This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.

How would you feel about adding "bits" to 1E?

Yes, add them.
12
27%
I don't care at all.
6
14%
I'd prefer you didn't.
6
14%
No, don't do it.
14
32%
No, and if you do it I'll quit.
6
14%
User avatar
Director of First Edition
By MidnightLich (Charlie Plaine)
 - Director of First Edition
 -  
Trailblazer
#502751
Welcome to today's First Edition Friday Question, where you get a chance to answer questions that will help shape the future of First Edition. If you'd like to catch up on previous entries, here's a list of all of my previous Friday Questions:

6 MAR 2020: What are your favorite "almost good" S/P dilemmas?
28 FEB 2020: What are your favorite decks to play?
21 FEB 2020: Which Decipher expansion most deserves a sequel?
14 FEB 2020: Which "broken link" should be fixed first?
7 FEB 2020: What's your favorite episode of Star Trek?
31 JAN 2020: Which TOS main character needs a new card?
24 JAN 2020: What should qualify a card for the "watch list"?
17 JAN 2020: What card would you unban without changes?
10 JAN 2020: What single card would you ban to improve your game?
3 JAN 2020: What are you looking forward to in The Neutral Zone?
27 DEC 2019: How can we help you recruit new players?
20 DEC 2019: Where do you want the game to be in five years?
13 DEC 2019: Which concepts should 1E "import" from other games?
6 DEC 2019: Which couples should get a dual personnel card?
29 NOV 2019: Which old, unused 1E cards deserve some love?
22 NOV 2019: Which upcoming milestones need celebration?
15 NOV 2019: What's your favorite card image?
11 NOV 2019: What was your first 1E experience?
1 NOV 2019 What is your opinion of the "full page" policy?
25 OCT 2019: What do you want to see in a Halloween set?
18 OCT 2019: What is your favorite expansion?
11 OCT 2019: Which TNG main character needs a new card?
4 OCT 2019: Which Star Trek story needs more cards?
27 SEP 2019: How many points should [SPOILER] be worth?
20 SEP 2019: Which rules always confuse you?
13 SEP 2019: What do you think of [SPOILER]?
6 SEP 2019: Which card needs an alternate image (AI)?
30 AUG 2019: Which characteristic needs love?


Happy Friday everyone. I hope that, wherever you are, you're staying safe and washing your hands. It can seem really scary when the media and social media are sharing lots of sensationalist stories about COVID-19. I'm sure it is really scary if you're in an area where there is significant outbreaks or if you, or someone you love, is vulnerable to viruses like this. But just try and stay safe, stay sane, and build some 1E decks. And did I mention washing your hands?

Games, even card games, have evolved a lot since the 90's when our beloved First Edition was born. Today's question is to gauge how you feel about potentially having to bring some extra "bits" with you when you go to a 1E tournament.

How would you feel about adding extra "bits" (counters, tokens, dice, etc.) to First Edition?

For the purposes of this question, you can define "bits" as anything you like: little glass beads, dice, poker chips, meeples - anything of that nature. The exact nature of the "bit" doesn't really matter, but the idea is that if a game mechanic were added to 1E that needed a little something like this to work, how would you feel about it?

Decipher, for Trek, always had the philosophy that cards are all you need. Of course, as they made other games, like Lord of the Rings TCG, they loosened that somewhat. But Trek, in bot editions, remained faithful to the "no bits" rule. Do you think that should still be true? What if Decipher were making the game anew today - do you think it would warrant some "bits" added? Most modern cards games do.

In the past, there has always been some extreme anti-bit reactions - some people have threatened to quit if a mechanic is introduced that requires bits. If you feel that way - and it's perfectly okay if you do - I'm curious why. Sure, it's different than Decipher, but is that the reason for the strength of that reaction? On the other side, I've seen players do this already, using markers to mark mission completion, dice to keep score or track countdowns, or other similar ideas. At their core, "bits" are really just memory aides.

Also, let me be clear: this is just a question. We don't have any plans to do anything like this. But your reactions will still help us decide if we keep staying away, or we look into what might be in a "bit" world for 1E. And to make it easier, I've put a poll on this question; you can vote if you don't want to reply, though I encourage replies with context and detail!

So how do you feel about the idea of adding "bits" to 1E? Would it make you quit the game - and if so, why? Do you do this already? Or do you fall somewhere in between? In any case, please sound off and let us know.

Have a great weekend - and wash your hands a lot!

-crp
User avatar
Director of Operations
By JeBuS (Brian S)
 - Director of Operations
 -  
#502752
I liked the beads in LotR. It was a handy visual representation of the state of the game. A lot of current Trek players use dice as counters for things like countdowns or to remember bonus points that aren't tracked in any other way. The biggest problem with adding more bits to 1e is that there is already quite a lot of stuff on the table, only using cards. Adding bits could make the game even harder to keep track of, when their purpose should be the opposite.
User avatar
 
By Boffo97 (Dave Hines)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Moderator
Donor
#502753
One of the early things I learned after becoming an active participant on these boards is that any idea that requires mass errata isn't going to happen. Hence, for example, why we don't have graphic upgrades of cards from sets where the graphics we have are very low res.

I don't see how anything like this could happen without mass errata.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
President
Community Contributor
#502754
JeBuS wrote:I liked the beads in LotR. It was a handy visual representation of the state of the game. A lot of current Trek players use dice as counters for things like countdowns or to remember bonus points that aren't tracked in any other way. The biggest problem with adding more bits to 1e is that there is already quite a lot of stuff on the table, only using cards. Adding bits could make the game even harder to keep track of, when their purpose should be the opposite.
This sums up my feelings pretty well. I'm always grateful to That One Player who brings enough dice for everyone to track countdowns without card rotation, but usually forget to bring my own. I'd hate to either be punished for that, or to end up with even more STUFF on a crowded, crowded table.

QI was a fun exception -- but one that only "worked," in my mind, because it was a "lost card" from the Fajo Collection.

But, hey, maybe a particular mechanic would be SO cool and powerful and simple to justify the move. So I voted "I'd prefer you didn't."

It's hard for me to imagine quitting over it.
User avatar
 
By Daimyoshi (Richard Steele)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#502758
We could always have bits that represent things that happen in game like damage counters instead of rotation, countdown markers [dice], Mission accomplished tokens, etc. Sell them through the Promenade even?
User avatar
 
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#502766
BCSWowbagger wrote: This sums up my feelings pretty well. I'm always grateful to That One Player who brings enough dice for everyone to track countdowns without card rotation, but usually forget to bring my own. I'd hate to either be punished for that, or to end up with even more STUFF on a crowded, crowded table.
.
I don't know if it's a punishment thing, though - I can't think of a game that gets particularly picky about *what* a token/counter has to be, so long as everyone agrees on what it represents. Someone always has loose change or dice or M&Ms or a Tribbles deck or *something*.
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#502810
By default I like the idea of a deck of 60 cards versus another deck of 60 cards and having to come up with the best implementation of a deck within those confines. For 1E, that's not really workable with the need to get the skill matrix in there and the desire to add one's own twist to a deck. Having a Q's Tent side deck to accompany it--I'll gladly take that as well. But, it still feels like adding some form of cost to the game the more we move away from that: cards that can be thrown in and seeded for free because there's no reason not to do so, cards that can be brought in from outside the game, side decks that can do amazing things but add to the sprawling feel, and then... extra "bits" would just be another part of it. It could be a complexity thing, but for me it mostly comes down to preference for not having them.
User avatar
 
By Smiley (Cristoffer Wiker)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#502824
I was very against bit in card games back in the time of D management of this game. But over time I have come to understand that there is a lack of "knobbs" to turn in the game. Cards can do a lot of things but just the possibility to include other things that could better represent what it supposed to be or for that matter just not consuming the deck of cards.
 
By Spectre9
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#502846
I already feel 1e is too complex with the many side decks.

I'd prefer a move towards a simpler game than a more complex one.

That being said I think there's some give and take there. Get rid of ref decks and you can have the extra bits :P

From a game design perspective I can certainly see the lure of wanting to create new mechanics in which to evolve the game and if this can be done in a useful non intrusive way it would probably be ok.

Spending bits to do stuff feels very 2e though. Adding that kind of thing as a way of costing abilities might feel a bit like 3e.
User avatar
First Edition Balance Manager
By JasonRed3 (Jason Robinette)
 - First Edition Balance Manager
 -  
#502851
Spectre9 wrote: Spending bits to do stuff feels very 2e though. Adding that kind of thing as a way of costing abilities might feel a bit like 3e.
I'm not sure that the exact usage was articulated, but there are probably plenty of countdown-style effects that would be easier to track with something.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
President
Community Contributor
#502858
Takket wrote:i voted no because apparently "HELLS TO THE NO" isn't an option.
Curious how you'd answer this:
MidnightLich wrote:In the past, there has always been some extreme anti-bit reactions - some people have threatened to quit if a mechanic is introduced that requires bits. If you feel that way - and it's perfectly okay if you do - I'm curious why. Sure, it's different than Decipher, but is that the reason for the strength of that reaction?
I obviously somewhat agree, since I voted "prefer not to," but I don't grok the intensity myself.
20 Questions: Project Storm's Name

...Is it Face of Evil? No. You have 17 ques[…]

is/ was trek more than an ip?

We seem to have two questions: [SD] Was Quark ev[…]

2 Truths and a Lie: Project Storm

ooooo - I like that Odo. :thumbsup:

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

Thanks. :)