Making your own power cards
tintagel
Explorer
Khaalis said:
Thanks khaalis, for that feedback. I have to agree with you about the overall darkness, but given a good printer... man. Perhaps WOTC will see these as examples and publish them on the quality level of MTG cards? Then the ink won't be a problem, as there are many MTG cards like that.
What I will probably do is produce two sets for the Warlock: a "printer friendly" lighter set and the "ultimate" darker set.
However, I have to politely disagree with you on the printing requirements for the rest of my cards. I've been printing them out on my Lexmark Z52 (fairly old) printer without any problems in quality - and that's on the normal (not photo) setting. The warlock set is another matter, but so far the parchment, nature, and marble themes aren't bad at all. In any case, those who want to save on ink can simply download my MSE file for any of the classes and simply choose the marble theme and apply it to all the cards. That's probably the least ink intensive of the set.
This is exactly what I am hoping as well. They are in the perfect position as masters of the TCG realm to produce some really nice Power Cards. I really hope WotC takes the hint and produces a box set of Power Cards for the PHB (and new sets for each new supplement) similar to the Spell Cards of 2E but at the MtG card style/quality.tintagel said:
Good idea. Its always good to give options.
I'll have to take a crack at printing them. I tend to find that the metallic gradients like the border lines in your art don't print as nicely. The darker backgrounds like the warlock have the same issues, where you tend to loose some of the finer shading in general printing. Granted doing it in photo quality might work better. also, printer quality varies, as well as how much you are actually printing. For me, I tend to be the one that produces the game aids for the whole group, so I'd end up printing just about all of the cards.
I find the parchment works the best. The marble is nice but can somewhat fade with certain print qualities. I can try to do some print tests, when my schedule allows some time this week and post up photos.
They're not in the zip file in an ready-to-open form; they're in the mse-set file. To get at them, rename the mse-set file's suffix to .zip and open it, they're all named image##. Note that MSE rescaled and cropped all of my processed image files before storing them, so they're not going to be all that useful for editing/resizing (for reference, the images are 1200x1200 before I import them into MSE).meandog said:
I put in the attribute vs. "Melee" or "Ranged" because that's how the official power text is written (see the Warlord excerpt for examples). Yes, it's missing some of the modifiers, but I don't think Wizards wanted the Attack line to read:meandog said:
"Attack: Attribute modifier + Level modifier + Class bonus + Proficiency bonus + Feat bonus"
Each of those things is (for the most part) passive, each of those things can vary between characters with the same power, but only the Attribute modifier is explicitly defined in the powers in question. You could make an argument for:
"Attack: [melee or ranged or thrown] weapon attack roll"
But just from the pregens, there are nearly as many exceptions as examples that conform to the rule.
* If the enemy shifts, you may make an immediate melee basic attack. This is not explicitly an Opportunity Attack, implying that it isn't one. (Furthermore, it uses the word "immediate," which implies that it is an Immediate action, which would mean you can only use it once per round.)meandog said:
* +2 to Opportunity Attacks only applies to Opportunity Attacks, so if the immediate melee basic attack isn't an Opportunity Attack, you don't get the +2.
Granted, this is a pregen sheet, with shortcuts and hasty editing, but it seems to me that if I wanted it to be an Opportunity Attack, I'd just say "Opportunity Attack" instead of "immediate melee basic attack," which is wordier.
@ Solmancer: Thanks for the feedback! Onto specific points:
The images aren't limiting text, for me, because the way I've been creating cards has been: "Enter information -> if there's room, modify/scale image." If I added more spacing in the text, I might end up cutting/shrinking the images, but that's how I was approaching them anyway: rules before art.
I've considered putting the image behind the text, but I don't want to mess with readability. Honestly, there's so much text for some of these powers that I can't reasonably introduce empty lines as the standard text template, and I'd like to maintain consistency. I might have to look into reducing font size, but I don't want to cause eyestrain either... It is quite a bind, because of the Wall of Text
You're right that the descriptor field (Arcane, Force, Implement, etc) is important; the primary reason I didn't put it in the header or the text box is that some of the descriptor lines are simply too long and will line-wrap, which just looks awful. Putting it where it belongs, with the associated layout shuffling sounds more like a new template design, really... Maybe a landscape layout?
sunspot
Explorer
Hi guys,
I tried to create a blend between a few of the styles so far, and would like to know what you all think. I have thick skin so be nit-picky.
Questions I would like input on:
- Is the side bar interfering with the symmetry?
- is the top button better used for action or attack type?
- Is it important to insert 'at-will' somewhere (middle tab, maybe) or is the card color enough?
- Should the 'Wizard Attack 1' stay on the bottom or go in one of the side tabs?
- And everything else you can think of, please flame vigorously and coherently.
I tried to create a blend between a few of the styles so far, and would like to know what you all think. I have thick skin so be nit-picky.
Questions I would like input on:
- Is the side bar interfering with the symmetry?
- is the top button better used for action or attack type?
- Is it important to insert 'at-will' somewhere (middle tab, maybe) or is the card color enough?
- Should the 'Wizard Attack 1' stay on the bottom or go in one of the side tabs?
- And everything else you can think of, please flame vigorously and coherently.
Last edited:
Some Keep on the Shadowfell spoiler info for Power Cards
In this thread.
In this thread.
Dragonborn racial abilities said:
Cleric powers said:
Fighter powers said:
Wizard powers said:
Rogue powers said:
Paladin powers said:
Divine Challenge patch said:
Feat? said:
Condition said:
One order of picky, coming right up!sunspot said:
- I don't think the side bar is interfering with anything at all; the silvery border between the main text and the tabs on the side bar prevents that, if you ask me.
- To be honest, I'd say the top button is best for attack type, and that having the action should be more of a communication elsewhere on the card (color, topleft symbol, whatever). Additionally, for attack type, I think fitting the word "Ranged"/"Burst" into the tab would be ideal (something like "Ranged" at the top, the symbol in the middle, then the actual range/burst-radius on the bottom; alternatively the symbol on top and "Ranged 20" on the bottom or what have you); spell it out, in other words. I also wouldn't consider it redundant to keep the "Ranged 20" text in the card, either, as you currently have.
- For some reason I just can't stand seeing the "Int vs. Ref" (the "Hit") field in general in the tabs. I don't know why, but I just look at it and go "bleh". It also seems a bit odd to have the "Hit" data and not the "damage" in the case for a power such as Magic Missile. If you want "at a glance" information, shouldn't both be there? Just a thought.
@everyone-making-their-own-templates: Something I think would be neat, and this is something I've been trying to visualize and failing on, would be if you did a watermarkish layer of "At-Will" and so on behind the power's name, sort of superimposed behind the text but still relatively readable. (I'm having dejavu that I posted about this before... Can't post-search to verify this...) ... I could really use Photoshop experience right about now, and Photoshop itself.
I put in the attribute vs. "Melee" or "Ranged" because that's how the official power text is written (see the Warlord excerpt for examples). Yes, it's missing some of the modifiers, but I don't think Wizards wanted the Attack line to read:
"Attack: Attribute modifier + Level modifier + Class bonus + Proficiency bonus + Feat bonus"
I was using another site i found that has taken the excerpts and combined them and for the powers it would have melee or range etc. Is there a source that has all the powers listed out?
Do you see having cards for the race traits useful?
And one last question when i try inserting images in MSE i get the image in a big white box around the image. How did you insert yours into the cards and not have this? Do you have to do something with the images before you insert them?
Thank you
"Attack: Attribute modifier + Level modifier + Class bonus + Proficiency bonus + Feat bonus"
I was using another site i found that has taken the excerpts and combined them and for the powers it would have melee or range etc. Is there a source that has all the powers listed out?
Do you see having cards for the race traits useful?
And one last question when i try inserting images in MSE i get the image in a big white box around the image. How did you insert yours into the cards and not have this? Do you have to do something with the images before you insert them?
Thank you
