Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

Archmage» Forums » General

Subject: Question about design of spell cards rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Alex
msg tools
I don't know if this is the final design, but I have a very small concern about the design of the spell cards.

The upper right corner depict the level of the spell (fundamental = brown, advance = silver,....) and the number represents the points for the final scoring, right? (fundamental = 1 point, advance = 2 points,....). While watching the 4 videos about the game and after reading the rulebook, I'm not really sure if this is the best design.
First I was like "Ok, the number represents the cost of the spell..." and it's not. The costs is dependent of the level of the spell, but where do I find it, besides the color of course? I don't think that the points for the final scoring should be so bold. Would it be possible to just make dots at the bottom of the card for the points, and the costs at the upper right corner?

Overall, I really like the design of the game, but I don't know if this is the "easiest way" to go. I just think that it might lead to little confusion in the beginning of the game.

Or maybe I'm just one in a million who finds this problematic

Please just take this post as a suggestion, not a critique (and hopefully i could make my point clear enough for you to understand )
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Game Salute
United States
Londonderry
New Hampshire
flag msg tools
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi Alex,

Yes, the layout of the spell cards is something we've works around with a lot. Now for the Fundamental and Advanced cards, this isn't an issue. The Fundamentals cost 1 to cast and they score you 1 VP while the Advanced cost 2 and score you 2. The problem comes with the Master Spells, which cost 3 to cast but will score you 4.

Our current thought process with the way the cards are set up now is this. The upper left part of the card tells you the resource cost of the card and the upper right tells you the spell level of the card.

If you look at a Fundamental Spell Card you will see only 1 Relic in the upper left. So to cast it costs 1 of that Relic.

With an Advanced Spell Card, you will see 2 different Relics. So you must spend 2 Relics, 1 of each type or 2 of one type, to cast that spell.

With Master Spell Cards, 3 Relics are seen. So it costs 3 Relics in some combination to cast.

Of course, we are still making minor tweaks to the layout and design of the game and its components, so this could change.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dann May
Australia
Victoria
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Hi! Pleased to meet you.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Rodrick wrote:
I don't know if this is the final design, but I have a very small concern about the design of the spell cards.

The upper right corner depict the level of the spell (fundamental = brown, advance = silver,....) and the number represents the points for the final scoring, right? (fundamental = 1 point, advance = 2 points,....). While watching the 4 videos about the game and after reading the rulebook, I'm not really sure if this is the best design.
First I was like "Ok, the number represents the cost of the spell..." and it's not. The costs is dependent of the level of the spell, but where do I find it, besides the color of course? I don't think that the points for the final scoring should be so bold. Would it be possible to just make dots at the bottom of the card for the points, and the costs at the upper right corner?

Overall, I really like the design of the game, but I don't know if this is the "easiest way" to go. I just think that it might lead to little confusion in the beginning of the game.

Or maybe I'm just one in a million who finds this problematic

Please just take this post as a suggestion, not a critique (and hopefully i could make my point clear enough for you to understand )


Hi Alex, the "spell mantle" the punchboard piece that you put your spells beneath and move them above as you cast them, that has a featured graphic showing 1 2 or 3 for the costs, which also combines with the left hand side of the card. So as you line up your spells, to cast them you move them up over that mantle, paying the cost listed.




Trivia: Originally the cards were scored 1, 2, and 3, but play tests showed that players felt 4 was a more balanced score for Master level spells, so we adapted and made the spell mantle, which also helps to remember and see clearly which spells are active. Sometimes symmetry gets overridden by what motivates better player responses.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex
msg tools
Ah, I see, perfect.
Thank you for the response.
I will definitely bag this game, it looks so good and it seems to have many interesting mechanics.

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Long Nguyen
United States
San Jose
California
flag msg tools
Just discovered this game on KS and very interested in it! My concern is also on the iconography of the cards.

For my example, I'll reference the Upheaval (master level Nature spell). The icon on the upper left will tell you the 3 spheres that it combines (Nature, Blood and Matter). Why not use the Tree icon in the middle for all levels and use the ring surrounding that icon to represent the other type used. For example, the Upheaval can have the Tree icon in the middle to represent that it's a Nature type spell and the ring can be 3 colors (green, yellow and red) instead of the 2 used.

To reference the Wellspring spell (also a Nature spell), it could have a Tree icon but the ring can be green and yellow instead of the split icon that it currently has.

I think this would create more consistency in the readability of these cards as well! The number of colors in the rings would also represent its cost (ie. 3 colors = cost of 3).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Heerema
Canada
Hanover
Ontario
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for your interest and your feedback. However, the potential problem with your suggestion lies in the Advanced level spells. For example, Wellspring is not a Nature spell any more than it is a Matter spell. It is an equal combination of the two spheres.

And the current layout already shows 1 colour for Fundamental, 2 colours for Advanced and 3 colours for Master level. Furthermore, as noted above, the spell mantle (which sits to the right of your tower board) also reinforces the casting costs.

With respect.
Tim
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Long Nguyen
United States
San Jose
California
flag msg tools
divine_justice wrote:
Thanks for your interest and your feedback. However, the potential problem with your suggestion lies in the Advanced level spells. For example, Wellspring is not a Nature spell any more than it is a Matter spell. It is an equal combination of the two spheres.

And the current layout already shows 1 colour for Fundamental, 2 colours for Advanced and 3 colours for Master level. Furthermore, as noted above, the spell mantle (which sits to the right of your tower board) also reinforces the casting costs.

With respect.
Tim


Ahh that makes perfect sense and an excellent design choice!

Another question I have is why can no 2 mage occupy the same hex? I guess I'm wondering why 2 mages can't duel using certain spells. The losing mage must return to his tower or an area he/she controls. This might be a concept for an expansion maybe?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Heerema
Canada
Hanover
Ontario
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
It was definitely a "mechanics over theme" decision on this aspect. I wanted to preserve the "worker placement" "if I take this space, I can block you from doing the same" idea. (But the alluded to expansion may very well contain spells that interfere with your opponent's mage...)

However, I don't think that this game will ever primarily be a dueling wizards game. There are quite a few of those on the market. Think of it as more of a dueling Orders of Mages game?
 
 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.