The Hotness
Games|People|Company
Dominion: Dark Ages
Total War
Mage Knight: Board Game
Fantastiqa
Libertalia
The Lord of the Rings: Nazgul
Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition)
Eclipse
Mice and Mystics
Doctor Who: The Card Game
Lords of Waterdeep
Star Wars: X-Wing Miniatures Game
Agricola: All Creatures Big and Small
Dungeon Fighter
Android: Netrunner
Virgin Queen
A Game of Thrones: The Board Game (Second Edition)
Glory to Rome
Infiltration
Collapsible D: The Final Minutes of the Titanic
Dominion
The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game
Twilight Struggle
City of Horror
Snowdonia
1989: Dawn of Freedom
Goa
Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective
Agricola
Among the Stars
7 Wonders: Cities
7 Wonders
The Swarm
Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization
Arkham Horror
Village
Ora et Labora
Battles of Westeros: House Baratheon Army Expansion
Race for the Galaxy
War of the Ring
Trajan
Kingdom Builder
The Castles of Burgundy
Zombicide
Twilight Imperium (third edition)
Space Alert
Dungeon Command: Sting of Lolth
Hacienda
Battlestar Galactica
Ground Floor

Dragonslayers - A game in the making!

Dragonslayers is a game about treasure, gold and glory - and of course slaying dragons. I sent out copies of the game to a crafty and trusty lot of playtesters. In this here blog my playtesters and I will discuss the game, how it plays out, what works well and what less, what is obviously broken and how we could change the rules to make Dragonslayers an enjoyable experience for gamers old and young!
Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
5.00
 tip
 Thumb up

Multi-Player Rules (mostly cooperative)

Robert Seater
United States
Ashland
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Director of Game Development at Cambridge Games Factory
badge
Feed me...games...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I’ve been trying to combine the various suggestions on this threat to create multiplayer DS rules. The hardest part is to get the game mechanics and difficulty to scale up smoothly as more players are added, without adding too many fiddly mechanics. E.g. I don’t want to have to change the deck composition based on the number of player, but I don’t mind small variations in setup. I’m also torn about player elimination – I really want players to worry about getting eliminated, but I don’t want people to have to sit out for a long period because of some early bad luck (especially if the game is going to last 30-45 minutes, and the early fights are going to be legitimately challenging!).

Below is my current mostly-cooperative rule suggestion:

(1) Rotate who is leader each turn, passing that role to the left. The leader decide to fight or flee (when facing a high level monster).

(2) When a monster attacks (when its initiative comes due), it rolls a separate attack against each player. If a player has several heroes, the attack goes against the lowest DEF hero, with that player breaking ties (as in the solo game). If a player has been eliminated, the extra attack is skipped -- there is always exactly 1 monster attack per player left in the game.

(3) Monsters are also harder to kill. For each player number, there is a card you use to augment all monsters. E.g. there is one for 2 player games, one for 3 player games, and so on. We can probably support as many as 8-10 players. The card is two sided -- a red side shows mostly bonus hearts (LP) and some bonus shields (DEF); a blue side shows mostly bonus shields and some bonus hearts. Each monster is either flagged as red or blue, and the corresponding side of the boost card is used. This reduces the extent to which all monsters look the same in a 8 player game.

(4) Each player receives the full gold reward of the defeated monster, but players may not share gold and equipment (except at the Trader location). If there are items as rewards, the killing blow player gets the items, and everyone else gets a gold substitute (50/100/150 for level I/II/III items).

(5) There is a partial form of player elimination. A player who loses his last hero is temporarily eliminated from the game, and he gives all of his items and gold to a single surviving player. At a tavern, you can buy a new hero for an eliminated player for only 200 (bringing them back into the game), instead of 300 to buy an extra hero for yourself. When you bring a player back into the game, they always start with their original starting character, so there is some continuity to their play experience.

(6) If the team defeats Grimlock, all surviving players win (and all dead players lose). If all players are out of the game at any one time, everyone loses.
Twitter Facebook
17 Comments
Subscribe sub options Wed Aug 3, 2011 11:07 pm
Post Comment
Robert Seater
United States
Ashland
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Director of Game Development at Cambridge Games Factory
badge
Feed me...games...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Here are the boost cards I've been using so far:

# p | blue side | red side
2 | DEF+3 LP+0 | DEF+1 LP+1
3 | DEF+7 LP+0 | DEF+2 LP+2
4 | DEF+5 LP+1 | DEF+2 LP+3
5 | DEF+7 LP+1 | DEF+3 LP+3
6 | DEF+9 LP+1 | DEF+3 LP+4
7 | DEF+7 LP+2 | DEF+3 LP+5
8 | DEF+8 LP+2 | DEF+3 LP+6
9 | DEF+9 LP+2 | DEF+4 LP+6
10 | DEF+8 LP+3 | DEF+4 LP+7

Note: if a player is (temporarily) eliminated, you keep using the same boost card. So a band of 6 players who have lost 3 of their members are hitting monsters boosted according to row 6, not row 3.

Physically, these cards will lie down next to the monster card, extending them and adding extra hit points.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Wed Aug 3, 2011 11:38 pm
  • Posted Wed Aug 3, 2011 11:16 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Andrew Tullsen
United States
Tigard
Oregon
flag msg tools
designer
Custom Prototypes, Game Parts, Print & Play Games, Short Runs, POD
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Have you seen my multiplayer ideas here?

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/blogpost/3291?commentid=2235887...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Aug 3, 2011 11:18 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Robert Seater
United States
Ashland
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Director of Game Development at Cambridge Games Factory
badge
Feed me...games...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Monster coloration (& level):

1 Disembodied Tentacle
1 Arach
1 Esquilax
1 Rat King

1 Ooze
1 3 Headed Doom


2 Muck Beast
2 Lindwurm
2 Wyrm

2 Giant Boar

3 Basilisk
3 Earth Dragon

3 Swarm
3 Wyvern


4 Le Tarasque
4 Ascarius

4 Bargost

5 Mechanical Dragon

5 Grimlock
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Thu Aug 4, 2011 7:05 pm
  • Posted Wed Aug 3, 2011 11:22 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Robert Seater
United States
Ashland
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Director of Game Development at Cambridge Games Factory
badge
Feed me...games...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Howitzer_120mm wrote:


I tried a version where players basically split up the deck, but ran into some fundamental scaling problems. If I'm understanding your suggestion, I think it will hit the same issues I was struggling with.

I was trying a rule where the leader flips up P cards in a P player game, then players (starting with the leader) each pick which card they want to encounter. Players then encounter those cards as per the 1-player rules. There is some incentive to cooperate and match players with needs/abilities, but there is also incentive to 'cheat' by taking the option that is good for you but not best for the team.

The problem is that (a) players are sharing the kills, and therefore they are getting less reward than they would get in a 1-player game. E.g. in a 6 player game, each player would on average kill one of the 6 level 1 monsters. That leaves nobody ready to buy enough equipment to fight the level 2 monsters. Furthermore, (b) most cards on most passes through the deck are no-ops, so it's pretty boring when you picked a terrain, but have to wait for someone else to resolve a solo combat. I really want all the players to be engaged all the time, and not feel like it should just be 1 person controlling everything.

For both these reasons, I decided that it was necessary that each player encounter every card in the deck. Once that constraint was established, I had to make the monster hard enough to be tough when facing several players. Hence the above rules for strengthening the monsters.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Wed Aug 3, 2011 11:31 pm
  • Posted Wed Aug 3, 2011 11:31 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Loose Cannon
United States
Ypsilanti
Michigan
mbmbmbmbmb
Not sure, I've read everything you're doing. But in a DnD game I've been working on. this is what I have been trying to do.

I have a monster/trap deck.
and each has a level listing on it.
all ranging from level 1/2 to 10.

And I count up total number of characters in the game (the good guys)
say 5 to start.

Then Draw from the monster/encounter deck, until I get a total of five levels or more.
This allows for the players to face more powerful monsters, and have the choice of fleeing, or fighting.

I also set aside doubles of most basic monsters, and if say a Goblin is drawn, another one is automatically added from this Extra deck.
But I supose one card could actually represent 3 goblins like the new Battleship Galaxies game does fighters. (they list them in groups of 3).

Or it could be a die roll Add an extra D6 Goblins. Etc.
JM
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Thu Aug 4, 2011 3:30 am
  • Posted Thu Aug 4, 2011 3:29 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Andreas Propst
Austria
enzenkirchen
upper austria
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thank you Rob for coming up with this ingenious solution for scaling the game to multiplayer! I really liked what I read and think you are on to something here

Boosting the Monsters in DEF and LP with the cards you described sounds like a good, easy to use and non-fiddly way to scale the game up to multiplayer to me. But how are we going to keep track of Monster LP and DEF lets say in a ten player game where the LP and DEF stats get incredibly high? Using counters? Now I don't know if that is justifiable in terms of production cost, but I would go for small red and blue dice to keep track of LP and DEF respectively. We would need a truckload of counters otherwise...

Also, the prospect of having the game playable for up to 10 players baffles me. Did you actually have a chance to try it with a large number of players? If yes, how did it go?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Aug 4, 2011 4:54 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Robert Seater
United States
Ashland
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Director of Game Development at Cambridge Games Factory
badge
Feed me...games...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jilocasin wrote:
Also, the prospect of having the game playable for up to 10 players baffles me. Did you actually have a chance to try it with a large number of players? If yes, how did it go?


I simulated an 8-player game against myself, and it went pretty well. The mostly-simultaneous nature of combat reduced dead time, although it's still frustrating if you get eliminated on the first monster, and your 7 buddies play for another 15 minutes before buying you back into the game.

10 may be a bit extreme, but I decided to push the limit with the prototype to really find out how the game scaled. We can scale back the max player count as needed, but let's think big!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Aug 4, 2011 3:14 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Andreas Propst
Austria
enzenkirchen
upper austria
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yeah let's think big! If the game works with 10 players why not advertise it as such?

Are you going to be at GenCon Rob?

Also, did you read my mails?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Thu Aug 4, 2011 3:51 pm
  • Posted Thu Aug 4, 2011 3:40 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Robert Seater
United States
Ashland
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Director of Game Development at Cambridge Games Factory
badge
Feed me...games...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
A player who loses his last hero is temporarily eliminated from the game, and he gives all of his items and gold to a single surviving player.


I wonder if the items should remain with the eliminated player. If the player is re-introduced, they get those items back (e.g. as an heir). That would further incentivize buying someone back into the game during the later stages (when high tier equipment is more pertinent than warm bodies). On the other hand, it might be good for players to have a tough time getting back into the game (to make sure it really does sting to be eliminated, and people don't take on risks too carelessly).

I have to admit, I kind of like the idea of a leader intentionally getting into a fight that his buddy can't survive just to grab his equipment. It's also thematic that equipment is dropped, and doesn't magically teleport home.

Most importantly, I want the choice of whether to buy a player back into the game vs. buy a new hero for yourself to be a difficult choice. To that end, I'm inclined to stick with dead players losing their equipment -- buying a player back in risks not being able to equipment before a big battle, but buying a hero for yourself means that you can immediately equip that hero with the dead guy's gear. That's a real risk management decision.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Aug 4, 2011 5:22 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Robert Seater
United States
Ashland
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Director of Game Development at Cambridge Games Factory
badge
Feed me...games...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jilocasin wrote:
Are you going to be at GenCon Rob?


I can't make it personally, although CGF will have a table. If you're there, go introduce yourself!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Aug 4, 2011 5:23 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Andreas Propst
Austria
enzenkirchen
upper austria
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would be in favor of the variant that the dead player drops his equipment. Getting eliminated should be penalized in a manner that you don't get all your stuff back when you are revived.

I also like the idea that the current leader takes the equipment a killed player dropped. Think about it: Your party gets in a fight with a dragon, someone gets killed, then the dragon gets slain. Why on Earth would the remaining heroes leave all the good stuff behind? Admittedly, picking over the bones of a fallen comrade is a bit distasteful, but who cares? It is a harsh world out there for dragonslayers and valuable items don't grow on trees! Well that's just my two cents.

...

And no, sadly I can't make it to GenCon as I live in Austria and can't afford the flight, hotel etc. As much I would love to meet you guys in person, my budget doesn't allow for it. TOG Entertainment, the guys who publish my game Elemental Clash, were supposed to go to Gencon and I might have come along. But that's another story
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Thu Aug 4, 2011 5:53 pm
  • Posted Thu Aug 4, 2011 5:41 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Robert Seater
United States
Ashland
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Director of Game Development at Cambridge Games Factory
badge
Feed me...games...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
(2) When a monster attacks (when its initiative comes due), it rolls a separate attack against each player.


Another debate in my mind is whether the monster rolls a separate attack against each player, or if the monster rolls once and applies the result to each players.

Rolling separately makes some thematic sense, but means that some players will just suffer inequitably from back luck. Rolling jointly means that players suffer or triumph more as a group, and saves some dice chucking time, but it removes some of the tension from the game. E.g. A hero who is 2LP/4DEF will always die before a hero who is 2LP/6DEF if you are sharing rolls, and that kind of certainty seems inappropriate. However, I do like the idea of good/bad luck affecting the party as a whole, just for the sake of player satisfaction.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Aug 4, 2011 6:54 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Robert Seater
United States
Ashland
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Director of Game Development at Cambridge Games Factory
badge
Feed me...games...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
(4) Each player receives the full gold reward of the defeated monster, but players may not share gold and equipment (except at the Trader location). If there are items as rewards, the killing blow player gets the items, and everyone else gets a gold substitute (50/100/150 for level I/II/III items).


The reason I did this, rather than giving all rewards to all players, is to preserve the current treasure decks. There are only 8 level 1 treasures, so in an 8 player game, I don't want the entire deck being distributed the first time an Ooze is killed! Treasure items should be exciting, not commonplace.

I debated whether or not the item should go to the current leader or the killing blow player. The killing blow makes some thematic sense, and gives some emotional satisfaction to being the person to finish off a monster, but it's largely random (since there are no real choices once combat begins). Giving it to the leader is interesting game-wise, since it could affect the decision to fight/flee and stir up dissent among players. I went for the thematic option rather than the political option, but I'm leaning towards changing that. I want it to matter who the leader is, and for players to not necessarily be able to make all decisions as a committee.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Aug 4, 2011 7:03 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Robert Seater
United States
Ashland
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Director of Game Development at Cambridge Games Factory
badge
Feed me...games...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
(1) Rotate who is leader each turn, passing that role to the left. The leader decide to fight or flee (when facing a high level monster).


The leader (going clockwise) also gets first pick at what items to buy, if the items are running low (e.g. at the Blacksmith). I'm expecting there to be between 1 and 3 copies of each generic buyable item, so in larger games there will be contention over the scarce resources.

Did I mention that I like it when players should cooperate but don't?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Aug 4, 2011 7:08 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Andreas Propst
Austria
enzenkirchen
upper austria
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rseater wrote:
Quote:
(2) When a monster attacks (when its initiative comes due), it rolls a separate attack against each player.


Another debate in my mind is whether the monster rolls a separate attack against each player, or if the monster rolls once and applies the result to each players.

Rolling separately makes some thematic sense, but means that some players will just suffer inequitably from back luck. Rolling jointly means that players suffer or triumph more as a group, and saves some dice chucking time, but it removes some of the tension from the game. E.g. A hero who is 2LP/4DEF will always die before a hero who is 2LP/6DEF if you are sharing rolls, and that kind of certainty seems inappropriate. However, I do like the idea of good/bad luck affecting the party as a whole, just for the sake of player satisfaction.


I am inclined towards the option of rolling jointly. Players should share the triumph or suffering as you suggested! Player satisfaction is of utmost importance!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Aug 4, 2011 7:30 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Andreas Propst
Austria
enzenkirchen
upper austria
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rseater wrote:
Quote:
(4) Each player receives the full gold reward of the defeated monster, but players may not share gold and equipment (except at the Trader location). If there are items as rewards, the killing blow player gets the items, and everyone else gets a gold substitute (50/100/150 for level I/II/III items).


The reason I did this, rather than giving all rewards to all players, is to preserve the current treasure decks. There are only 8 level 1 treasures, so in an 8 player game, I don't want the entire deck being distributed the first time an Ooze is killed! Treasure items should be exciting, not commonplace.

I debated whether or not the item should go to the current leader or the killing blow player. The killing blow makes some thematic sense, and gives some emotional satisfaction to being the person to finish off a monster, but it's largely random (since there are no real choices once combat begins). Giving it to the leader is interesting game-wise, since it could affect the decision to fight/flee and stir up dissent among players. I went for the thematic option rather than the political option, but I'm leaning towards changing that. I want it to matter who the leader is, and for players to not necessarily be able to make all decisions as a committee.


I agree. Let's go with the "political option". Being the leader should indeed matter!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Aug 4, 2011 7:34 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Robert Seater
United States
Ashland
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Director of Game Development at Cambridge Games Factory
badge
Feed me...games...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Yeah let's think big! If the game works with 10 players why not advertise it as such?


Speaking of which, we'll need more than 14 heroes if there are many players. E.g. in a solo game I occasionally end the game with 3-4 heroes (some of whom are unequipped meat shields). On the other hand, I don't mind large games causing scarce resources (since items will be running out too, in such games). So, we probably need between 20 and 30 heroes total. However, I still want to maintain quality control:
(1) heroes are balanced (roughly), although some might be better starting characters and some might be better support characters.
(2) heroes are non-redundant -- each hero produces a different play experience when used as a starting characters.

So, what styles of play and what fantasy archetypes are we missing?
--> swarm. My old attempt at the Yin-Yang duo didn't work, but maybe we can come up with one that does work -- where a player ends up with several weak heroes, who die a lot but are bought back relatively cheaply.
--> drawbacks. Have a hero with great stats but some serious drawbacks, like "loses a random item at the end of each year" or "cannot wear armor".
--> spite. Have a hero that steals items from other players, and who is definitely not a team player.
--> generous. Have a hero that is almost incapable of helping itself, but which boosts other heroes (and other players).
--> Some kind of halfling.
--> Some kind of druid / nymph / nature dweller.
--> Some kind of nobility or royalty.
--> Some kind of giant.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Aug 5, 2011 9:26 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.