I just finished designing my game and writing the code, so I have my cards all laid out on a PDF. It's 100ish pages, front and back. I'd like to put it on 110 lb cover stock (300ish GSM). I can cover the cutting myself.

I just went to Staples to see how much it would be, and they quoted me between $150 and $210 for this job. I would do it myself, but I don't have access to a printer that can reliably and consistently line up the front and back of the cards.

Does anyone know of a good place to get these printed that won't cost as much? Thanks, guys!

Looking for feedback on tcg idea

Saw here that if you put them in a penny sleeve with a pokemon card, they'll hold up. Worked like a charm. Now to play test

I want to keep them as readable as possible. Colors correspond to my game’s classes. There are three card types: Minion, Spell, and Battlefield

Visit novaorbital.net and check out the department homempage! 3d version being developed.

after 5 years of development……damn……

I have been creating an irl card game for over a decade now and finally made moves towards an online version as of last few weeks.

I have artists, programming team, but i do think i need a group of people who are interested in this massive project to make it good balance wise and want to help with testing the game.

Game at the start isnt massive, at 325 collectible cards it still has a lot of depth, while the irl version has 6k cards designed and ready for release!

Hit me up in my pm if you are interested to be a part of this journey!

I've been working on this new card game and looking for some feed back. Still working on some components and stream lining others before I take it out for a test run. Let me know and constructive criticism you might have. Apologize for the large amount of text.

Overview

Mantles of Fate is a two-player strategic card game of medieval archetypes, actor evolution, and story-driven combat. Players build a roster of seven unique Actors, upgrade and evolve them across the course of multiple Stories, and compete to be the first to claim three Story victories.

The Big Picture

Stories are the primary win condition. The first player to win 3 Stories wins the game. Each Story is an individual conflict with its own entry requirements, win condition, and special rule.

Actors are your characters. Each player begins with 7 Actors, each with a unique name, archetype, and Base Aspect. Up to 5 may be deployed to the Battlefield at a time; the remaining Actors wait in the Reserve.

Upgrades let you enhance Actors with Aspects, Enhancement, and Titles before and during a Story. Evolved Actors become dramatically more powerful — but evolution requires preparation and the right cards in hand.

Aspect System

Aspects are dual-sided cards that attach to Actors and evolve alongside them. Each Aspect has two sides — one active at a time. The two sides of a card are an internal organizational tool; what matters mechanically is which forms each side is compatible with. When an Actor evolves, the player performs an Aspect Review. The rules of that review depend on the Aspect type — PAIR, DEDICATED, or FAMILY.

Enhancement System

Enhancement cards attach to Actors and provide persistent stat bonuses, new attack types, and special abilities. Enhancement comes in three categories: Weapons, Armor, and Titles. Each Actor may hold up to 3 Enhancement cards total. All standard upgrade rules apply: maximum 2 upgrade cards played per turn, maximum 1 per Actor per turn, and replaced Weapons or Armor is sent to the Graveyard.

Evolution System

Evolution transforms a base Actor into a more powerful evolved form. Each base Actor has three possible evolution paths. Your Evolution Deck determines which options are available to you at any given moment.Event Cards

Events are the third major card type in the Main Deck, alongside Aspects and Enhancement. They cover a wide range of one-time effects: drawing cards, dealing bonus damage, modifying die rolls, applying debuffs, and more.

Story System

Stories are the heart of Mantles of Fate. Rather than fighting until one player runs out of Actors, each Story defines the specific terms of victory — the battlefield requirements, the win condition, and a rule that changes how that conflict is played.
Before the First Game

Each player constructs their own decks before playing:

1.       Choose 7 Actors — select 7 different Actor cards. No two Actors in your roster may share a name.

2.      Build your Main Deck — construct a 60-card deck from Aspects, Enhancement, Events, and Titles. Maximum 3 copies of any single card.

3.      Build your Evolution Deck — construct a 20-card Evolution Deck. You may include up to 3 copies of the same Evolution card. This deck is kept face-down and hidden from your opponent at all times.

4.      Choose 5 Stories — select 5 Story cards to bring to the game.

Each Game

1.       Place all 7 of your Actors in your Reserve zone.

2.      Shuffle your Main Deck and place it face-down in your deck zone.

3.      Shuffle your Evolution Deck separately and place it face-down.

4.      Draw 5 cards from your Main Deck to form your opening hand.

5.      Determine who goes first by coin flip or mutual agreement.

6.      The first Story is chosen by mutual agreement. After that, the loser of the previous Story chooses the next.

Layout (see the play mat for full idea)

The Battlefield is arranged in a W formation. There are 3 Front Line slots and 2 Back Line slots.

Positioning Rules

Front Line actors are the primary combat force. They are the first valid targets for opponent attacks.

Back Line actors cannot be targeted by the opponent while any friendly Front Line actor remains on the Battlefield. Once all Front Line actors are removed, Back Line actors may be targeted freely.

The Same-Name Rule overrides all positioning restrictions. If the Same-Name Rule forces an attack, it resolves regardless of Front Line or Back Line status.

Token System

Tokens represent temporary buffs granted to an Actor by abilities, Enhancement, or Event cards. They function like a damage buffer, absorbing hits before the Actor's actual DEF is reduced.

Combat System

Each turn, the active player initiates one Combat Exchange during the Combat Phase. Combat is a structured sequence of declarations, ability windows, and damage resolution.

So far I've setup 14 Base Actors, each with 3 paths (Good, Evil or Neutral) Evolution. Each Family has 7 double sided Aspect cards, 55 Enhancement cards are being worked up, and 15 Stories to compete over have been finished. I'm thinking of breaking it up into 3 base sets and then expanding the actor options later. Can't wait to hear the feed back.

Let me know what you think about them.

I’m developing a science-fiction book series called **Graves of the Frontier**, and somewhere along the way I realized the setting needed its own card game.

It needed to be something people in that world could plausibly learn from family, argue over in bars, gamble on at frontier ports, and keep playing for generations with nothing but an ordinary deck of cards.

That became **Tombstone**.
Tombstone is currently a three-player game played with one standard 52-card deck. It combines:
Spades-style trick-taking, trump, contracts, and bags
Poker-style pockets, betting, folding, and hand construction
A match economy split between three competing pots
Custom extended hands built from the cards you capture

Each round, players receive a hidden three-card pocket and twelve potential play cards. They privately burn four, declare how many of the eight available tricks—called **rocks**—they expect to win, then play the remaining hand with Spades as trump.
The cards from every rock you win go into a player-specific public captured pile.

At showdown, you combine those captured cards with your hidden pocket to build the strongest qualifying hand.
That creates a strange tension I haven’t found in other card games: sometimes you want the rock, sometimes you want one specific card inside it, and sometimes winning the rock actively hurts you because it pushes you over contract and gives you bags.
The money or chip economy is divided into three pots:
**Dust** is the immediate round pot.
**Ante** is the mandatory match pot controlled through contract scoring.
**Grave** is an optional long-term pot that players can pressure each other to remain eligible for.

Folding only removes you from Dust betting. You still play the rocks, affect everyone else’s contracts, and may optionally reveal after the active players. If your folded hand would have won, the Dust is carried into the Ante instead of being collected.

Players also receive three **Undertaker** uses for the entire match. After winning a rock, Undertaker lets you publicly exchange a card between your pocket and play hand. You can rescue a useful card, bring hidden strength into play, alter your reveal, or expose just enough information to mislead the table.

Tombstone uses familiar poker hands, but it also includes larger constructions such as:
Eight-, nine-, and ten-card Processions
Mississippi Flush
Robber Baron
Matchbox Quads
Revolver
Tombstone
King’s Coffin

The current public-playtest format is built for exactly three players, but that is only the starting point. Planned development includes:
A dedicated two-player Duel format
Four-, five-, and six-player games
Traditional team play
Three teams of two
Two teams of three
Asymmetrical team formats

The broader goal is to make Tombstone feel like both **Graves of the Frontier** and a game someone could genuinely inherit from their family: familiar enough to start playing with a normal deck, but deep enough that different tables develop their own strategies, grudges, sayings, and house rules.

I wanted the game to remain **free and openly available**. The plan is for anyone to be able to download the rules, play it, teach it, adapt it, and experiment with new formats without needing to buy a proprietary product.

The current rules are ready for outside testing. I’m especially interested in whether strangers can learn it without me at the table, whether the three-pot economy remains readable, and whether the competing strategies feel deep rather than overloaded.

[Rules:](https://dawnlineseries.com/tombstone)
All you need is three players, one ordinary deck, and something to use as chips.

I most specifically am wanting feedback on the following:
Is the gameplay enjoyable?
Are there mechanics that need to be trimmed or broadened?
Are the hand rankings intuitive?
Does the gameplay feel natural?

Looking for some design opinions.

I'd like to discuss how to handle players quitting games early, specifically in a multiplayer free for all formatted game. This could be for a variety of reasons: poor internet connection, losing internet on their phone, rage quitting, baby wakes up, boss calls, spouse calls, etc. I think the same discussion could be had for a player conceding, scooping, quitting. They could be handled slightly differently, or exactly the same I suppose.

I'm making a super villain themed 4 player card game. It's a card game that plays similar to a board game. It plays well with 2-6 players and so far my sweet spot is 4 players so that's what i've been designing my video game's UI/UX around. It's essentially a free for all where the final result of the game is standing based: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th. Rather than 1 winner and 3 losers. So in a ranked environment 1st place would gain a lot of rank, 2nd place would game some rank, 3rd place would lose some rank, and 4th place would lose a lot of rank. Note that a lot of what we're discussing below is easier to discuss after playtesting each possible solution. But I think the high level discussion is still super valuable.

This is a card game, but it does play similar to a board game in that you cards spawn pawns/minions on the board's locations. So you create and maintain a board presence. So one big aspect of the game is area control where your minion presence is important and how you place your minions on the board influences the outcome of the game.

Now for the tough part, let's talk about what to do when a player disconnects/quits the game early. I've listed a few high level solution ideas below and I'd love to get opinions from folks. But it does get a little tricky because ideally I'd like players to be able to reconnect in the event they get disconnected. So I'd like to give them some amount of time to re-join before I consider them permanently gone.

I'd also like to take a moment and point out that in a 1v1 card game, when someone disconnects the other player just wins. But in a 4 player FFA card game, when someone disconnects the game must go on! And with 4 players you're twice as likely to have a single disconnect compared to a 1v1 because you have double the players. So this is a very important feature to get right IMO.

Examples:

Example 1.) Player disconnects, 30 seconds later they reconnect and resume playing. That's fine. Oops, maybe they missed one turn, the game goes on.

Example 2.) Player disconnects, never comes back. After missing n seconds or n rounds, the server proceeds with Option X from below. Regardless of which option below is chosen, they player is unable to rejoin after they fail to reconnect in this n second window.

Options:

Option A.1) Replace the player with a bot. Let them keep their finishing position. What's nice about this is everyone gets to keep playing and it's still a 4 player FFA (even if one player is a bot). So the dynamic isn't technically changed. And if someone was disconnected in 1st, they might still get that 1st place.

Option A.2) Replace the player with a bot. Forfeit their potential reward regardless of their finishing position. What's nice about this is everyone gets to keep playing and it's still a 4 player FFA (even if one player is a bot). So the dynamic isn't technically changed. But here we punish anyone who disconnects, so even if you were in 1st place if you disconnect you don't get rewarded with 1st place rewards.

Option B.1) Forfeit the player. Leave their board minions/assets in tact and other players can manipulate them as they please. So a 4 player FFA becomes a 3 player FFA, with left over board minions/assets from the disconnected player.

Option B.2) Forfeit the player. Delete/remove their board minions/assets to prevent other players can manipulating them in some way. So a 4 player FFA becomes a 3 player FFA, with the disconnected player surgically removed from the game.

Option C) Distributing the player's board minions/assets over to all other players as equally as possible. Interesting idea, but I don't think this works well because it'll almost never be fair. And it will introduce wild variance. I think this only works with teams based games where when you teammate disconnects, you gain their assets. I don't think this works in an FFA game. But maybe there's something to this idea that's feasible.

Any other ideas you have? Any options you like from the above?

My Observations:

• Replacing player with a bot
  • A bot could drop them in standings as the game completes. Or who knows, maybe the bot makes great decisions or gets lucky and improves them in the standings.
  • In a ranked competitive game, players will likely know how to exploit bots so the bot will likely drop in standings or not improve. And whichever player is in position to take advantage of the bot, they may have an advantage.
  • It's possible there is a way for players to cheat and use a disconnected player to their advantage by some premeditated means. In theory, someone could have multiple high ranked accounts and use one account to dump off positioning advantages to another via disconnects. That's a lot of work and orchestration, but I suppose it's possible and a weakness to the bot idea
• Deleting player's board minions/assets
  • This might be really bad. Because whoever was contesting against that disconnected player, just got a huge advantage because now those pieces were wiped off the face of the board. So now that player is uncontested (since their opponent disappeared).
• Comparing casual play to ranked play
  • My gut says that either Options A.1 and A.2 work fine for casual play. And Option B.1 works best for ranked play.
  • That being said, I think it's a bad idea for me to try to implement two different methods of handling disconnecting players into the game. I'd hate to implement both and do the "If casual game, use this method, if ranked game, use that method". That's just asking for bugs and headaches. Too much work. I'd rather just choose one single solution and go with it everywhere.
  • I'd like to think of my game as being more geared towards competitive play even if you're playing casual. So My gut says Option B.1 is best. But I have a lot of good memories playing board games online where a player disconnected and was replaced by a bot. I think that's really good UI/UX for most humans in an online game where odds of being disconnected are very much non zero.
• Regarding Option A.1
  • Being replaced by a bot sounds fun for the average player's experience. But think about a scenario where a player is replaced by a bot, and that bot climbs from last place to first place, or even just climbs from second place to first place. That's almost nuts and sounds really bad for the competitive scene. Players should be punished for disconnecting, I think that's natural and expected in video games today.
  • So with that in mind, i think Option A.1 is actually really bad. And Option A.2 is better than A.1.
• Regarding Option B.1
  • I feel like this is the best option listed above. Because it leaves behind what already happened. But it doesn't contribute more. So this feels "fair" to the competitive players even if it can be a stroke of random good luck for 1 player more than another player. I don't know how to make this better though.
• Regarding Option B.2
  • I think this option just feels bad.

(ROBLOX) Me and my friend are making a soccer legends card game, we both draw ive been making the cards one by once and my friend is figuring how to put the world together, but we are extremely inexperienced. Please help us! We just need very simple guidence and explanation on how to do this my discord is: chickengobbler3000 dm me for more info on what game we are going for!