$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 68.61

4,781 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
30.1% of Goal | 28 Days Left

Support:

Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

Grimslingers» Forums » Rules

Subject: Duels - Ruling tweaks? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jacob Soden
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Hey all, I got my hands on Grimslingers and it is really a lot of fun and has a lot of potential.

I have a couple of qualms with the standoff so I'm searching for some opinions.

Does anyone think the standoff should be turn based e.g. turn 1, player A performs standoff actions then player B, then proceed to The Draw and Aftermath as normal, then Player B starts the next turn..?

I only ask because I often find my self waiting for my opponent to be ready before doing anything. If my opponent decides to surge for example I might want to play my standoff differently and that just doesn't make sense to me with simultaneous actions as actions cannot be taken back.

Maybe action by action should be turn based? Let me know what you think.

EDIT:

Posting this got me thinking about certain aspects of Grimslingers that I really enjoy but are a little underused as well as mechanics that I think force strategic play to fall a little short…

DNC and Roll in Duels:

First things first, I love the use of the number deck, I feel like it keeps things thematically pleasing within the feel of the game.

In general have no problem with these mechanics but why not use the Number Deck to determine the result of a cards FX instead of swap and changing to a die roll for seemingly no reason? I understand that in Co Op you need the die to determine which creature to fight (this could possibly be changed if each creature was assigned a suit and/or number) but I feel like the number deck sits there for a lot of the game being unused and I REALLY want it to be incorporated into the game more often.

Combine:

Combine is a good mechanic, however slapping both cards down at the same time as simultaneous action seems counter intuitive to strategic play. It falls within the same category of issues I have with the Standoff (mentioned in previous post). Maybe combine should be done at the point of the Draw/Pass phase. So now your options after the Standoff would Draw, Pass, Combine (placing a new card face down to combine) or Archetype ability if applicable.

Don’t get me wrong, I love this game, I think it has a unique approach to game play, it’s absolutely beautiful and I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t enjoy it. I’m not saying Grimslingers needs to change all together, I suppose there's nothing stopping you making your own house rules if you wanted. I just want to see what you guys think. Thanks

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Gibson
Canada
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
mbmbmbmbmb
Jamcob wrote:
Hey all, I got my hands on Grimslingers and it is really a lot of fun and has a lot of potential.

I have a couple of qualms with the standoff so I'm searching for some opinions.

Does anyone think the standoff should be turn based e.g. turn 1, player A performs standoff actions then player B, then proceed to The Draw and Aftermath as normal, then Player B starts the next turn..?

I only ask because I often find my self waiting for my opponent to be ready before doing anything. If my opponent decides to surge for example I might want to play my standoff differently and that just doesn't make sense to me with simultaneous actions as actions cannot be taken back.

Maybe action by action should be turn based? Let me know what you think.

EDIT:

Posting this got me thinking about certain aspects of Grimslingers that I really enjoy but are a little underused as well as mechanics that I think force strategic play to fall a little short…

DNC and Roll in Duels:

First things first, I love the use of the number deck, I feel like it keeps things thematically pleasing within the feel of the game.

In general have no problem with these mechanics but why not use the Number Deck to determine the result of a cards FX instead of swap and changing to a die roll for seemingly no reason? I understand that in Co Op you need the die to determine which creature to fight (this could possibly be changed if each creature was assigned a suit and/or number) but I feel like the number deck sits there for a lot of the game being unused and I REALLY want it to be incorporated into the game more often.

Combine:

Combine is a good mechanic, however slapping both cards down at the same time as simultaneous action seems counter intuitive to strategic play. It falls within the same category of issues I have with the Standoff (mentioned in previous post). Maybe combine should be done at the point of the Draw/Pass phase. So now your options after the Standoff would Draw, Pass, Combine (placing a new card face down to combine) or Archetype ability if applicable.

Don’t get me wrong, I love this game, I think it has a unique approach to game play, it’s absolutely beautiful and I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t enjoy it. I’m not saying Grimslingers needs to change all together, I suppose there's nothing stopping you making your own house rules if you wanted. I just want to see what you guys think. Thanks



Hey

Thanks for the feedback and compliments!

Dice rolls are used in in various situations because a dice is faster than drawing a card and reshuffling the number deck afterwards. So the main purpose of the dice is speedier resolutions to whatever it is being used for.

There are a number of cards that DO use DNC, including creature cards. But again, rolling is often chosen over DNC so that it's a quicker resolution.

I actually thinking combining doesn't really give away what you are doing. So, yes you can see they have combined two cards, but you really have NO idea what they are. You can only assume it's a powerful attack and try to defend yourself against it, but the name of the game isn't neccessarily defense, it's offense.

And they could even be baiting you by playing 2 combine cards to get you to play your defensive cards, only for them to then pass and nullify your defense.

All in all, I want people to be able to see and react to someone playing combine cards.

You mentioned how you sometimes want to wait to see what someone is doing during the standoff, or if they are combining, and I think that's fine. I actually don't think it helps you too much to wait and see but I'm sure in some instances it can. Most players don't wait though, i'd say maybe 95% or more. Heck, most skip the standoff.

If you find it's a problem in your group, house-ruling it would be the way to go.

I think there are some issues that arise from a simultaneous action game for highly competitive players, and I'll try and account for that in future Grimslinger games!

And again, I appreciate the feedback, and my responses aren't trying to suggest your wrong, just my reasonings.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jacob Soden
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
ssgibson wrote:
Jamcob wrote:
Hey all, I got my hands on Grimslingers and it is really a lot of fun and has a lot of potential.

I have a couple of qualms with the standoff so I'm searching for some opinions.

Does anyone think the standoff should be turn based e.g. turn 1, player A performs standoff actions then player B, then proceed to The Draw and Aftermath as normal, then Player B starts the next turn..?

I only ask because I often find my self waiting for my opponent to be ready before doing anything. If my opponent decides to surge for example I might want to play my standoff differently and that just doesn't make sense to me with simultaneous actions as actions cannot be taken back.

Maybe action by action should be turn based? Let me know what you think.

EDIT:

Posting this got me thinking about certain aspects of Grimslingers that I really enjoy but are a little underused as well as mechanics that I think force strategic play to fall a little short…

DNC and Roll in Duels:

First things first, I love the use of the number deck, I feel like it keeps things thematically pleasing within the feel of the game.

In general have no problem with these mechanics but why not use the Number Deck to determine the result of a cards FX instead of swap and changing to a die roll for seemingly no reason? I understand that in Co Op you need the die to determine which creature to fight (this could possibly be changed if each creature was assigned a suit and/or number) but I feel like the number deck sits there for a lot of the game being unused and I REALLY want it to be incorporated into the game more often.

Combine:

Combine is a good mechanic, however slapping both cards down at the same time as simultaneous action seems counter intuitive to strategic play. It falls within the same category of issues I have with the Standoff (mentioned in previous post). Maybe combine should be done at the point of the Draw/Pass phase. So now your options after the Standoff would Draw, Pass, Combine (placing a new card face down to combine) or Archetype ability if applicable.

Don’t get me wrong, I love this game, I think it has a unique approach to game play, it’s absolutely beautiful and I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t enjoy it. I’m not saying Grimslingers needs to change all together, I suppose there's nothing stopping you making your own house rules if you wanted. I just want to see what you guys think. Thanks



Hey

Thanks for the feedback and compliments!

Dice rolls are used in in various situations because a dice is faster than drawing a card and reshuffling the number deck afterwards. So the main purpose of the dice is speedier resolutions to whatever it is being used for.

There are a number of cards that DO use DNC, including creature cards. But again, rolling is often chosen over DNC so that it's a quicker resolution.

I actually thinking combining doesn't really give away what you are doing. So, yes you can see they have combined two cards, but you really have NO idea what they are. You can only assume it's a powerful attack and try to defend yourself against it, but the name of the game isn't neccessarily defense, it's offense.

And they could even be baiting you by playing 2 combine cards to get you to play your defensive cards, only for them to then pass and nullify your defense.

All in all, I want people to be able to see and react to someone playing combine cards.

You mentioned how you sometimes want to wait to see what someone is doing during the standoff, or if they are combining, and I think that's fine. I actually don't think it helps you too much to wait and see but I'm sure in some instances it can. Most players don't wait though, i'd say maybe 95% or more. Heck, most skip the standoff.

If you find it's a problem in your group, house-ruling it would be the way to go.

I think there are some issues that arise from a simultaneous action game for highly competitive players, and I'll try and account for that in future Grimslinger games!

And again, I appreciate the feedback, and my responses aren't trying to suggest your wrong, just my reasonings.


Thank you,

These are just some ideas I had after speaking with some friends. We all very much enjoy the game. In fact I came home to my housemate sitting at the table ready to play, so needless to say we’re very eager to play as often as we can.

What I hear the most about is wanting stricter rules. Someone mentioned that a free for all for the item pile feels off. If everyone declares they want to draw an item roughly at the same time who draws first? I know in the long run these things don’t matter but my group is highly competitive and I hope you can see where this mindset towards the game comes from.


Btw there’s nothing in the glossary about negating, in what instance is a card or DMG negated?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Gibson
Canada
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
mbmbmbmbmb
Yeah I totally understand where you are coming from. I wouldn't use items if you are very competitive because it's random.

I also don't think who draws an item first matters, specifically because it's random. Going first doesn't matter any more than going last. At least, in my opinion.

If I were to play a highly competitive match, I'd probably not use archetypes or items. Maybe even give everyone 3 signature spells instead of 2, and we'd do a proper draft of the signature spells.

If something is negated, that means it was cancelled out or reduced by a card somehow.

What specific situation are you thinking of where you are confused about negation? The Bloodlust spell?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jacob Soden
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
ssgibson wrote:
Yeah I totally understand where you are coming from. I wouldn't use items if you are very competitive because it's random.

I also don't think who draws an item first matters, specifically because it's random. Going first doesn't matter any more than going last. At least, in my opinion.

If I were to play a highly competitive match, I'd probably not use archetypes or items. Maybe even give everyone 3 signature spells instead of 2, and we'd do a proper draft of the signature spells.

If something is negated, that means it was cancelled out or reduced by a card somehow.

What specific situation are you thinking of where you are confused about negation? The Bloodlust spell?


I think we like to play with everything, we've decided on a system at the moment where AFTER dealing out the signature spells we decide on what Archetype to play. to see which would combo well with our spells.

We're also going to try a new drafting system where each player is dealt 4 spells and picks 1, remaining spells go back to deck and shuffled, then each player is dealt 3 spells and picks 1.

I do remember the negating issue had something to do with Bloodlust and possibly another Signature Spell that converts DMG taken into gaining HP and/or EP.

Does that mean redirecting and converting DMG count as negating?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Gibson
Canada
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
mbmbmbmbmb
Jamcob wrote:
ssgibson wrote:
Yeah I totally understand where you are coming from. I wouldn't use items if you are very competitive because it's random.

I also don't think who draws an item first matters, specifically because it's random. Going first doesn't matter any more than going last. At least, in my opinion.

If I were to play a highly competitive match, I'd probably not use archetypes or items. Maybe even give everyone 3 signature spells instead of 2, and we'd do a proper draft of the signature spells.

If something is negated, that means it was cancelled out or reduced by a card somehow.

What specific situation are you thinking of where you are confused about negation? The Bloodlust spell?


I think we like to play with everything, we've decided on a system at the moment where AFTER dealing out the signature spells we decide on what Archetype to play. to see which would combo well with our spells.

We're also going to try a new drafting system where each player is dealt 4 spells and picks 1, remaining spells go back to deck and shuffled, then each player is dealt 3 spells and picks 1.

I do remember the negating issue had something to do with Bloodlust and possibly another Signature Spell that converts DMG taken into gaining HP and/or EP.

Does that mean redirecting and converting DMG count as negating?


I'd say converting yes, redirecting no. The redirection isn't being blocked or negated, it's being sent elsewhere.

So in theory, you could use Dirty Cheat to Bloodlust, then use Transmute to convert the DMG to HP, and you'd also get the DMG bonus on the next turn. You can also use Dirty Cheat to Bloodlust then use Exalt or Barrier for a good combo.

I'm undecided if Evert should count as negation...I'm guessing it should.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jacob Soden
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Is converting the only instance of negating? If so, perhaps the FX should reflect this by saying converted instead of negated?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
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.