Fortune Cards: and randomized collectible cards come to D&D

[Imaro]

They're randomized within the packs, so that the benefit of each pack is = to the benefit of each other pack.

For instance there's no chance that say a card in this pack will give you a +5 bonus, but the highest bonus from a card in the next pack will give you only +2. Both will give you a card with the +5 bonus possibility.


The cards might have different flavor- but thats the equivalent of the dice colors.

You don't need to continuously buy packs on a quest to hunt down the elusive +5 bonus card.

This doesn't make sense... as seen in CCG's and collectible mini games... even cards and minis with the same rarity can have different levels of power in the game... so no your assumption that rarity level does, on a one for one basis, equate to power level is not correct.

 

[mudbunny]

First off, I totally disagree... I shouldn't have to pay to demo a product you are trying to sell to me... Second, if the cards are optional, as has been stated before, why put this requirement in the GD at all? If GW is perfectly playable without boosters let the game sell itself.

1 - WotC designed the game to be played with random elements in the form of cards.
2 - WotC is having a game day, where they want people to try the game in, according to WotC, the way that provides the most fun.

Thus, the game day requires that there be random packs of cards for players to use.

 

[Imaro]

1 - WotC designed the game to be played with random elements in the form of cards.
2 - WotC is having a game day, where they want people to try the game in, according to WotC, the way that provides the most fun.

Thus, the game day requires that there be random packs of cards for players to use.

... and that said new players should be responsible for purchasing them before trying the game out.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

They're randomized within the packs, so that the benefit of each pack is = to the benefit of each other pack.

For instance there's no chance that say a card in this pack will give you a +5 bonus, but the highest bonus from a card in the next pack will give you only +2. Both will give you a card with the +5 bonus possibility.


The cards might have different flavor- but thats the equivalent of the dice colors.

You don't need to continuously buy packs on a quest to hunt down the elusive +5 bonus card.

Another thing to consider is that it looks like not all the cards will be positive effects. Some are going to be -2, and presumably the rare -5. I think this is where the "deck building" rules come in, so the guy who spends a ton of money can't stack the deck with all +5 while others are stuck with random chance at -5, -2, +2, or +5.

 

[Jor-El]

Not to derail, but on the subject of "paying to demo", some buddies of mine tried to demo 4E at Gencon after being told it wasn't time for the Ravenloft Boardgame demos, but that they'd have to come back about an hour later when someone would be there to run the demo for them...and then told them they'd have to pay .25 each for character sheets in order to demo a game that WoTC would presumably want them to buy.

Money wasn't an object, and .25 certainly wasn't an issue, but it was the principle of it. They walked away and never went back.

Requiring players to buy something in order to demo a game you want them to start playing and buying other products for, seems like a somewhat "poisonous" marketing tactic.

You know, "catch more flies with honey" and all that.

The smarter thing would be to offer the card packs/character sheets/whatever for free. If the cost to do that is prohibitive, then I'd say they have bigger problems to worry about!

 

[mudbunny]

... and that said new players should be responsible for purchasing them before trying the game out.

I am not sure whether I should be shocked or not that WotC wants people to buy their stuff.

 

[Imaro]

I am not sure whether I should be shocked or not that WotC wants people to buy their stuff.

Here we go... "They're a corporation, so anything they do in the name of making a profit is excusable..."

Nowhere have I said I had a problem with WotC wanting people to purchase things... the tactic used for the GW gameday... yeah, I kinda do.

~ don't put words in someone else's mouth. You don't like it when you think someone is doing it to you (and mudbunny isn't doing it here anyway: Admin ~

 

[Twowolves]

I don't recall the backlash in 2e when trading cards were introduced by TSR in the early 90s.

Did those trading cards have ANY tagible, in-game impact or were they just pretty to look at?

 

[Matt James]

Is the 4e game system now requiring you to use the Fortune Cards? I think it keeps coming back to this. What about Paizo's Plot Twist Cards? Those can seriously hamper or benefit your character in the story. Should we boycott them now too? Probably not, considering they are optional as well.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I don't recall the backlash in 2e when trading cards were introduced by TSR in the early 90s.

Totally different than making them part of the actual play content of an rpg.

Heck I have no issues with a D&D based fully collectible card game just keep it separate from the core roleplaying game. Those that want all the card goodness can have it and those who enjoy a more traditional rpg still have it.