Sobek Posted September 16, 2009 Report Share Posted September 16, 2009 One of the things that I like about Malifaux is that it really seems to lend itself more to multiplayer games than other systems. The one thing that it doesn't go into is how to determine strategy and scheme targets. I've been thinking about this recently, and figured that this is as good a place as any to put my thoughts. I think that it'd be safe to say that we don't want one person to be the target of more than one other player's objective lest the game turn into a gang up type of situation. In this mindset, it'd probably be a good idea to require each player have a different opponent as the target of their objective if applicable. It could be determined any number of ways: randomly, or whoever draws highest simply chooses. In addition to Strategies, we also have Schemes to think about. Two different ways to handle schemes come to mind. Either require the target of your schemes, if applicable, be the same as your strategy, or require your Scheme target to be different that your strategy target. Thoughts? How have you all been playing your multiplayer games? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StormHalo Posted September 16, 2009 Report Share Posted September 16, 2009 The first question that comes to my mind is, what about the strategies that have players claiming or camping objectives? They wouldn't have a target at all. Would they have to pick the player that sets up closest to that objective as the target for their schemes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmp_mydog Posted September 16, 2009 Report Share Posted September 16, 2009 We have been using random card flips to determine the target (lowest card is the target) in multiplayer games for strategies. Schemes you get to pick. In the event that someone is getting targeted by multiply strategies we reflip. You can read about some of our games here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AoM Posted September 16, 2009 Report Share Posted September 16, 2009 I like what jmp_mydog has going on. Schemes are schemes. it might be a personal vendetta, or reflect on-going tensions between the factions (or players). The strategies are the meat of things, so they should be distributed as fairly as possible, which includes making them as random as possible instead of cherry picking opponents to get an advantage. Of course, every gaming group will do things differently when it comes to multiplayer games with rules written from the perspective of one-on-one games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keltheos Posted September 17, 2009 Report Share Posted September 17, 2009 Multiplayer rules may be incoming soon... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nilus Posted September 17, 2009 Report Share Posted September 17, 2009 Multiplayer rules may be incoming soon... Cool, Personally I think a different set of strategies and schemes might help Multilayer a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus Khan Posted September 17, 2009 Report Share Posted September 17, 2009 Multiplayer rules may be incoming soon... GASP!! An entire book devoted to playing multiplayer? Sounds like fun... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sobek Posted September 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2009 I'd also love to see some sort of campaign system in the game as well. That's one of the things that I loved about other character-based skirmish games that will remain nameless. That duing leagues/campaigns that could actually gain experience/injuries which could affect them from game to game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paperbag4 Posted September 17, 2009 Report Share Posted September 17, 2009 Another we do that jmp failed to mention ... if you flip the red joker to determine your target then you get to pick who you're strategy is against, but if you flip the black then you have to acheive it against everyone. Otherwise we randomize the target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capcap Posted September 17, 2009 Report Share Posted September 17, 2009 These all seem like good ideas but I think I'm going to try the flip idea. We'll see if we can get a multiplayer game in tonight. That would be awesome. One idea I had but haven't tried out is that you have two schemes (one for each player) and a strategy for your side. Has anyone done games with 3 or more players a side? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmp_mydog Posted September 17, 2009 Report Share Posted September 17, 2009 Our biggest game was a 6 man free for all. It can get quite messy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.