Talk:Clue: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
I'd vote for one separate deck, because even if we use a general denominator we should still have a few specific rules for specific combinations. If each character is dealt only one extra card, that would make it a total of 6*15=90 different combinations, say that there should be specific rules for 20-30 different combinations. If we go with two separate side decks, we're up to a whooping 6*6*9=324 different combinations, and let's not forget that there should be additional rules governing what will happen if two or more characters are placed on the table. | I'd vote for one separate deck, because even if we use a general denominator we should still have a few specific rules for specific combinations. If each character is dealt only one extra card, that would make it a total of 6*15=90 different combinations, say that there should be specific rules for 20-30 different combinations. If we go with two separate side decks, we're up to a whooping 6*6*9=324 different combinations, and let's not forget that there should be additional rules governing what will happen if two or more characters are placed on the table. | ||
I'm thinking there should be one general rule, but each character should have one "strong" weapon and room, and one "weak" weapon and room. By "weak" I mean a rule/order/card change that will target specific card combinations and weaken them and the opposite with "strong", that a certain combination are instead amplified. Following the video, Col. Mustard with The Candlestick should be made into either a "strong" combo for Paul or a "weak" combo for Bill. | I'm thinking there should be one general rule, but each character should have one "strong" weapon and room, and one "weak" weapon and room. By "weak" I mean a rule/order/card change that will target specific card combinations and weaken them and the opposite with "strong", that a certain combination are instead amplified. Following the video, Col. Mustard with The Candlestick should be made into either a "strong" combo for Paul or a "weak" combo for Bill. This will in the end come to 6*4=24 specific exceptions to the general rule. Of course this does not mean that these exceptions need to ignore the general rule, only that something additional happens. --[[User:MatsJn|MatsJn]] | ||
I'll throw my vote in for a single additional stack of clue cards, with the characters mixed in with the general deck. I think that it both fits more authenticly with the source video, and will work better as a game mechanic. --[[User:MadAlric|madAlric]] | |||
Seems like the majority wants to see a single stack with the locations and weapons mixed. Editing now! --[[User:Davefp|Davefp]] 04:25, 5 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
Does the American version of the game really call him 'Mr. Green'? In the UK version he's 'Rev. Green', which adds a bit more variety to the character names (IMO). Still, if we're going to use the American version for consistency purposes, Mr Green should stay. --[[User:Davefp|Davefp]] 17:34, 5 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
YEs, he's called [http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Chasm/9098/green.html Mr. Green] in the american version. I reccomend calling him whatever you want, and making a point of clarifying in the "card types" section that he is called either "Mr." or "Rev." --[[User:MadAlric|MadAlric]] 19:13, 5 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 19:14, 5 February 2009
I would like us to come to a decision regarding the Clue card and weather the locations and weapons should be placed in a single side deck or divided into two.
I'd vote for one separate deck, because even if we use a general denominator we should still have a few specific rules for specific combinations. If each character is dealt only one extra card, that would make it a total of 6*15=90 different combinations, say that there should be specific rules for 20-30 different combinations. If we go with two separate side decks, we're up to a whooping 6*6*9=324 different combinations, and let's not forget that there should be additional rules governing what will happen if two or more characters are placed on the table.
I'm thinking there should be one general rule, but each character should have one "strong" weapon and room, and one "weak" weapon and room. By "weak" I mean a rule/order/card change that will target specific card combinations and weaken them and the opposite with "strong", that a certain combination are instead amplified. Following the video, Col. Mustard with The Candlestick should be made into either a "strong" combo for Paul or a "weak" combo for Bill. This will in the end come to 6*4=24 specific exceptions to the general rule. Of course this does not mean that these exceptions need to ignore the general rule, only that something additional happens. --MatsJn
I'll throw my vote in for a single additional stack of clue cards, with the characters mixed in with the general deck. I think that it both fits more authenticly with the source video, and will work better as a game mechanic. --madAlric
Seems like the majority wants to see a single stack with the locations and weapons mixed. Editing now! --Davefp 04:25, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Does the American version of the game really call him 'Mr. Green'? In the UK version he's 'Rev. Green', which adds a bit more variety to the character names (IMO). Still, if we're going to use the American version for consistency purposes, Mr Green should stay. --Davefp 17:34, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
YEs, he's called Mr. Green in the american version. I reccomend calling him whatever you want, and making a point of clarifying in the "card types" section that he is called either "Mr." or "Rev." --MadAlric 19:13, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
