after all), or,
A passive buff that gets more effective the fewer stress cards you have.

Actually, come to think of it, each zone card could have all three: the first for firebenders, the second for earthbenders, and the third for waterbenders. Or something like that. That'd be a lot to fit on one card, though.

So yeah, I don't know, I'm just rambling now, so I'll stop. Hopefully some of that is helpful.

[Fable Wright]

Something that you might want to look into for this is, oddly enough, the game Malifaux, a miniature-based combat game that uses cards as a randomization mechanics. It has a few interesting methods of using cards to attack and defend- a hand that can be used to cheat cards into play, rewarding players for overwhelming defense, and several other mechanics that could have a use in the game. More details about the mechanics and how to be implemented are in the spoiler below.


Note: These rules may be wrong. I'm typing from memory from the one time someone explained the rules to me, so I may be wrong about how some of the mechanics work.

Malifaux uses a "Fate deck" mechanic for randomization. Each player has their own fate deck, each deck has the same cards in it. Each card had a number 1-13 on it, and a number of dots on it from 1-3. A the beginning of each game, each player starts with a hand of 5 cards. When one model attacks another, both sides flip over the top card of their Fate deck. At this point, there is a 'Cheat' phase, where each side may play one of the cards from their hand to replace that flip. At this time, the results of the attack play out- if the values on the attacker's card + attack is less than 5 below the defender's card + defense, the attacker flips over 3 cards and deals damage equal to the lowest number of dots on a card flipped. If the result is equal, the top two cards are flipped and the lowest number of dots are used. If the defense was beaten by a value less than 15, the top card is flipped and the value may be cheated. If the defense was beaten by a value greater than 15, the attacker flips over the top 2 cards of the deck, and uses the highest number of dots on the card for damage. This value may be cheated. At the end of each turn, hands are refilled to 5. A way to implement this in bending may be to have each bender have a certain amount of damage they can take, and then after they take that many points of damage they have to move back a zone. This might also work with each of the benders- each bender deck is different, and possibly has three numbers on it, for attack, defense, and damage, to skew the probability of events. So, Firebenders may have a high damage on many of the cards in their decks, but average attack and low defense values. And so on. Combining this with the action card idea, each card might have a special written on it, so if it's flipped for an attack, it has a special effect if the card hits- for example, a bonus to a stat, a penalty to an opponent, a bonus to teammates, and so on. A powerful attack might have a low attack and defense value on it, but a good damage and special. It's something to think about, at least.

[Madara]

Onto the rest of the stuff:
Instead of quoting, I'll just respond by topic, since a lot of what you said has to do with just a few topics.
I will do quoting :smalltongue:


Zone Cards
[SPOILER]When I said "effectively doubles your HP," I meant that Zone Cards are basically your HP, since you are taken out of the game when you lose all of them. Sorry about the confusion. :smallsmile:

No problem


I like the idea of "tapped" Zone Cards not being given to the other team until everyone on your own team has lost one. That matches up nicely with the show, but we do need to be careful. If it takes one hit to tap a Zone Card, and another hit to take it away from someone, where does it go between that second hit and the time it takes for all your other teammates to lose their Zone Cards? Off to the side? Maybe it would be like this:

I was thinking "Off to the side", in that effectively no one has it. But it defaults to the original owner at the end.


The idea here is that you've got to knock all of your opponent's back 1 Zone before your team can advance. The strategy this creates is that you need to make sure that at least one of the Benders on your team doesn't have a tapped Zone Card, because that way you prevent the other team from gaining the Zone Cards. Make sense?

Exactly what I was thinking :smallbiggrin:


Stress Cards
Do you picture Stress Cards as permanent gains, or something that you gain and then discard in order to use? I was picturing them as permanent (for the round in which they are gained, anyway), but if they're going to be more powerful (attack twice in one round, negate an attack), then maybe they should be gain and discard to use. Thoughts?

I like the idea of one-time use. A stress card represents what amounts to an adrenaline rush, it doesn't last for very long.


Special Abilities
Instead of separate cards that players draw from the deck, I had pictured Special Abilities being printed on the character card. That said, I'm fine with those abilities modifying standard attack cards (e.g. you need an normal attack card to use it), rather than being actions in their own right.

See bellow.



I like the idea of being able to adjust your score (e.g. "Oh no! They're ganging up on me! I'd better switch to defensive mode!"), but I want to maintain the idea that the various Benders excel in different areas. With that in mind, here's a possible rule:

I meant that when you pick a bender at the beginning, the firebenders you can pick aren't all the same. Make separate archetypes for each bender(Maybe three), so that each game is different.



I've been trying to think of a way to represent these in a way that will allow them to be adjusted, while adding as few materials to the game as possible. At first I thought it might work to use cards with a different color on each side representing Attack and Defense, but with 6 Benders on the field, you're looking at an additional 60 cards. Then I thought some kind of two-sided token might work, but that still adds clutter. If we use a white board, people are going to have to buy new markers eventually, and it would be nice if the game didn't cost anything past the initial investment. Thoughts?

Rotate a dice? We're already going to use dice, why not use more?


Airbenders
snip

Makes sense, you've gone and convinced me now. But we have little material to base it off of.


Having all four elements available for play fulfills the Four-Man Band trope present in both shows, and also allows for greater strategic variety. 4v4 Pro-Bending is certainly a possibility, but--right now--having 4 styles and only 3 positions allows for even more strategic variety, which is pretty appealing. Plus, I think I'm starting to favor the idea of separate bending decks more, which circumvents the "I just drew a card that I can't use" problem. Again, I may be able to sketch out my ideas for a table layout this weekend.

ok..ok... you've convinced me. But have a little give and take. Make 3 of each bender card, so you could have Makko the Firebender or Steve the Firebender, with Steve having different stats.

Edit: Double Ninja'd, will respond later

[Zap Dynamic]

Just in case anyone's wondering, these are spoiler'd to avoid Ye Old Wall O' Text. It's not like I'm trying to speak privately to each of you or anything. :smalltongue:

DaTedinator

So, I've been lurking for a little while, and before I jump in, can I say that this is a great idea? Because this is a great idea.

Thanks! I was hoping that was the general sentiment. :smallsmile:


Airbenders: While I like the idea of including them, this seems like a big project that would be a *lot* simpler without them. If I were you, I'd stick with the standard three benders for now, and then maybe, once the game is actually designed and the rules are ironed out, bring airbenders in as some sort of expansion pack. Oh wait, I've been Ninja'd, you suggested that yourself. Well, just know that I'm behind that idea.
Whether the Airbender is a part of the initial release or not, the game will need to be balanced. Just so I won't have to dig the project out of the closet later on, my plan is to build the game as if Airbenders are a part of the mechanics, but to make it such that game balance isn't really affected by their addition or absence (honestly, the same goes with the other classes too).


Zone cards: Alright, this is may not be a good idea, but what if zone cards, instead of being a per-bender thing, are a per-team thing? I just feel like that could simplify things a whole lot, and with the use of a die and a tapping mechanic, could still represent the situation well enough.
I feel like the nature of Pro-Bending is better represented by Zone Cards for each Bender.


To expand on that idea, maybe, instead of each different type of bender having a different roll they need to get a stress card (Firebenders get a stress card on a 6, earthbenders on a 5+, waterbenders on a 4+), the die roll represents *who* gets the stress card. So whenever a zone gets tapped (or lost or both), you roll a die; on a 1-3, the waterbender gets a stress card, on a 4 or 5, the earthbender does, or on a 6, the firebender does.
I like the first bit, but I'd rather make Stress Cards less random than the second bit implies.


Alternatively, if you keep zone cards tied to individual benders, what if the zone cards themselves are the stress cards? Each zone card has either:
A high-risk special ability that, if it fails, costs you the card (representing you leaving yourself too open, and getting knocked back a zone).
A special function that occurs whenever you lose the card (an counterattack, or some sort of defense that could let you keep the card after all), or,
A passive buff that gets more effective the fewer stress cards you have.
Not sure how I feel about this. There's always a fine line between elegance and oversimplification, and I'm on the fence about which one this is. It's definitely intriguing, though. Lemme stew on it, and I may have something to say tomorrow.

DMofDarkness

Something that you might want to look into for this is, oddly enough, the game Malifaux, a miniature-based combat game that uses cards as a randomization mechanics. It has a few interesting methods of using cards to attack and defend- a hand that can be used to cheat cards into play, rewarding players for overwhelming defense, and several other mechanics that could have a use in the game. More details about the mechanics and how to be implemented are in the spoiler below.


Note: These rules may be wrong. I'm typing from memory from the one time someone explained the rules to me, so I may be wrong about how some of the mechanics work.

Malifaux uses a "Fate deck" mechanic for randomization. Each player has their own fate deck, each deck has the same cards in it. Each card had a number 1-13 on it, and a number of dots on it from 1-3. A the beginning of each game, each player starts with a hand of 5 cards. When one model attacks another, both sides flip over the top card of their Fate deck. At this point, there is a 'Cheat' phase, where each side may play one of the cards from their hand to replace that flip. At this time, the results of the attack play out- if the values on the attacker's card + attack is less than 5 below the defender's card + defense, the attacker flips over 3 cards and deals damage equal to the lowest number of dots on a card flipped. If the result is equal, the top two cards are flipped and the lowest number of dots are used. If the defense was beaten by a value less than 15, the top card is flipped and the value may be cheated. If the defense was beaten by a value greater than 15, the attacker flips over the top 2 cards of the deck, and uses the highest number of dots on the card for damage. This value may be cheated. At the end of each turn, hands are refilled to 5. A way to implement this in bending may be to have each bender have a certain amount of damage they can take, and then after they take that many points of damage they have to move back a zone. This might also work with each of the benders- each bender deck is different, and possibly has three numbers on it, for attack, defense, and damage, to skew the probability of events. So, Firebenders may have a high damage on many of the cards in their decks, but average attack and low defense values. And so on. Combining this with the action card idea, each card might have a special written on it, so if it's flipped for an attack, it has a special effect if the card hits- for example, a bonus to a stat, a penalty to an opponent, a bonus to teammates, and so on. A powerful attack might have a low attack and defense value on it, but a good damage and special. It's something to think about, at least.
It sounds like a really cool game--and your ideas for applying it's concepts bring up some cool points--but it seems like there are a lot of steps involved, and I'd like to streamline this game as much as possible.

Madara

I will do quoting :smalltongue:
Blasphemy! :smalltongue:


I like the idea of one-time use. A stress card represents what amounts to an adrenaline rush, it doesn't last for very long.
I think that's a good idea. Let's go with it!


I meant that when you pick a bender at the beginning, the firebenders you can pick aren't all the same. Make separate archetypes for each bender(Maybe three), so that each game is different.
I like that idea. It's more work for us, but I think it will make the game that much more fun.


Rotate a dice? We're already going to use dice, why not use more?
I had a thought between then and now. I think what would probably be best is to put a baseline Attack and Defense rating on every Bender Card, and then provide cards that can modify either attack or defense. I've got a rule typed up outside of the spoiler below.


Makes sense, you've gone and convinced me now. But we have little material to base it off of.
We don't have a whole lot of material to base it off of in the world of Pro-Bending, but I think there's a TON of stuff to draw from in the Avatar universe as a whole.


ok..ok... you've convinced me. But have a little give and take. Make 3 of each bender card, so you could have Makko the Firebender or Steve the Firebender, with Steve having different stats.
As I said above, I'm fine with this idea. We could give each bender a specific name, but what about just giving them a class? e.g. "Firebender Juggernaut" for a character who's all about relentless attack, or "Earthbender Sentry" for the all-out defensive character? I feel like that will appeal more to the RPers out there.


Playing Cards
Each bender may play two cards per turn. Attack cards must be played on a bender's turn, but all other cards may be played at any time. For instance, a defensive card can only be played during an opponent's turn (in answer to an opponent's attack).

Certain cards modify Attack and Defense values, increasing your own chance of success, or hampering your opponent's. These cards may be played at any time, so long as the 2 card per turn rule is not violated.

[Zap Dynamic]

P.S. - Here's a diagram of how I pictured the table layout with separate decks for each bender:

http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2012/174/c/e/pro_bending_tcg_layout_thoughts_by_zapdynamic-d54m0rs.jpg

Basically: I picture the Bender cards being larger than everything else, and I picture the Zone and Stress Cards beings smaller than the action cards. There are examples of tapped Zone Cards in the picture, and (as you can tell), everyone would have their own discard pile. When the draw piles are empty, everyone would reshuffle their own discards and draw from them. That's similar to Dominion, where everyone builds their own deck, and I think it helps that whole "now you know what your opponents moves are like" thing.

Thoughts?

[Madara]

P.S. - Here's a diagram of how I pictured the table layout with separate decks for each bender:

http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2012/174/c/e/pro_bending_tcg_layout_thoughts_by_zapdynamic-d54m0rs.jpg

Basically: I picture the Bender cards being larger than everything else, and I picture the Zone and Stress Cards beings smaller than the action cards. There are examples of tapped Zone Cards in the picture, and (as you can tell), everyone would have their own discard pile. When the draw piles are empty, everyone would reshuffle their own discards and draw from them. That's similar to Dominion, where everyone builds their own deck, and I think it helps that whole "now you know what your opponents moves are like" thing.

Thoughts?

I like it, but you're missing the Stress Deck :smalltongue:
As for the reshuffle, I think that works fine, including whatever stress cards you've accrued.

[Zap Dynamic]

I like it, but you're missing the Stress Deck :smalltongue:
As for the reshuffle, I think that works fine, including whatever stress cards you've accrued.

You're right! I think they could go between Earth and Water in the diagram without too much fuss.

I don't know how I feel about holding onto the Stress Cards. It might work if each team held onto their Stress Cards, but I don't think a single bender is going to get enough of them to make holding onto them practical. Plus, I picture Stress Cards as being surprising tricks to pull out of your proverbial back pocket, and if you recycle them then it take away a little of that mystique.

At some point today, I'll be reviewing the posts and adding stuff to the OP. This game is starting to come together!

One thing I forgot to mention about the diagram I made is the whole color thing. I think it'd be cool to start a Kickstarter to fund the printing of the cards, but because I'm pretty sure Pro-Bending (or at least the Avatar universe) is copyrighted, we probably won't be able to actually create cards that use art or terminology from the show. The way I'm thinking about working around it right now is that all of the cards will have some noticeably different, bright color representing what's really going on.

While I'm thinking about it, does anyone have any idea how easy/difficult it is to contact Nick about using their material? We're still pretty far from printing the game, but this is the biggest hurdle I can see in the whole process, so it doesn't hurt to start thinking about it now.

[DaTedinator]

While I'm thinking about it, does anyone have any idea how easy/difficult it is to contact Nick about using their material? We're still pretty far from printing the game, but this is the biggest hurdle I can see in the whole process, so it doesn't hurt to start thinking about it now.

I feel like it could hurt to start thinking about it now. You're not just far from printing the game; you don't even have a game to think about printing yet. One goal at a time. Make the game first. And probably don't get your hopes up about merchandising.

[Craft (Cheese)]

I feel like it could hurt to start thinking about it now. You're not just far from printing the game; you don't even have a game to think about printing yet. One goal at a time. Make the game first. And probably don't get your hopes up about merchandising.

I've been staying out of the discussion for a while, but I just wanted to second this. Get any thoughts out of your head right now about making a profit off of this: The premise of the connection with pro-bending takes all possible chances out of that. Furthermore your best bet for getting the game out there is to make a way to easily play it online, like with LackeyCCG (or maybe a custom client) or something.

[Zap Dynamic]

I've been staying out of the discussion for a while, but I just wanted to second this. Get any thoughts out of your head right now about making a profit off of this: The premise of the connection with pro-bending takes all possible chances out of that. Furthermore your best bet for getting the game out there is to make a way to easily play it online, like with LackeyCCG (or maybe a custom client) or something.

It wasn't really a question of turning a profit. I figured that in a world where this thread is the top result on google for "Pro-Bending Card Game," there's a real possibility that the whole project could be shut down by Nick if we don't consider this. I'm not really interested in making any money off of this; I just want to be able to create it in peace.

[Madara]

I looked at LackeyCCG, and it could work. I have Linux, so it'll take a bit before I get it working. As for google, we don't show up for "Pro-bending" or "Pro-bending game". I don't know what the likely hood of typing in "Pro-bending Card game" is.

[Zap Dynamic]

I only went to their website, but I'm very happy that LackeyCCG exists!

Bah. I had been idly thinking about the nature of tie-breakers in Pro-Bending, and I realized that having teams made up of different benders could complicate that. At the very least, if the team builds were like the diagram I created, then only Water and Fire could be eligible for a tie-breaker, since only those two elements have a bender on each team.

At first, I thought that was a deal-breaker, but now I'm not quite convinced.

P.S. - JUST finished Season 1. Booyah.

[Madara]

So, any thoughts on working up a sample card? Even if its just text?

[malonkey1]

Would any non-standard or advanced bending techniques (I.E. Metalbending, Sandbending) be represented?

[Madara]

Would any non-standard or advanced bending techniques (I.E. Metalbending, Sandbending) be represented?

I don't think at this time, since not only would that not reflect the show, it would also be difficult to balance(We could do it, if we're willing to move away from the show's Pro-Bending). However, I thought about it being "Gritty-Bending: The hard core Pro-bending card game in which the benders have taken the games underground."

[Zap Dynamic]

So, any thoughts on working up a sample card? Even if its just text?
Here's the way I picture combat mechanics operating:

Firebender has a base Attack stat of 7
Earthbender has a base Defense stat of 7
Firebender plays [generic attack card], which grants a +2 to Attack
Earthbender plays [defense card level 2], granting +4 to Defense
Firebender and Earthbender both roll 1d6 and add it to their stats. Whomever's result is highest wins.


First: that's how I pictured at least the basic cards working. Second: now that I type that up, it doesn't seem to be very worthwhile. Thoughts?


I don't think at this time, since not only would that not reflect the show, it would also be difficult to balance(We could do it, if we're willing to move away from the show's Pro-Bending). However, I thought about it being "Gritty-Bending: The hard core Pro-bending card game in which the benders have taken the games underground."

According to the official Pro-Bending rules, you can only bend elements in their "natural" forms (no ice, lightning, sand, metal, etc.). However, I kinda like the idea of Gritty Bending. Maybe an expansion once we get the basic game set up?

Edit: That would also be a great time to introduce Cheat Cards!

[Madara]

I think it would work better as an expansion.

As for the sample combat, that's what I was thinking. And do realize, that's only the basic cards. In reality, it'd go like so:

Firebender has a base Attack stat of 7
Earthbender has a base Defense stat of 7
Firebender plays [generic attack card], which grants a +2 to Attack
Earthbender plays [defense card level 2], granting +4 to Defense
Firebender and Earthbender both roll 1d6 and add it to their stats. Whomever's result is highest wins.
Earthbender's teamate activates his Water Whip card, which blocks one firebending attack.


With special cards, and assists, things will be more exciting.

[Zap Dynamic]

Fair point!

As far as cards are concerned, I feel like each element should have its own "signature card." That card is either more present in the deck, or it's more powerful or something. I want to take a look at my deck for Bang! to remind myself, but I feel like the order should go something like this:

Basic Attack Cards=Basic Defense Cards>Moderate Special Cards>Powerful Special Cards
e.g. Lots of basic attack and defense cards, 3-8 fewer moderate special cards, and 1-5 total powerful special cards.

I feel like each Bending deck should have 30-50 cards in it. That seems like a good number to give the respective bender on each team chance enough to draw good cards, and few enough cards overall, that they will have to recycle their discard piles.

As far as developing cards is concerned, I think we should focus on what I can only think to call the "mechanical philosophy" of each bending discipline:

Firebenders: Action/Offense
Waterbenders: Reaction/Patience (couldn't really think of a good second term)
Earthbenders: Cancellation/Defense
Airbenders: Manipulation/Trickery

Thoughts about all this?

[Madara]

Fair point!

As far as cards are concerned, I feel like each element should have its own "signature card." That card is either more present in the deck, or it's more powerful or something. I want to take a look at my deck for Bang! to remind myself, but I feel like the order should go something like this:

Basic Attack Cards=Basic Defense Cards>Moderate Special Cards>Powerful Special Cards
e.g. Lots of basic attack and defense cards, 3-8 fewer moderate special cards, and 1-5 total powerful special cards.

I feel like each Bending deck should have 30-50 cards in it. That seems like a good number to give the respective bender on each team chance enough to draw good cards, and few enough cards overall, that they will have to recycle their discard piles.

As far as developing cards is concerned, I think we should focus on what I can only think to call the "mechanical philosophy" of each bending discipline:

Firebenders: Action/Offense
Waterbenders: Reaction/Patience (couldn't really think of a good second term)
Earthbenders: Cancellation/Defense
Airbenders: Manipulation/Trickery

Thoughts about all this?

:smallsigh: still going airbender?

We need to remember to keep the team factor important. That many cards are for "assists". Which is why I don't like the two card/ turn limit. Maybe two attack/defense cards each turn, but allow specials to be played more often. As for the deck size, 30-50 is good. Keep in mind that having repeats isn't bad. So a deck of 40(my ideal size) would have about 26 Attack/Defense(Change depending on bending type), 10 specials, and 4 super specials.
For a total of

[Zap Dynamic]

:smallsigh: still going airbender?
Haha, I just can't give up on em! :smalltongue: Like I said, I'd like to go ahead and design as if we're going to include them; because each bender should be balanced with each other bender, I feel like it would be completely possible to design them and leave them out without affecting gameplay.


We need to remember to keep the team factor important. That many cards are for "assists". Which is why I don't like the two card/ turn limit. Maybe two attack/defense cards each turn, but allow specials to be played more often. As for the deck size, 30-50 is good. Keep in mind that having repeats isn't bad. So a deck of 40(my ideal size) would have about 26 Attack/Defense(Change depending on bending type), 10 specials, and 4 super specials.
For a total of
First, 2 cards/turn is completely flexible. That's one of the things that I think will be most important to pay attention to during playtesting.

Second, I feel like I'm right on the verge of being able to express what I want, but I can't quite get there.

Simply because we're giving each bender their own playstyle, we're creating four different kinds of cards: Action, Reaction, Cancellation, and Manipulation. I like where you're headed when you say that the ratio of Attack/Defense cards should vary amongst different bending arts, but why not take it a step further?

Example:
Firebenders are all about attack, so 26 cards in their deck should be about attacks or powering up attacks. They're not good at defense, so maybe only 4 cards in their deck are defense cards. The other 10...well, that's where I'm stuck. I need to spend a little more time and think about exactly what each of those categories I suggested is all about.

Until tomorrow!

[Madara]

I'm gonna brainstorm a bit about "gritty bending"
Waterbending
Bloodbending

Earthbending
Metalbending

Firebending
Lightningbending

My thoughts would be to add a "Resource Pool" deck for gritty bending. Also, I would reduce the total amount of cards in each deck, and switch to a Dominion-style, with constant re-using your cards.

So, you start with 12 cards based on your bender selection. Then we go dominion. Instead of "buys", you get "gains". Instead of Copper, Silver, Gold..ect, you have "Resources" which you can buy.

I would remove Airbending from Gritty Bending, to make things easier. Cards that attack have a resource cost. Each bender would have health counters, which they could gain more of with certain cards, or lose to an attack. I'm thinking about 4 health counters to start. With each successful attack removing one counter.

[Zap Dynamic]

Response to Madara, spoilered to avoid Wall 'O Text:

I'm gonna brainstorm a bit about "gritty bending"
Waterbending
Bloodbending

Earthbending
Metalbending

Firebending
Lightningbending
I'm a little concerned about the Bloodbending bit, only because it's so powerful. Then again, lightning is the same way.

One of the ways we could add those facets of the different bending arts is by coming up with 2-3 cheater cards to add to each bending deck. The entire expansion pack wouldn't be more than, like, 20 cards, and it would still allow the use of those things, but on a more limited basis.

Regardless, one of the rules of Pro-Bending is that you can't bend water or fire for longer than 1 second. That adds a few more cards that we could add into the decks.


My thoughts would be to add a "Resource Pool" deck for gritty bending. Also, I would reduce the total amount of cards in each deck, and switch to a Dominion-style, with constant re-using your cards.

So, you start with 12 cards based on your bender selection. Then we go dominion. Instead of "buys", you get "gains". Instead of Copper, Silver, Gold..ect, you have "Resources" which you can buy.

I'm not sure that I understand all of this. What kind of resources are you thinking about?

You gave me an idea. What if the "resources" you're talking about were things like "you bribed an official, so you can cheat." That might allow you to play two cards at once or something. Likewise, there might be something like "you're sponsored by the Triple Threat Triads," which gives you a greater chance to succeed on a die roll.


I would remove Airbending from Gritty Bending, to make things easier. Cards that attack have a resource cost. Each bender would have health counters, which they could gain more of with certain cards, or lose to an attack. I'm thinking about 4 health counters to start. With each successful attack removing one counter.

I lament the loss in strategic options, but we might as well just remove Airbenders entirely. I seem to be the only one fighting for them in the first place, and if we're going to leave them out of one thing, we might as well leave them out of everything.

Card Types
So I've been thinking about the different kinds of cards that I mentioned earlier, although not as much as I should have been. Here's what I've got. Some of the info will need to be adjusted without Airbenders.

Action cards are usually attack cards. They are played on their own, though they can be powered up by Manipulation cards. Firebender decks have the most Action cards, and Airbender decks have the fewest. Firebender decks are the only decks with Action cards that can attack multiple targets.
Sample Card:
Fiery Blast
Image: A big fireball
Description: Attack with a +4 bonus
Attack Value: 4
In-Tandem Value: 6

Cancellation cards are usually defensive cards. They are played in response to other cards, and can affect both Action cards and Manipulation cards. Earthbender decks have the most Cancellation cards, and Firebender decks have the fewest. Earthbender decks are the only decks that have Cancellation cards that can protect more than one bender.
Sample Card:
Disk Block
Image: In the foreground, a water blast shattering an earth disk right in front of a bender. In the background, there is an Earthbender throwing a punch. It is clear that he just saved his buddy.
Description: +4 to Defense. May be played against an attack against an ally.
Defense Value: 4
In-Tandem Value: 6

Reaction cards are responses to previous attacks. They are played the turn after an attack. Waterbender decks have the most Reaction cards, and Earthbender decks have the fewest. The Reaction cards in Waterbender decks are more powerful for Waterbenders that have more Stress Cards.
Sample Card:
Momentous Lash
Image: A waterbender twirling away from an earth disk and readying a water blast at the same time.
Description: +4 to attack after successfully dodging an opponent's attack. Play immediately after a successful defense.
Attack Value: 4
+1 per Stress Card

Manipulation cards can help your allies and hinder your enemies. They are often played on their own, but they will always affect other cards. Airbender decks have the greatest number of Manipulation cards, and Waterbender decks have the fewest.
Sample Card:
Air Pocket
Image: A tiny cyclone of air under an opponent's foot.
Description: -2 to an opponent's next attack.
Attack Value: -2
In-Tandem Value: -4

Thoughts?

[Baniff]

If you want to include airbenders, I don't see why you shouldn't. If someone doesn't want to use them, then they don't have to, but it would be nice for the rest of us to have the option.

[Madara]

I was thinking of Gritty Bending being a separate game all-together

As for your sample cards, can you explain the "Values" like Attack Value and Defense Value?

It already mentions the bonus to attack, so what's with the value?

[Zap Dynamic]

If you want to include airbenders, I don't see why you shouldn't. If someone doesn't want to use them, then they don't have to, but it would be nice for the rest of us to have the option.
Good point. They're back in!



I was thinking of Gritty Bending being a separate game all-together
Oh! That's a cool idea. That said, do you mind if I keep "gritty" cards in mind for an expansion pack to this game?


As for your sample cards, can you explain the "Values" like Attack Value and Defense Value?

It already mentions the bonus to attack, so what's with the value?
This will be easiest to explain by looking at the cards from Paint the Line again:
http://www.gamehead.com/sites/default/files/styles/gh_lightbox/public/images/product_files/410258/paint-the-line-glam.jpg
In my sample cards, "Description" refers to the text just below the image, whereas "Attack" and "In-Tandem" values would refer to the numbers in the bottom right and left corners of the card. It's a little redundant when you don't have a card in front of you--so I understand the confusion--I just put it up there for the sake of full disclosure. :smallsmile:

Card Quantity Mumbo Jumbo
Deck Sizes I spoke with a friend of mine who enjoys playing and making card games, and got a lot of useful advice on deck sizes, from a much more mathematical perspective than I've been thinking. Here's what I've got:

Each bender begins play with 5 cards. In the first round of play, no cards are drawn.
Each bender (not player) has a Hand Limit of 5 cards. If at any time they have more than 5 cards in their hand, they must discard to their own discard pile.
At the beginning of each turn, a player draws 3 cards for each bender they control from the appropriate bending decks.
During a turn, a bender may play up to 3 cards. Action cards must be played during the player's turn. The same is true of most Reaction and Manipulation cards. Cancellation cards may be played at any time.
When a player plays a card, they must discard it to their own appropriate discard pile.


I think there ought to be 40 cards per bender deck. Let's examine this.
Because you tap Zone Cards, you can be hit a total of 6 times before you're removed from the game (provided you don't gain any of them back). With perfect offense, that means there will be 6 turns in a round, but you're more likely to see something like 12+ turns per round to achieve a TKO. On a side note, I think there should be a 10 turn limit per round, because a TKO should be a rare thing; winning a round by possessing the most Zone Cards should be the most common method of winning.

So. Each bender draws 3 cards per turn. That means that--if two teams share a bending art--6 cards are being drawn from a deck each turn. Thought: If you are playing a bender that's not represented on the other team, maybe you should only draw from a half-deck? Regardless, after the first 6 rounds, a total of 40 cards will be drawn by both players (including the starting hand of 5 cards each).

By setting the Bending Decks at 40 cards each, that means that each player will have 20 cards at their disposal by round 7. With 5 cards in their hand at any given time, that leaves a discard pile of 15 cards, which seems like plenty to give them exciting options in play. Also, that means that the first 6 turns of the first round (which will be jusst over half of that round) will be completely surprising.

It remains to be seen if it will be best to recombine the bending decks at the beginning of each round; my intuition says no, but my intuition isn't the smartest cookie. I think playtesting will be the best way to determine this sort of thing.


Bender Decks I don't have much of a mind for mechanics, but yesterday I spent some time doodling and thinking about the quantities of cards that would be present in each deck. In the examples below, card types are listed in order from greatest to least occurrence.

The little blurbs just after the bolded titles describe what I would consider to be the basic playstyle for each deck. Offensive and defensive playstyles should be fairly obvious, as should simple and complex. Active playstyles are more about taking charge, whereas Passive playstyles are more about reacting to different situations.

Each deck consists of 4 "tiers," each representing a different kind of card. Just to throw some numbers out there, this is what the different tiers might look like:
Tier 1: 16 cards
Tier 2: 12 cards
Tier 3: 8 cards
Tier 4: 4 cards
For a total of 40 cards. Each of those tiers can be split evenly between two benders, and it makes it so that your top-tier cards are likely draws, and your bottom-tier are very unlikely.

Here's what I've got for which kind of card goes where for each bender:

Firebenders are offensive, simple, and active.

Action
Manipulation
Reaction
Cancellation
Waterbenders are offensive, complex, and passive.

Reaction
Action
Cancellation
Manipulation
Earthbenders are defensive, simple, and passive.

Cancellation
Action
Manipulation
Reaction
Airbenders are defensive, complex, and active.

Manipulation
Cancellation
Reaction
Action


I'll be spending the morning combing through what we've already discussed in the past week or so and adding it to the OP.

[SirDalyus]

If firebenders are pure offence, wouldn't action, reaction, cancellation manipulation be a better order? The firebenders in the show don't tend to be sneaky, so having manipulation higher than reaction seems odd.

[Zap Dynamic]

If firebenders are pure offence, wouldn't action, reaction, cancellation manipulation be a better order? The firebenders in the show don't tend to be sneaky, so having manipulation higher than reaction seems odd.

My reasoning there was that manipulation for a firebender could be something like just a bright flash of fire to disorient opponents or something along those lines. I was also trying to balance things such that every card type was in the top two positions twice, and the bottom two positions twice. As it stands, "Action" cards are in the top two positions three times, and "Reaction" cards are in the bottom two positions three times, but I couldn't for the life of me figure out an order that made more sense.

[Serby]

So, I really like this idea, and thanks to a storm last night had some time to brainstorm on the Stress deck.

My thought is that each team (or player?) has a Stress deck with a wide range of number of cards allowed (I'm thinking anywhere from no cards to a certain number of copies of every stress card created) - representing how that group of benders responds to pressure.

For example, the Fire Ferrets would have a roughly standard sized Stress deck, that specializes in cards that get more effective with fewer benders on your team (Mako coming from their zone 1 to get a Knock-Out; Korra suddenly dodging every attack and managing to return fire). Hasook would have had a seperate deck, that was unusually small, so when he was focused on, he was knocked off quickly.
The Wolfbats, on the other hand, have a fairly large Stress deck, with cards to manipulate its order and gain more Stress (while avoiding being knocked back), in order to get a 'Bribe the Judge' - a Cheat card that increases your Cheat roll while reducing your opponent's (with most Cheat cards requiring a die roll to succeed - if you roll higher than the number required, the Judge doesn't call you on it). This would then allow them to use 'blatant' Cheats (which I picture as an unofficial term) - which are Cheats that require a 7+ or higher roll on a d6 and would in turn be more powerful than the easier cheats.

Going from there, I had the idea of a 'Crowd Support' - a Stress card that helps you out when your opponent cheats (with a boost when they blatantly cheat) as long as you don't.

Continuing from that idea, I'm thinking that Stress would be a seperate but related type of HP. When you play an attack, you decide if it's trying to wear down your opponent (Stress) or knock them back (Knockback). If Stress, then the amount of damage you do over their defense is the amount of Stress cards that bender takes (under their current Zone?); If Knockback, you are able to knock them back zones based on the number of damage over their defense. (1 + 1 per zone knocked back this attack) per zone this attack. In other words, you need to make an attack worth 2 (plus defense) to knock back a single zone; 5 (plus defense) to knock back two zones; 9 (plus defense) to knock back three zones (the amount needed to get a knockout from an even match); 14 to knock back four zones; and 20 to knock back five zones (to get a knockout from your own third zone).

To make it a bit harder, besides reactions, the defender can choose to change the type of damage taken (at a penalty) - changing to Stress adds to damage (or, as an option to think about, part to all of the cards count as used and are unable to be used for their basic effect), while changing to knockback reduces the number needed to knock back (either a flat one, or one per zone knocked back this attack) - as in, from 2/5/9/14/20 to either 1/4/8/13/19 or 1/3/6/10/15.


As a seperate note, I'm thinking that zones should be moved at the end of the turn rather than immediately on the benders losing the zones. Not for a specific reason, other than allowing for cards that take zones immediately if they qualify.

Although, one thing I'm not sure on - if you have a bender knocked back to your zone three, but your other two maintain your zone one and take your opponent's zone one, does your zone three bender move up? If so, to where? (This is both what's intended for the card game and in the show)

Also, are zones going to be reset at the end of each round?

I'm sure there were other things that I thought of, but I think that's enough for now, and hopefully a comment will remind me of my idea.

[Zap Dynamic]

So, I really like this idea, and thanks to a storm last night had some time to brainstorm on the Stress deck.
Thanks! Always glad to see interest, and doubly interested in getting feedback!


My thought is that each team (or player?) has a Stress deck with a wide range of number of cards allowed (I'm thinking anywhere from no cards to a certain number of copies of every stress card created) - representing how that group of benders responds to pressure.

For example, the Fire Ferrets would have a roughly standard sized Stress deck, that specializes in cards that get more effective with fewer benders on your team (Mako coming from their zone 1 to get a Knock-Out; Korra suddenly dodging every attack and managing to return fire). Hasook would have had a seperate deck, that was unusually small, so when he was focused on, he was knocked off quickly.
The Wolfbats, on the other hand, have a fairly large Stress deck, with cards to manipulate its order and gain more Stress (while avoiding being knocked back), in order to get a 'Bribe the Judge' - a Cheat card that increases your Cheat roll while reducing your opponent's (with most Cheat cards requiring a die roll to succeed - if you roll higher than the number required, the Judge doesn't call you on it). This would then allow them to use 'blatant' Cheats (which I picture as an unofficial term) - which are Cheats that require a 7+ or higher roll on a d6 and would in turn be more powerful than the easier cheats.

As of right now, we're not building the game to have different teams from the show. I feel like we'd run into more trouble way, both in terms of the work we'd have to do (creating a dozen different team decks rather than just one deck for everyone), and in terms of staying under the radar (I feel like Nick would be more forgiving of a generic pro-bending game than one that uses their characters outright).

That said, I'm open to the possibility of building one's own Stress Deck. The only issue I see is that--as the game stands right now--both teams draw from the same Stress Deck, so there would be a little bit of customization from game-to-game, but it would benefit both teams equally.


Going from there, I had the idea of a 'Crowd Support' - a Stress card that helps you out when your opponent cheats (with a boost when they blatantly cheat) as long as you don't.
I like it! Playing off of your idea of putting Cheat cards in the Stress Deck, what if every Stress Card had a standard ability, then a "Cheat" ability listed just beneath. Each bender can choose which they would like to use when they use the Stress card, but Cheat abilities require a roll. On a success, the cheat is more powerful, but on a failure they either a) lose all their Stress Cards, or b) go back 1 Zone. A "Crowd Support" Stress Card would be give bonuses to the team that doesn't use Cheat abilities, whereas a "Ref Support" card would give bonuses to teams that do use Cheat Cards. Thoughts?


Continuing from that idea, I'm thinking that Stress would be a seperate but related type of HP. When you play an attack, you decide if it's trying to wear down your opponent (Stress) or knock them back (Knockback). If Stress, then the amount of damage you do over their defense is the amount of Stress cards that bender takes (under their current Zone?); If Knockback, you are able to knock them back zones based on the number of damage over their defense. (1 + 1 per zone knocked back this attack) per zone this attack. In other words, you need to make an attack worth 2 (plus defense) to knock back a single zone; 5 (plus defense) to knock back two zones; 9 (plus defense) to knock back three zones (the amount needed to get a knockout from an even match); 14 to knock back four zones; and 20 to knock back five zones (to get a knockout from your own third zone).

To make it a bit harder, besides reactions, the defender can choose to change the type of damage taken (at a penalty) - changing to Stress adds to damage (or, as an option to think about, part to all of the cards count as used and are unable to be used for their basic effect), while changing to knockback reduces the number needed to knock back (either a flat one, or one per zone knocked back this attack) - as in, from 2/5/9/14/20 to either 1/4/8/13/19 or 1/3/6/10/15.
I like the idea of attacking either Stress Cards or Zone Cards. It will definitely need to be playtested, but it adds a cool element. "The opponent's Waterbender has a bunch of Stress Cards--so they're really powerful--but they're also in the final Zone. Which do you attack?" Cool idea.

I have no idea what you're talking about in that second paragraph, though. :smalltongue: Could you tease that out a little more?


As a seperate note, I'm thinking that zones should be moved at the end of the turn rather than immediately on the benders losing the zones. Not for a specific reason, other than allowing for cards that take zones immediately if they qualify.
The mechanic of when a team gains and loses Zone Cards has everything to do with making sure that a team advances together from one Zone to the next. In that light, Benders don't immediately lose Zone Cards until their whole team has that particular Zone Card tapped. But, I don't think it would be practical to have cards that could immediately take a Zone Card from someone, because that would be like advancing to the next Zone before the rest of your team, which doesn't happen.

That said, I like the idea of some cards threatening to tap more than 1 Zone Card on a success. For example, some super powerful fire blast that--if successful--would tap all 3 of their Zone Cards, effectively sending them to the drink from Zone 1.


Although, one thing I'm not sure on - if you have a bender knocked back to your zone three, but your other two maintain your zone one and take your opponent's zone one, does your zone three bender move up? If so, to where? (This is both what's intended for the card game and in the show)

Also, are zones going to be reset at the end of each round?.
I'm not sure about that first one. My intuition tells me that everyone on the team advances, but they maintain their relative positions. For example, if two Benders are in Zone 1 but the third is back in Zone 3, and that team knocks their opponents back into Zone 2, then the first two would advance to the opponent's Zone 1, and the third would advance to her own team's Zone 2. Make sense?

Zones will be reset at the end of each round. They reset to an even footing every new round in the show, so it makes sense to do it in the game too.

Thanks again for the input! You've got some cool ideas!

[Serby]

Let's see if I can respond correctly...


As of right now, we're not building the game to have different teams from the show. I feel like we'd run into more trouble way, both in terms of the work we'd have to do (creating a dozen different team decks rather than just one deck for everyone), and in terms of staying under the radar (I feel like Nick would be more forgiving of a generic pro-bending game than one that uses their characters outright).

That said, I'm open to the possibility of building one's own Stress Deck. The only issue I see is that--as the game stands right now--both teams draw from the same Stress Deck, so there would be a little bit of customization from game-to-game, but it would benefit both teams equally.
I definitely understand (and was working under the assumption of) not building specific teams from the show - if for no other reason but they'ld be retired. However, they can serve as examples as to how you would build a Stress deck / play cards because they are a shared point of reference.

As for building a Stress deck - I figured I'd put the idea of each player having a Stress deck themselves; Among other things, this would make an uneven number of players easier - 1 player has a team working towards the same goal; 2 players have a (smaller) team with additional options from the third that come in handy when the team isn't able to get going; 3 players has each bender working seperately - if they are at cross purposes, the team can fall apart, but if their Stress decks support each other, they can be even more effective.
With that said, I'll go more into this (with a shared deck) in response to a later comment.


I like it! Playing off of your idea of putting Cheat cards in the Stress Deck, what if every Stress Card had a standard ability, then a "Cheat" ability listed just beneath. Each bender can choose which they would like to use when they use the Stress card, but Cheat abilities require a roll. On a success, the cheat is more powerful, but on a failure they either a) lose all their Stress Cards, or b) go back 1 Zone. A "Crowd Support" Stress Card would be give bonuses to the team that doesn't use Cheat abilities, whereas a "Ref Support" card would give bonuses to teams that do use Cheat Cards. Thoughts?
...I forgot it was the next comment. :smallredface:
That solves the starting reason I had for seperating the decks - the possibility of having your Stress cards keep coming up Cheat cards that you don't want / can't play. It doesn't remove all the advantages, but that would probably have cut off my train of thought had it come to mind.

I like the Crowd Support vs. Ref Support idea - maybe they could be on the same card (As in-
Money to Throw Around
Stress Card
Each time a bender on your team takes any number of Stress cards, you may replace one of those cards with a Stress card in your discard pile. If your team has not used a Cheat ability, you may replace one of those cards with a teammate's unused Stress card.
Cheat (no roll): +1 to your team's Cheat rolls. -1 to the opposing team's Cheat rolls.
)

There is something that is bugging me, but I'll get to that.


I like the idea of attacking either Stress Cards or Zone Cards. It will definitely need to be playtested, but it adds a cool element. "The opponent's Waterbender has a bunch of Stress Cards--so they're really powerful--but they're also in the final Zone. Which do you attack?" Cool idea.
This ties into that second paragraph, but there's an issue that I was trying to work out - why would you ever attack your opponent's Stress? After all, they add to your opponent's abilities.
How my thought goes is that your example battle from above goes...
• Firebender has a base Attack stat of 7
• Earthbender has a base Defense stat of 7
• Firebender plays [generic attack card], which grants a +2 to Attack and declares that he's attempting to knock the Earthbender back.
• Earthbender plays [defense card level 2], granting +4 to Defense and declares that he's hunkering down to take Stress.
• Firebender and Earthbender both roll 1d6 and add it to their stats. The Firebender rolls a 6, but the Earthbender only manages a 1. The Earthbender takes 5 Stress (3 for losing so badly, and 2 for converting a hit that would knock back a single zone)
• Earthbender's teamate activates his Water Whip card, which blocks one firebending attack and he takes no Stress.

But, if the firebender attempted to deal Stress, the Earthbender could change it to knock back (rolling with it to avoid Stress) - they have the same results, and the Earthbender is knocked back two zones (if using the -1 per zone knocked back) or one zone (if a flat -1 is used).

I think this needs it's own response, so I'll put it in a spoiler at the end so that I can ramble a little more.


The mechanic of when a team gains and loses Zone Cards has everything to do with making sure that a team advances together from one Zone to the next. In that light, Benders don't immediately lose Zone Cards until their whole team has that particular Zone Card tapped. But, I don't think it would be practical to have cards that could immediately take a Zone Card from someone, because that would be like advancing to the next Zone before the rest of your team, which doesn't happen.
Obviously I explained a bit poorly. I meant that rather than moving the cards as soon as the last bender's zone is tapped, you move the cards at the end of the turn. Likewise, the immediate zone capture cards would include the condition that the cards would be moving at the end of the turn anyway.


I'm not sure about that first one. My intuition tells me that everyone on the team advances, but they maintain their relative positions. For example, if two Benders are in Zone 1 but the third is back in Zone 3, and that team knocks their opponents back into Zone 2, then the first two would advance to the opponent's Zone 1, and the third would advance to her own team's Zone 2. Make sense?

Zones will be reset at the end of each round. They reset to an even footing every new round in the show, so it makes sense to do it in the game too.
Makes sense, and what I would figure. Just wanting to get all the questions answerable early out there.

As for reseting at the end of each round - that's why I asked. It hadn't been mentioned one way or other.


Thoughts On Combat-
Okay, so I was thinking how to do a turn sequence (or at least that it could be helpful). I like the idea of playing at the same time, but I don't think it works well when you have to respond to your opponents cards. So, here's my attempt/initial thinking, spoiled for length:

Game Set-up

Prepare decks
Choose Benders
Each bender draws 5 cards from the appropriate deck
Flip a coin to decide the active team

Playing a turn

Active team may play a card (if they have played 2 or less cards)
Play goes back and forth for reactions until both pass
Resolve the played cards
The team with the least number of played cards becomes active (unless they just passed)
Repeat the above until all benders have played 3 cards or both have passed playing the first card
Each bender draws 3 cards (with a reminder that whenever a player's hand goes above 5, they immediately discard down to 3 - noting that it doesn't just apply to this point in the turn and is after all cards are drawn).

Playing a round

Each bender is given 3 Zone Cards each (in place of current zones)
Shuffle each bending deck and Stress deck
Play 10 turns (or until a team is knocked out)
Discard unused Stress cards and shuffle up to X discarded cards (from which decks?) into their deck(s?)
If neither team was knocked out, the team who lost the last round becomes the active team.
If two or less rounds have been played, repeat.

Playing an attack card

Active team plays an attack card (usually an Action card)
Active bender declares damage target (Stress or Knockback) and target bender
Non-Active team may play a defense card (usually a Reaction card)
Non-Active bender may change the damage target
Play goes back and forth between teams until no cards played by either
If attack going through, both roll a d6 and add to bender's stat (usually Attack or Defense depending on side)
Reduce attack result by defense result to determine damage

If Stress damage, the non-active bender gains a number of Stress cards equal to the amount of damage dealt.
If converted Knockback damage, increase damage by 1 for each zone knocked back
If Knockback damage, check each zone to see if the bender is knocked back

First zone - If damage is 2+, bender is knocked back
Second zone - If damage is 5+, bender is knocked back
Third zone - If damage is 9+, bender is knocked back
Fourth zone - If damage is 14+, bender is knocked back
Fifth zone - If damage is 19+, bender is knocked back

If converted to Stress damage, determine how many zones the bender would be knocked back - that bender gains that many Stress cards.



I'm somewhat losing my train of thought, but the basic problem I'm having is this - how do you make the attacker want to deal Stress or the defender want to take Knockback. Assuming you don't reshuffle the Stress discards automatically, not being able to convert to Stress is obvious, but combining a large Stress deck with this makes it tougher.
All I can think is to have cards that specifically increase one or the other; Admittedly, wanting to take knockback is probably okay to be rare, but wanting to deal Stress...

I suppose dealing Stress to oppossing Fire/Air/Earth-benders to avoid the Waterbender getting much would be one way. Also, I'll note that a shared deck makes this more important to solve - if you cause Stress, you can't take as much.


I hope that I explained well, because if not, I may have to seperate my responses more, so I can focus on one part at a time.

[Zap Dynamic]

Hoo boy! Sorry about taking so long to respond! Long story short, I've been a very busy boy in all corners of my life, and I just didn't have energy enough to contribute here.

I'll post something more meaningful later today, but I can't do it right now.