Quick card game

#1

Here’s a second (1) draft for a quick card game (32 cards-deck). Let me know if you know something like this and also, what could go wrong.
-It’s a game of cards and storytelling. You will narrate a story together, and in parallel you will try to gather cards of one suit to lay them down in front of you and tell the end of the story.

  • Set up the game, dealing every player 6 cards (4 : 5-8 players, 2 : 9-16 players). Each one of you puts one card face down in front of them.
  • To start the game, turn your card face up and narrate what it represents.
    A face up card gives you control over what happens to what it represents. For simplicity, when I say “your card”, I also mean “what it represents”.
  • Whenever you want, you can put down cards face up in front of you, but you can never take them back in hand. That’s for putting down a card.
  • Each turn, please play one card.
    You can play any card you own. When you play a card, it exchanges its location with that of any other card.(1) That’s for playing a card.
  • Each turn, please narrate what happens to any one card in front of you. Try not to be original, just add your bit to the story.
  • After “8 - nb of players” turns (minimum 1), the game ends. Count 1 point for each card in the largest suit in front of you (1). Whoever has more points narrates a happy ending. Ex aequos share this narration.

1 : edited after Radmad’s answer)

#2

This wording is very confusing. Is it required that every card played be exchanged with another players card? I think a visual aide is needed.

Also, the scoring needs clarification. Do you choose only one suit to score or do you get points for each group of every suit?

I think the system as I understand it needs one additional mechanic, because right now you always want to maximize the number of scoring cards you have and adjust the narration to fit that desire. I think it needs some conflicting meter or resource that is narratively driven and incentivizes you to go for non-scoring or low scoring plays. That way there is an overarching “theme” to the meta (for example, collecting cards that benefit you represents amassing resources, but having a healthy spread of suits represents a healthy spirit). That’s just my impression. If you want the game to be a aggressive vie for power, especially if different suits are worth different amounts of points I think it will already create that sort of political play.

1 Like
#3

Thank you for the feedback.
My hurried translation shows, but you interpreted right. I’ve edited, please tell me if it’s clearer.
It’s true “you always want to maximize the number of scoring cards you have”. Like you, I have a variant with a Trump suit but it polarizes play even more ;p
The card game is ruthless and chaotic, but the stories produced are hopefully more focused. “adjust the narration to fit that desire” (to win) is not from these rules. The rules only say you narrate “what happens to one card in front of you”.
That makes me think another game involving cards and storytelling made you think you had to narrate the card you play. If that’s the case, I would like to know which game. Of course, you have no moral obligation to answer that, as you already helped me with your feedback.