So, I’m absolutely in love this idea I came up with for character roles that fit into the rock-paper-scissors thing, you know it’s so easy to figure which ones take priority over what, but I’m realizing suddenly that it sounds awesome in practice, but why on earth would anyone willingly choose a vulnerability?

It might make sense in the context of a video game (where I’m currently using the system), but how would you ever convince a tabletop gamer to accept some kind of weakness in their character? It’s just that, in the context of a customizable card game, a savvy player will simply choose cards to minimize their deck’s vulnerabilities.

So I have this system that I still want to use (I’m not married to it or anything, I just like it) but unless I implement it throughout the game, on a scale that makes little to no sense, there’s no reason a player would choose to go with the cards.


It occurred to me that I want to include interrupt actions for the players to use when it isn’t their turn. It occurred to me that rather than creating restrictions on what cards can be used against whom at what times, interrupts could be added to attacks as a sort of bonus thing. An interrupt can be a secondary, alternative effect.

How about this hypothetical card:

Careful Attack [Combat, Artillery]
Standard; commit to activate target Hunter.
Quick; commit to cancel target Leader or Striker combat effect.

The primary effect of the card is an activation of a hunter (could be your hunter, an enemy’s hunter, or an allied hunter, really), regardless of either card’s value. The secondary effect is to cancel a Leader or Striker combat effect. Both effects are useful in different circumstances, and should be straightforward to use.

Similar cards would exist for different classes and different combat roles. I’m sure there’s some other glaring error in my reasoning that I’ll have to figure out eventually, but for the time being, it looks good. Actually, one advantage is the range of effects it can counter. Still, maybe the problem is it has no value-based effect? I don’t know.