trekcc.org

Well that was close race, wasn't it? The early favorite pulled it out, but not without a significant challenge. Here are the final results:

Concept C - 28%
Concept G - 19%
Concept A - 8%
Concept E - 8%
Concept H - 8%
Concept J - 8%
Concept B - 7%
Concept I - 4%
Concept F - 2%
Concept D - 1%

To refresh your memory, here is Concept C:

A dilemma whose effect occurs only when the dilemma is consumed.

This concept was submitted by Franklin Kenter (MilesStuntDouble) who has dubbed it "Consume Me!" Keep in mind this is just the play testing title - you will be able to pick the card's final name much later in the process.



So, now it's time for the next step. As you can see, the design team has given you the timing for the card's ability. It's your job to fill in the rest and submit your ideas for the card's remaining game text. We're going to be accepting submissions from the community at large, just like we did for card concepts. Here are the rules for this round:

1. Submissions are due on or before MIDNIGHT (server time, GMT-5) on Sunday, 16 March 2008.

2. Each person may send in one (1) submission that contains a single idea for Consume Me!'s game text.

3. Submissions must be sent via Private Message (PM) to Administrator. You can use this link to send a message.

4. Submissions should be worded as you want them to appear on the actual card. Elements that are tied to storyline - such a specific skills - should be abstracted. (Example: Instead of submitting "Unless you have Anthropology, Physics and Science", please submit "Unless you have skill, skill and skill" as the requirement.)

5. Make sure to differentiate between requirements (in bold) and text that is not a requirement.

6. You may choose to rewrite the existing line of game text, but your text must strictly adhere to the chosen concept.

Once we receive all the submissions, the design team will select a small sample of them for you to choose from via a community vote. (Give us some time, as this likely to take awhile.) Sound good?

If you have any questions, please post them here. Otherwise, we look forward to reading your ideas and moving forward.

MidnightLich wrote: 2. Each person may send in one (1) submission that contains a single idea for Consume Me!'s game text.

Darn, this was hard. But now I have choosen one of my ideas.

MidnightLich wrote:Once we receive all the submissions, the design team will select a small sample of them for you to choose from via a community vote. (Give us some time, as this likely to take awhile.) Sound good?

Other than only sending one idea, its not good. It is GREAT! But after all the great concepts I can understand why you want to restrict the number of entries

While I think the game text on the prototype is accceptable, I would like to point out that it could still trigger off things other than consume- like Stripped Down, et. al.

Or the Q event that exchanges the top card of your dilemma pile with one that was just overcome.....The Trial Never Ended

So many choice now....where to begin....to kill or not to kill....to stop or not to stop.....to remove or not remove....what will be favorite be?

charlie wrote:Or the Q event that exchanges the top card of your dilemma pile with one that was just overcome.....The Trial Never Ended

Events are not dilemmas. The "Consume Me" text says when it is placed beneath a mission by another dilemma... that rules out Dominion Defiant manipulation also

Should we be thinking along the lines of "make it like card X, except in dilemma form" (maybe when this dilemma is consumed, destroy an event {or two })

I'd avoid putting skills on the dilemma because of Kirk shenanigans.

Altoid wrote:I'd avoid putting skills on the dilemma because of Kirk shenanigans.

I was just thinking about that. What if it was "...name a skill at least two of your personnel have. Randomly select a personnel with that skill to be stopped/killed/placed in your brig/whatever." Kirk is useless.

The Guardian wrote:

Altoid wrote:I'd avoid putting skills on the dilemma because of Kirk shenanigans.

I was just thinking about that. What if it was "...name a skill at least two of your personnel have. Randomly select a personnel with that skill to be stopped/killed/placed in your brig/whatever." Kirk is useless.

If one does not have the requirements, he or she could use Kirk. He doesn't just work on dilemmas with skills. The example you list could be Kirk'd.

Also, the dilemma does not mention consume because the word consume does not put dilemmas beneath a mission - it's the italic words behind the word consume that puts the dilemma beneath the mission.

Brad wrote:

The Guardian wrote:

Altoid wrote:I'd avoid putting skills on the dilemma because of Kirk shenanigans.

I was just thinking about that. What if it was "...name a skill at least two of your personnel have. Randomly select a personnel with that skill to be stopped/killed/placed in your brig/whatever." Kirk is useless.

If one does not have the requirements, he or she could use Kirk. He doesn't just work on dilemmas with skills. The example you list could be Kirk'd.

I suppose if you also use of a couple of Stricken Dumbs, but by making it a skill your personnel has, I have eliminated Kirk because you can definitely meet the requirements.

AllenGould wrote:

Maelwys wrote: Oops, sorry, I misunderstood your previous post. I thought you were arguing that they SHOULD be considered keywords to save space, not that they were considered keywords to save space. Obviously I was just reading too quickly and misread your post. Ignore me now.

Then I'll jump in on this one. If "loading" the keyword allows us to say things like "Each time you consume a dilemma", then this is a good thing. The reminder text should still be there as often as possible for obvious reasons, but I think there's some ground to be gained if we can simply call things what they're called. (Also cleans up the "I gain the keyword, but not the ability that the keyword means?" problem).

While this has been an interesting discussion, we're designing a dilemma here, not altering the mechanics of the game. If you have a different way to word your game text, go for it. But please follow the submission guidelines in the first post.

Back on topic now...

-crp

well,i think the card should have a dual effect.1 if played normally and 1 if consumed.that way its not a totally dead card if you draw it.

whampiri wrote:well,i think the card should have a dual effect.1 if played normally and 1 if consumed.that way its not a totally dead card if you draw it.

I've been thinking about this too. If the only use is to be consumed, then does the cost of the card matter? I know we're not there yet, but it would also be nice to know if we are going to add any other text to it after this choice.

The Guardian wrote:

whampiri wrote:well,i think the card should have a dual effect.1 if played normally and 1 if consumed.that way its not a totally dead card if you draw it.

I've been thinking about this too. If the only use is to be consumed, then does the cost of teh card matter? I know we're not there yet, but it would also be nice to know if we are going to add any other text to it after this choice.

Since the chosen mechanic explicitly says the effect only occurs when the dilemma is consumed, I don't think the person who suggested it intended an additional "regular" effect. However, I do agree that if there is only that one effect, it would have to be reasonably powerful to warrant inclusion in the dilemma pile.
An overcosted "backup" function (e.g., cost 5 for 1 random stop) might be an option, but I have to say I really like the concept of a dilemma that only works when it's consumed.

Cost and type (planet/dual/space) are probably only relevant for cards like Dabo!, Malcolm Reed, Field Studies and the like.

Kaiser wrote:Cost and type (planet/dual/space) are probably only relevant for cards like Dabo!, Malcolm Reed, Field Studies and the like.

What would you cost and type it then? Again, I know we aren't there yet, but a certain amount of planning ahead can be a good thing. What would be the benefit and drawback to a high or low cost? What would be the benefit and drawback to each type? Is there any way that this decision can affect the current decision we are making? Is there anyway to word the dilemma as envisioned that would make the slightest difference in those future decisions? I honestly cannot figure a way.

Oh, and I bet the possibility of a dilemma that no one would ever actually face came up when drawing up the costing charts.

The Guardian wrote:Oh, and I bet the possibility of a dilemma that no one would ever actually face came up when drawing up the costing charts.

It is not a hard number but there is a provision for how something like a dilemma that does nothing when faced should be costed.

Brad wrote:

The Guardian wrote:Oh, and I bet the possibility of a dilemma that no one would ever actually face came up when drawing up the costing charts.

It is not a hard number but there is a provision for how something like a dilemma that does nothing when faced should be costed.

Wow. Cool.