Yeah, its just a little tricky to figure out the physics of the ball.

Wow Mike's dismissal of this is wild. You need to just try it one time and see if it actually is tedious or if you'd actually have fun

Especially shocking considering billion sun's multiple tables

Thanks, I have a lot of general experience demoing at conventions, so I'm glad if it comes across.

Ultimately, the game experience is the most important thing. If your game doesn't have that much to gain from non-discrete movement, I don't think there's a massive amount to gain from it. I absolutely think that tape measure movement is its own barrier to entry, I just think that it can give a significant amount of gameplay in return, depending on the design.

@@RuleofCarnage makes sense. And now that I'm toying with the idea of hexagons, they seem to present their own brand of problems 😅 Still, it's fun to design around a different set of limitations 🤓

@@UnPlayableGames They do have their own ups and downs, there are a few people designing around them in the Discord.

Glad it helped you out. Really lovely minis.

Thanks, they're pretty simple but I'm happy that they have a decent impact.

I'm currently working through Clank! Legacy. I'm not sure how a similar requirement for multiple identical increasing elements would translate into minis games.

Only for the weak.

​ @RuleofCarnage haha but the thing is, there IS no way to make movement accurate and hassle-free as long as it is done by tape measures or templates, because there will always be occasions where you're gonna have discussions about what is just in, or just out of range. Even if you have a rule that says you don't have to make it to the enemy 100% of the distance but you've got a small margin, then the discussion will just move to measuring that margin. And if the actual measuring/templates aren't gonna cause discussion and hassle, then the players' actual physical interaction with the models and templates/measuring devices will. Think of people picking up their model to do a certain move, but then realizing they want to do something else and having to place them back in their starting position again. Or the actual placing of your units at the end of the measuring stick or template will not be 100% accurate as well (and then the next turn you might just be in range for a charge but both players know the movement of previous turn was so inaccurate that it will cause a discussion now that it is time to charge). There is no way to fix all of this without some objective abstract system of movement with hexes, right?

@@gekalskip Or, alternatively, by the awesome power of not worrying about it. In all seriousness, everything has ups and down, positives and negatives, you can "fix" the negatives of non-discrete movement, but in so doing, you remove all its advantages.

I've watched lots of Armada, but never actually sat down and played it. I know Mike has a copy, but I don't think he's a huge fan.

I think you have more leeway when player agency can allow you swap between movement forms for certain. If you're stuck in one or another you have to be much more careful.

@@RuleofCarnage Oh definitely At least in the older Editions, your mech's movement "mode" could only be changed before any actual movement and stayed that way until you changed it the following turn. So if your mech was moving at Top Speed (sprinting), all rolls by it and against it would be against a sprinting model with all the associated modifiers until you make it drop down to Combat Speed (walking) but you can't immediately make it Stop. Funny thing is though the rules actually say you don't _have_ to move which makes it weird to have a mech moving at "Top Speed" de jure but moved 0" de facto.

@@MansMan42069 That is one of the advantage of Gaslands in that if you qualify to move you must move.

Ah but you did click on it! A new KZfaq strategy emerges

So your problem is that the title got you to click on it and you consider that a failure of the title?

@@RuleofCarnage Uhh dude, did you think about this at all? I clicked on your channel to see more videos from you then I ended up not watching any because I saw how bad this title was, clicked on it for a second, paused it, made this comment, left, saw a recommendation of one of your videos (from 2 years ago with a better title.. huh I wonder why that was in my feed and not this one) and then clicked the three dots, and finally clicked "Don't Recommend Channel." Do you really consider that a win? Do you really consider getting the boost from my comment a win when I otherwise would've watched and liked and commented on more videos from you? Like yea I clicked on this video because it was the most recent one with a bad title, not because the title made me interested in the video. I'm assuming when you wrote it you weren't thinking "hurr durr this is so bad that I'm sure people will click on it" but hell, maybe you were. But if you weren't then you didn't actually accomplish your goal, you didn't get me interested in the video. Since you didn't accomplish your goal with the title (viewer retention) then you failed. Did you think about that at all? KZfaq hasn't rewarded clicking on a video and immediately clicking off for years, you didn't get anything out of your bad title besides some comments about how bad it is, if you consider that slight boost in the algorithm "not a failure" then that's just pathetic. Imagine this, you write a better more interested title, I don't click on it out of my need to write a comment at such a failure, I click on it because I'm interested in what's being discussed so I watch the video through like I did for your 2 year old video, I then go on to subscribe and watch more videos from you. Isn't that what you want? Are you genuinely too stupid to understand what my original comment was about or were you just trying to get some cheap win. Because either way it seems like you didn't think about it in the slightest which is just embarrassing. Have you literally never self reflected on the drop in views your channel has received which coincides with using objectively worse titles and thumbnails (not interesting, doesn't help the would-be viewer understand what the video would be about or like, doesn't give context for the actual topic, doesn't let the viewer see what kind of youtube video they'd be watching) and thought to yourself "maybe I made a mistake" ever? I'd go back to using a thumbnail from the video if I were you, I would go back to using the style of titles you used before if I were you. But you don't seem very intelligent so I'm going to guess that you won't do that out of spite even though I was hoping you would self-reflect after my original comment. I don't want to believe that you are actually this stupid, I don't want to believe that you read my comment and thought "well he DID click on the video though, I have no clue what his problem could be, it just doesn't make any sense to me" because you didn't actually register what I was saying. But I highly doubt you will. I doubt you will ever be able to see the difference between someone clicking on a bad video and watching it all the way through because the title promised a good video and someone clicking on a video because it had a bad title, to tell you that it was a bad title, and then clicking off of it without knowing if the video is actually good or not. Keep making horrible titles. Keep making horrible thumbnails that are worse than the lower effort screenshots from videos just because those at least let the would-be viewer know that they are about to watch a podcast. Keep not thinking at all. Because I know that you are too stupid to do otherwise.

@@bryce7344 What a horrible comment. You came to provide nothing to the conversation and had to write a whole nothing burger when you got clowned on. Embarrassing. Bye, Felicia 👋

Hi I have no friends or a life please take notice of me too, oh wait I didn’t use text speak or emojis no one will ever understand me 😂

We did a video about degradation mechanics if that's what you mean: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jayig9Bpmd6-gIk.htmlsi=5lQto4vmeyFRFDy9 they can be tricky to get right without ending up in a death spiral.

@@RuleofCarnage i was looking to find something different from wound like a model has a roll to survive damage but every damage on it makes the roll hard like if they have one damage they roll a 3+ but if they have four damage they roll a 6+ on a D20 and then if they survive the damage is removed, showing the armor keeping the bullets or whatever from killing the model

Seems like a solid pitch. I'd like to know what grounds all those random minis into your specific world.

@@RuleofCarnage Cool! the setting follws the end of previous Golden Age of Dispersion where humanity spread throughout the galaxy leading to a huge variety of cultural experimentation and almost no conflicts over resources or territory. At the end of this period encounters with alien civilisations, voracious xenobugs and sentient planets forced humanity inwards - once more people were fighting no only aliens but each other. So a lot of the factions can be represented with various minis - techno barbarians (who either aquired ech from outside ofr from a collapsed civilisation could use Mad Max or GW ork style minis), xenobugs might use Alien xenomorphs, GW 'nids etc...). And of course the galaxy is BIIG so all these variations can plausibly exist somewhere...

Well, our Discord is a good start.

@@RuleofCarnage I'll sign up for discord and take a look. Thanks.

Yeah, boxed games give you more options I think, Space Hulk is a classic and of course Gloomhaven has a really strong narrative.

@@RuleofCarnage I don't think being a boxed game makes it much easier. I think that Space Hulk was designed from the ground up for adversarial narrative play. You could do the same with a minis game if your goal was set early.

@@grimskald I think being a boxed game gets over the issue of providing what players need and laying out a specific narrative series of games. I mean, if I didn't have all the pieces to play Space Hulk when I first picked it up I don't know I'd have played it as much.

I think psychology rules are in a tricky place in modern game design. For "competitive" players they contain a lot of output randomness, and for "narrative" players they're quite broad strokes. Personally I prefer psychology to be quite emergent, while crazy events do happen, en masse, the psychology of people tends to be largely predictable.

I'm not sure how that follows. If the system is to only allow a single re-roll of a dice, surely allowing repeat re-rolls means there's one less thing to need to keep track of, rather than more.

@@RuleofCarnage I suppose it's a trade off. Easy enoughr to roll a re-roll on something, get the result, and move on. It could be that I am misunderstanding what your mean for re-rolls.

Well, thanks for making cool stuff to comment on.

You always make cool stuff so I love to be able to feature it.

No problem, I had it bookmarked and then someone bought it up in the RoC Discord, so it seemed natural to mention it.

Tarot cards are certainly an interesting choice, they open up a whole bunch of options.

Currently, yes.

Currently, absolutely fine, and becoming an increasingly powerful meta.

​@@RuleofCarnage Nice! What do you think of Blast weapons where the area of effect is defined by the boundary of the thrown dice (at least 3 to be able to draw a 2d shape)?

@@MansMan42069 I think that's a really nice idea.

With a bit of tweaking I should think so.

They can be flipped or rotated. The intention is absolutely that you can choose the placement of the exit arrow as well as the direction of the curve.

@@RuleofCarnage Cool. Thanks for the reply. I believe that the FAQ on the website is wrong then.

@@fireflydice I've just looked at the FAQ for Refuelled on the Gaslands website and can't see anything referencing templates. Can you let me know what you're referring to?

@@RuleofCarnage Of course. Its under movement, the 3rd question. "The turning templates only go one way: can vehicles only turn right? No. The turning templates may be rotated 180 degrees to allow for left turns. The swerve and veer templates can be flipped over to allow for left-wards motion."

@@fireflydice Sure, but that's just saying that the Swerve and Veer can be flipped over to go left, not that they can't be spun 180 degrees, since spinning the Veer and Swerve 180 degrees wouldn't change their direction so it wouldn't be an answer to the question about changing direction. On page 22 of the Refuelled rulebook it clearly states that the template may be placed with either short edge against the front of the vehicle.

Well, its a pretty ongoing subject for us. I think the balanced vs narrative argument isn't super helpful to either side to be honest, I think both can be either. My personal take is that its about how the game is trying to be socially transformative. I think that competitive games are trying to intercede between us socially as we play while casual games are trying to intercede between each of us and the play experience.

1) Well, the difference is that a re-roll with a keep option can be saved and only used after seeing the first roll while rolling two and keeping one has to be activated before rolling, its an input vs output randomness difference. 2) I really think that closing down the design space in fear of stacking, particularly for small independent games, is a mistake. It makes sense for something like GW who want to allow multiple designers to create multiple things in the same space, but for a single individual creating a single closed system its just not necessary.

Personally, I'd say that 5 is quite low, at that point its still impossible to get a full spread of results so, maybe counter intuitively, things get less chaotic with more dice. Of course, if you're scaling success a lucky result can seem quite spikey, but I'd be inclined to cap that on the degrees rather than on the number of dice.

The thing is, that you ended up using a deck of cards is sort of my point. I always have a deck of cards in my gaming bag, I have since the first time I played Malifaux if not before, so if a bag pull can just be a deck of cards, I think it should be.

Yeah, well that's the issue with random activation. Maybe some sort of manipulation of the bag pull process would be appropriate.

Thanks. Its hard to tell since TC is still in development but personally I'd have liked to see more personality put into the core rules rather than the faction system.

​@@RuleofCarnage Think KZfaq ate my reply. Or I'm about to double reply. Shrug. I can see your point. Personally, I adore the brutal simplicity of the core rules. I like how easy it is to learn and reach but still heals good depth. I think it's the best ruleset I've read in ages. There is a campaign system as well if you go to the Discord. Finally, the anime style game you were talking about with the stacked activation mechanic was Relic Knights

@@GrandNagusEli I'm glad you're liking it. It seemed fine to me, I just felt as though by the time it started showing off I'd kind of drifted away. To be honest, with the pedigree behind it I'd have been pretty shocked at anything left. Mostly, I think I just wanted something more Trenchy.

@@RuleofCarnage @RuleofCarnage that's fair. I like rules that are fast and intuitive before getting out of the way. I also love all the fiddly gear and kitbashing opportunities

@@GrandNagusEli I hear that, I just feel like things can be fast and intuitive but characterful as well. My personal taste is about 60% less gear options and 20% more unusual core rules.

Sure, cards would still perform the same purpose though.

​@RuleofCarnage They wouldn't, as the status of the unit isn't determined by the activation pull. So if the unit runs, the die gets turned to the 'run' side etc. So effectively the playing piece you have in your hand from the activation pull serves as six-markers-in-one. And that is an "elegant" system. Bolt Action does the same btw. Bag pulling is sort of the Warlord house style. They have it in the 2000AD games as well, just without the dice, opting for plastic markers instead. Special effects markers part of the bag.

@@gernwind9262 Cards have at least four sides they can be turned to. If they're custom made, eight actually.

I agree, its why I find it so baffling that some of these games put in mechanics to force more uneven activations than would happen naturally.