I wasn’t sure if this belonged more so in the variants section, but it isn’t something I’ve tried, it was just an interesting thought. Plus, it is more so something I thought it would be cool if Flying Frog actually included in a future expansion rather than something I was thinking of creating. So, I thought it kind of more so fit here.
So, we all know the card titled “Bickering.” If there are two or more heroes in the same space, the Zombie player can play it, and they are “bickering” and lose their turn.
That got me randomly thinking. I think a cool idea would be a zombie card that allows the Zombie Player to actually force the heroes to fight. In other words, to physically fight. It could be similar in theme to Bickering, except instead of losing their turn, they actually get into a fist fight, and one of them may actually wound the other.
There would have to be rules around it. I would say that the hero characters both roll their standard two fight dice. I would also think they shouldn’t be allowed to use any weapons. The thought being they just got into a heated argument and broke into a fight. They aren’t trying to kill each other, so it would just be a fist fight, not a death match. I would also say that it could not result in a Zombie Hero if one of them dies.
In fact, maybe part of the rules would even be that it can’t be used against any hero who only has one wound left. The thematic idea there being that you probably wouldn’t try to beat up one of your fellow survivors if they were near death. LOL! But, that is just a thought. Thoughts anybody?
Well i have a Variant game I play, where two teams of heroes and a zombie player, 3 on heroes on each team. Each team have a base of operations have to collect the number tokens scattered randomly around the board. the team with the most numbered supplies by the end of the game wins, while fighting off the zombies.
the heroes often fight each other, with instant kill rules, causing 2 wounds instead of instant death
Personally I think this is too powerful. And by not using weapons or involving a Hero with only 1 wound - why have the rule? Just seems an uneccessary distraction.
But thems only my thoughts.
Hi Staypuft, I do like the way you think
What if you made a simpler variant, as a sample. What if ....
when you play Bickering, Roll a d6, on a roll of;
1 or 2 each hero must fight 1 other hero, so if there are 3 heroes, 1 fights twice.
3 or 4 no effect
5 or 6 standard bickering
I dont think there should be any safety mechanic. ie it should not matter how many woulds a hero does or does not have.
Think about it like this. Zombie player plays Bickering on Father Joe, Jake and Sam. ( father joe takes his final wound to cancel Bickering -fails-, and dies) Thematics, Sam and Jake get into a argument about why the dead are walking. They dont agree with Father Joe's rambling and beat him to death.
Self Sacrifice- Sheriff takes his final wound to save the life of Becky.
There are plenty of ways for heroes to die, some by their own hands. ....well, maybe pushed along by the Zombies
(10-05-2012 01:42 PM)PJON Wrote: [ -> ]Hi Staypuft, I do like the way you think
You would!! Any ZP would!! Lol.
Betcha HP's think differently.
Maybe make a play or expand on those Bitten and I Feel Kinda Strange cards, where heroes can potentially turn on one another through fear and/or paranoia?? You know, thematically just like those B grade movies.
Just putting it out there (??).
Admittedly, I reckon I'd get pummelled by both of my gaming groups if I brought the concept to the table...
(10-05-2012 10:52 AM)Achtung Panzer Wrote: [ -> ]Personally I think this is too powerful. And by not using weapons or involving a Hero with only 1 wound - why have the rule? Just seems an uneccessary distraction.
But thems only my thoughts.
I suppose you could look at it this way. But, I'm not talking about a rule you add. I'm talking about a card. One single card in a stack that of 60 some to over 100 depending upon whether you have expansions. I don't think it adds too much at all. I fail to see how it is any more a distraction than a lot of the cards zombies can throw out to mess with the heroes.
Anyways, just a thought. I can definitely see how some may like it and some may not, but I just thought it may be neat thematically. Definitely something I could see the zombie player loving. LOL!
(10-08-2012 08:54 PM)StayPuft Wrote: [ -> ] (10-05-2012 10:52 AM)Achtung Panzer Wrote: [ -> ]Personally I think this is too powerful. And by not using weapons or involving a Hero with only 1 wound - why have the rule? Just seems an uneccessary distraction.
But thems only my thoughts.
I suppose you could look at it this way. But, I'm not talking about a rule you add. I'm talking about a card. One single card in a stack that of 60 some to over 100 depending upon whether you have expansions. I don't think it adds too much at all. I fail to see how it is any more a distraction than a lot of the cards zombies can throw out to mess with the heroes.
Anyways, just a thought. I can definitely see how some may like it and some may not, but I just thought it may be neat thematically. Definitely something I could see the zombie player loving. LOL!
Ah, just a card. Yup, I guess there's not much risk of inbalance there.
I find this card idea interesting, but even if it's only allowed to be played on heroes with more vacant health boxes, it's still a pretty strong card. That said, I don't think there should be any BUTs - the ZP should be allowed to play this card like bickering. You want wounds, then give them wounds. No limits there.
However, I suggest adding a "sacrifice" value to the card, perhaps a combination of cards and zeds.
(10-08-2012 09:33 PM)Achtung Panzer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2012 08:54 PM)StayPuft Wrote: [ -> ] (10-05-2012 10:52 AM)Achtung Panzer Wrote: [ -> ]Personally I think this is too powerful. And by not using weapons or involving a Hero with only 1 wound - why have the rule? Just seems an uneccessary distraction.
But thems only my thoughts.
I suppose you could look at it this way. But, I'm not talking about a rule you add. I'm talking about a card. One single card in a stack that of 60 some to over 100 depending upon whether you have expansions. I don't think it adds too much at all. I fail to see how it is any more a distraction than a lot of the cards zombies can throw out to mess with the heroes.
Anyways, just a thought. I can definitely see how some may like it and some may not, but I just thought it may be neat thematically. Definitely something I could see the zombie player loving. LOL!
Ah, just a card. Yup, I guess there's not much risk of inbalance there.
Yeah, if we were talking about adding it as a rule, that would be way too crazy, if you ask me. Too confusing, and, as you said, too much of a distraction. How would the zombies trigger it? Not to mention, thematically, why would the heroes be spending the whole time fighting each other if the zombies could just trigger it whenever? I was just thinking of it as one lone card in the deck.
(10-08-2012 11:10 PM)scarydk Wrote: [ -> ]I find this card idea interesting, but even if it's only allowed to be played on heroes with more vacant health boxes, it's still a pretty strong card. That said, I don't think there should be any BUTs - the ZP should be allowed to play this card like bickering. You want wounds, then give them wounds. No limits there.
However, I suggest adding a "sacrifice" value to the card, perhaps a combination of cards and zeds.
I could see that. A sacrifice could be a good way to balance it. I could also see giving it no limitations. My concern was just if that would make it a little TOO strong. Not to mention, I was a little worried it wouldn't make sense thematically. I mean, why would try to beat up one of your fellow survivors if they were near death? LOL! But, maybe I am just over-thinking it.
Hm...Interesting.
I feel like, to make it fair, there should be a similar card to use against the zombies. Either they attack each other in a rage, or a bunch of them decompose...but something that levels the playing field a bit.