Cards as randomizers?

[Grumpy RPG Reviews]

Does anyone have any suggestions on using cards as randomizers, instead of dice in a table top game? Are there webpages or blogsites or anything similar discussing the use of cards in this manner?

 

[malcolypse]

Random draw of a number of cards based on skill. High card wins. In case of ties, high suit wins.

It's super simple, but without any coffee this morning it's the best I can do at the moment. I'll give it a think, and if anything better comes up I'll post it later.

 

[Prickly]

Savage worlds uses cards for initiative

 

[Janx]

a side question: Why cards?

 

[Croesus]

a side question: Why cards?

I can't speak for the OP, but I can see one big advantage: it evens out luck. A die can (theoretically) roll 3 1's in a row, or 3 20's. It can consistently roll well or poorly in an evening. Using cards can even this out a bit, depending on the exact mix of results in the deck and how often the deck is refreshed. This can be important whether it's a player rolling really badly, or the GM rolling really well.

And for whatever reason, we found using cards for initiative in SW is faster and easier than dice. No one has to record the results, or add a bonus for this or that stat/feat. The cards sit in front of each player, so it's dead simple to know who goes next.

Also, though it's been years since I played Deadlands, I seem to remember players were dealt a mix of cards at the beginning of an encounter (?) or session (?), then it was up to the player when to use each card. You still have randomness, but the player has some control over when the cards are played, so he can limit the impact somewhat.

 

[Umbran]

Also, though it's been years since I played Deadlands, I seem to remember players were dealt a mix of cards at the beginning of an encounter (?) or session (?)

Classic Deadlands does it by the round - you roll an initiative check, and that determines the number of cards you get. You get an action per card. The value of the card tells you when it comes in the order - you don't get a choice in the matter.

If you have nothing else you want to do when your action comes up, you can put one (and only one) card "up your sleeve", to use later, and that can be used to insert an action elsewhere in the order.

Really fast characters often get 4 cards, which is a lot of actions in a round. Lead flies, and the combat is over in a couple of rounds.

 

[Croesus]

Classic Deadlands does it by the round - you roll an initiative check, and that determines the number of cards you get. You get an action per card. The value of the card tells you when it comes in the order - you don't get a choice in the matter.

If you have nothing else you want to do when your action comes up, you can put one (and only one) card "up your sleeve", to use later, and that can be used to insert an action elsewhere in the order.

Really fast characters often get 4 cards, which is a lot of actions in a round. Lead flies, and the combat is over in a couple of rounds.

Thanks for the clarification - I knew my memory was a bit fuzzy.

So using cards in this case has a couple advantages: for multiple results, it's easier to hold cards than rolling dice and recording the results; and the ability to put one card up your sleeve gives each player an option to control the randomness slightly (much like SW's joker allowing a player to choose when to act during the round).

 

[Umbran]

So using cards in this case has a couple advantages: for multiple results, it's easier to hold cards than rolling dice and recording the results; and the ability to put one card up your sleeve gives each player an option to control the randomness slightly (much like SW's joker allowing a player to choose when to act during the round).

Classic Deadlands (which is the progenitor of Savage Worlds), has jokers as well. One is good for the player, the other is bad.

Another advantage is that, in many games, when a character is fast and has multiple actions in a round, they tend to fully dominate over slower characters. The cards tend to even that out somewhat - slow characters may only go once, but they may well get a face card, and at least go early in the round.

Also, the cards give the option of having mechanics that manipulate cards - one 'edge' in the game allows a player to swap cards. Need your magician to go early? Trade cards with someone who goes faster!

 

[Crothian]

There are games like Deleria that use cards as the mechanic in the game instead of dice.

 

[Janx]

I can't speak for the OP, but I can see one big advantage: it evens out luck. A die can (theoretically) roll 3 1's in a row, or 3 20's. It can consistently roll well or poorly in an evening. Using cards can even this out a bit, depending on the exact mix of results in the deck and how often the deck is refreshed. This can be important whether it's a player rolling really badly, or the GM rolling really well.

And for whatever reason, we found using cards for initiative in SW is faster and easier than dice. No one has to record the results, or add a bonus for this or that stat/feat. The cards sit in front of each player, so it's dead simple to know who goes next.

My perception (not the same as fact) is that cards are clunkier, not any better than dice, and adds a new mechanism that is harder to automate (ex. for VTTs)

Decks have to be shuffled, which ends up being an interruption to game play. Specialized decks (non-standard cards) add a cost/entry fee to new players. And probably need to be shuffled often enough to negate any randomization balancing.

Math-wise, I'm not so sure of how much load-balancing of luck there is either. with a 52 card deck, if you're hoping for cards from the higher half of the deck, 26 of them are crappy cards. So you're first draw is 26 in 52 are crappy cards. Your second draw is 25 or 26 in 51 are crappy cards (25 if you actually drew a crappy card, if you drew a good card, then the original 26 crappy cards remain as outs for you to draw).

Technically, the percentage is moving, but not by big factor (.9%) and that % is good or bad, depending on what you last drew. There certainly is some luck adjustment, if you drew low, you have a slightly better chance of drawing better, and vice versa if you drew high. But it's a small percentage.


Lastly, automation is a big problem. i've been looking into VTTs lately. And one of my generaly pet peeves about RPGs rubs up against the same problem VTTs have. It seems every other game designer wants to devise some other randomizer mechanic, almost solely for the objective to be different. This hurts VTTs because it complicates matters to support a given game when its randomizer mechanic is unusual. Rolling some dice, adding a number and comparing to some target number is very easy to implement and automate. Every other mechanic adds a barrier to supportability in a VTT.

As such, I'm not keen on different mechanics for the sake of being different. I do think a fair counter to my arguments is if you have a fast, easy mechanic that also introduces other desirable side effects. Using a cards in Deadlands made sense, just from an ambience view (most folks can associate cards and westerns pretty easily).