Time for another set of cards as I work towards release of In the Balance 2.0. I figure I should take in any last minute feedback before certain cards get finalized.

The standard example of obstacle style cards in the game are the Maze and the Marsh. Overall, they are annoying, which obstacles are, though they are also rather ho-hum. The roll is too easy, they don't really have any effect to match what they are, and after about 10 to 20 turns they are no threat and only clog up a draw space. Over two decades, I've watched them come, and other than an encounter when they are drawn, they usual end up as the target of a spell just to get them out of the way. They aren't even worth teleporting another character to them to hamper a competitor.

There are two obstacle cards in ITB, and they've been through a number of different mechanics variation. Part of what I tried to do with them (based on input from my test groups) is to

1. give them some varied effect
2. give a light touch of variables to overcome them
3. provide some mix up in the game based on what they do
4. work them so they aren't just blockage of a draw space
5. and use them to put some badly needed if minor value into certain followers the are just ho-hum (like the Guides).

Take a peek and see what you think. Feel free to comment herein or by PM. For the usual lurkers out there, you know how to get in touch with me. These are not intended to lean on commercial card standards. Right-click and Save/View to the see them at 300ppi.

As with the Place-Challenge cards, I am considering including in ITB 2.0 some alternatives for other standard cards. They will only appeal to those fan-expanion players who would like such cards to work more like the mechanics on ITB cards. Here are two possibilities for the Maze and Marsh, though as with the two above, I have not settled on exactly how they will read in the end.

Really like the concept. A bit too wordy in my opinion. I reworked Flood plain to a lot less words.

Add Strength, Craft and Followers. Subtract 1 die roll and objects.

If you get a negative result. Lose either an object, follower or life.

Hope this helps with the mechanics a bit.

"Once placed, this card does not count against cards drawn here."

That would make a good houserule. The marsh and maze are the most irritating wastes of space, except for maybe the dungeon door getting drawn on the ruins.

I like your card ideas and I love the art and layoutthey look like cannon Talisman cards.

I don't have any suggestions, just an observation: It's clear to me why you'd need high strength to endure travelling through a marsh and high craft to solve a maze, and I can see why you'd need both to navigate a flood plain, but I have to reach with the Old Battlements card. Why is it strength *or* craft? is what I think when I read it.

Originally the Battlements was an issue of "breaching" or "circumventing." There's a more complicated version my group still uses, but it was too much for most other groups. With the Maze and Marsh, you have a Craft and a Strength challenge. I was just looking for one variation that required both, and one that let you choose.

danjr said:

That's somewhat close to an earlier version (which had additional factors). Subtract to a negative result (though it wouldn't bother me) isn't the standard way a test against attribute is done. I have tried it on other mechanics / cards, and it confused the heck out some players... math challenged I guess.

But adding Strength and Craft together for one comparison radically changes the range that is targeted; the roll would have to increase, and as it stands, a single die roll on this one isn't even a real challenge. Perhaps something like the following would work????

"Add together your current Strength, Craft, and count of Followers. Roll 2 dice plus your count of Objects. If the roll result is higher than your total, discard [etc.]"

The "2 dice" is certainly tougher, regardless, so perhaps the "miss a turn" option should be reintroduced on this card as well.

ADDENDUM: Having heard from you two herein, and from more off-forum, keep the notions and ideas coming. Not sure the "concept" of the "Battlements" works anymore for that card now that it has been simplified down from its original form.

I know you like to place an RPG feel on the game, but please make your cards less wordy and easier to remember for players. Overall your ideas are fantastic, but they can be too complicated!

Ell.

True, I can get a bit wordy... my wife and collaborator knows this well.

As to RPG, well, I haven't played any in 20 years. Something inbetween is what I try to seek for the more public versions of my cards. These obviously need more work and tempering.

I did not understand the card that you had to compare to the craft AND strength seperately.

That makes things much more difficult.

Yes, both are single roll. One compares to either Strength or Craft, player choice, the other compares to both. The latter may be too much for most players, though it is simpler than what my group and few others are using on a different version of these cards.

ADDENDUM: I've done some minor tweaking; more may be needed. The new versions have replaced the old ones above, so look there. Anyone curious may need to do a hard refresh to see minor changes.

Nice that is much more clear and concise. It even seems as if it took a lot less words.

Yes, I think they're getting close to an acceptable state of compromise between differing group preferences.

Nice cards again JC, can't wait for ITB 2.0.

For me they are already quiet acceptable!

Thanks... of late I've been buried under some deadlines, but I should be turning about to ITB again by Sunday or Monday.

Looking forward to it JC! I know I have not been very active of late, but I have better access currently.

Welcome back Jon, nice to have you around again.

NOTICE: All cards for this topic have been removed. Another topic for some new cards to review can be found HERE.