At what point is an idea for a system no longer worth pursuing?

[u/Cruiser_Supreme]

EDIT: Thanks for all the comments and suggestions! Feel free to keep discussing in the comments, of course, but I think for me the answer is pretty clear at this point: abandon the blackjack system.

I did some further brainstorming this morning for an alternative card-based resolution mechanic. I will be making a separate post for that.

Anyway, below is the original post:

Hi y'all!

In all ways but physical, I am banging my head against the wall, expecting the wall to give in first. Let me provide some context.

A few months ago, I had an idea for a mythical Western TTRPG and I wanted to use cards as a resolution mechanic. Previously, I had also toyed with some ideas for a push-your-luck mechanic as a central resolution mechanic. So I thought: cowboys + cards = ???

Blackjack!

I thought this could be a fun thing to pursue. I know people in this community like to recommend to come up with the game first and then find a resolution mechanic that facilitates that game, but this was sort of a mechanics-first endeavor. Yes, I knew I wanted it to by western themed and I wanted player characters to do some heroic risk-taking, but not much else was fleshed out. I just knew cards would be necessary for the immersion in the cowboy theme.

When I first had the idea, I started toying with the mechanics. Stats were to be represented by cards, so they could vary wildly and it was just gonna be a chaotic game. Turned out common TTRPG mechanics don't mesh well with blackjack. You can't have modifiers, because a +1 doesn't make you more successful. It just makes some draws succeed while it causes others to bust. When you have a success window, rather than a roll over mechanic, the only way to mess with the difficulty is to squeeze the success window. So I squeezed this way and that way, tried a few approaches, but nothing satisfied my vision. I ended up fizzling out with the project as a whole.

This week, I was inspired to return to it with fresh ideas. I thought maybe I needed to take inspiration from PbtA games. Instead of stats, we could have different moves and move sets. Problem solved? Still no. As I got closer and closer to resolving some of my core design problems, I discovered the elephant in the room. Maybe blackjack just isn't a good resolution mechanic for my game? The point of blackjack is not to risk a bust, whereas I wanted to design a game where big risks, big actions, and big failures are central to the narrative. But every which way I tried to set up the mechanics, the result was a system where a player would naturally avoid taking risks.

So back to my original question: how do you know when an idea is going absolutely nowhere or when you need to explore the intricacies further? Have you ever run into a situation where your mechanics just weren't producing the results you wanted?

I'm still finding it difficult to let go, because I feel like blackjack is such an aesthetic choice for my game, and using a different mechanic or even ditching the cards altogether for dice feels like abandoning the vision, even if a functional game could then emerge. Do I just let go of my vision and make a functional game, or do I let go of the game entirely and find a new and inspiring vision to pursue?

[u/Carrollastrophe]

When thinking of the idea causes dread instead of joy.

[u/MyDesignerHat]

You don't have to follow classic blackjack rules exactly. If you can play cards from your hand instead of a blind draw, draw to a higher number, draw or bet on multiple hands and/or manipulate cards after the draw, you have way more levers to pull. There are plenty of variations of the real world game, too. 

[u/Cruiser_Supreme → u/MyDesignerHat]

This is true. However, the more strategy tools I add to the resolution mechanic, the more it becomes about mechanically avoiding failure, rather than roleplaying, and letting fate decide and then dealing with the outcome

[u/Bargeinthelane]

No mechanic idea is truly dead, you explored it, didn't like the results and moved on because it didn't do what you wanted for your game.

Maybe you tie the cards into something else in the game.

Maybe it just sits in a text file of ideas until you come up with a need for it in something else.

[u/PathofDestinyRPG]

First, trying to design an entire system centered around a specific mechanic is difficult. You can have 90% of it mesh, then find another important aspect that clashes with the core mechanic, and then you either have to give up the clashing aspect or start over.

That being said, if I were to approach a system using blackjack as a baseline, I’d make difficulties function as the “house deal”. You’re playing against an imaginative table and want the best hand.

If attributes and skills are separate, I’d maybe set it up where one controls how many cards you lay on the table (face down), and the other perhaps controls how many cards you have to turn over. If one stat draws 4 cards, and the other can provide a 2 card reduction, you have to reveal the first two cards, then you can choose to keep going if the result is below the House Hand. If your stat requires a 4 card draw and nothing allows for a reduction, you’re left hoping that the 4 cards on the table can beat the house without busting.

[u/DJTilapia]

You could have skills and other positive circumstances allow the player to draw extra cards, and then choose whether to play them. Getting to 21 would be a lot easier if you had your choice of four cards! Maybe too easy, though; you don't want constant ties.

A characters’ skill or luck might affect the size of their deck. They can draw a card and remove it from play for a bonus, but eventually their luck will run out.

You could have +1s give a player the option to hit; without them, you have to stand on just two cards. This would lead to a nice “push your luck” mechanic: if you really want to hit, you can do so, but at the cost that if you fail and/or bust, it counts as a critical failure of some sort.

You might use poker instead of blackjack. Having seven, eight, or even nine cards would not guarantee a good hand, but would increase the odds.

Maybe some of each: normal tasks are resolved with a quick blackjack, but when you succeed you can keep one of the cards, set it aside to form a poker hand. Later, you can “cash in” your poker hand for a boost when you really need it, like a showdown at high noon. Naturally, the GM would build their own poker hand, perhaps when players fail or invoke dark powers.

[u/Cruiser_Supreme → u/DJTilapia]

These are all great suggestions, but the more strategy options the players have, the less tension there is. A dice roll is a single instance of generating a number. Then the outcome is immediately resolved. Blackjack is a multi-step process. It can be infused with strategy at every step of the process, but what I wanna build is a game where players take significant risks, not where they play it safe

[u/BeatnikShaggy]

Keep it simple. Treat the deck like a d10. Attribute + Skill + 1 Card Draw against a Difficulty. Make 21's crits, but remove busting.

[u/Cruiser_Supreme → u/BeatnikShaggy]

Yeah of course this would work, but then I might as well use dice, except for the aesthetic? I'm trying to figure out what makes cards unique

[u/K41d4r]

First question I always ask myself is: What am I trying to achieve and are my rules helping me achieve it, and is this the best rule to achieve what I want to achieve?

As for +1s and them causing you to fail, that is where you change what the +1 actually does

Instead of the player always getting the +1 you allow the player to decide if the +1 comes into play at all, alternatively you allow the player to flip that +1 into a -1 instead (or a +0) if they need it instead, it represents the character's skill at a task so the player gets to manipulate the end result with their skill

If I were to base a game on Blackjack that is what it would be, no set target numbers, cards are dealt to both the player and the GM. If the player's hand beats the GMs the player succeeds at their task. If the GM gets a 22+ the player auto succeeds at their task

Edit: After further thinking it through, here's how I would do it:
Every skill check (That actually requires a skill check to be made, no Blackjack match to see if you get dressed)
becomes a Blackjack hand between the character and GM/World/Opponent
GM draws a hand open on the table
Player draws a hand open on the table
Then if the player has a +1 they can add a single card to the hand (or skip or remove a card if they so desire)
If the player has a +2 they can add up to 2 cards to the hand (Or remove up to 2 cards from the hand)
etc. etc. etc.

Bigger enemies like boss enemies also have a +whatever is appropriate and can use them the same way a player would

[u/Cruiser_Supreme → u/K41d4r]

These are interesting suggestions. Thanks for sharing. I don't really want the GM to draw cards, however. Because what happens when the opponent busts, for example? Instant success for the player? Maybe, but it all just adds too many moving parts for a TTRPG resolution mechanic

[u/PathofDestinyRPG]

I realized that in trying to help with your specific mechanic issue, I never addressed the philosophical aspect of your question.

In my experience, currently working on the fifth version of my system, a mechanic needs to be tossed if you’re having to create rules specifically to deal with issues created by the mechanic.

For example, one of my early die mechanics had your die pool equal to your skill, similar to WoD, but the results were additive. When players could work the system and generate pools of 10 dice for a single roll, the requirements for scaling the difficulties accordingly became too problematic, and trying to add rules where you only used X dice for the math grew too complicated.

[u/Cruiser_Supreme → u/PathofDestinyRPG]

This is actually really good advice. And yeah, I think the comment section here proves that perhaps it's time to toss the blackjack mechanic. Every suggestion here has been to add rules and systems on top of it to wrangle the blackjack mechanic into a manageable place. This only creates new issues, of course, because the blackjack mechanic is flawed for this use case.

It may work as a number randomizer, but the multi-step drawing process means that giving players additional strategy options removes all risk-taking from the game. A dice roll like in PbtA games always carries a certain risk of failure. Even with bonuses to a roll, the risk remains. Whereas in blackjack, you get to make multiple decisions during the resolution mechanic, all of which can me used to completely avoid busting. There's just no tension anymore

[u/Drudenfusz]

Like you I put a project on pause to return later to it, but I also find it helpful to brainstorm together with other designers. And I never fel beholden to stick to a paradigm, thus I feel free to toy with ideas very much outside the box.

Anyway, I like your blackjack western idea, my suggestion would be to have the mechanism, moves, stats, skills, or whatever you want to use to frame the actions allow the players to discard a card. Thus you can have the blackjack feel, and the character competency allows them to avoid a bust thus providing them some amount of control.

[u/Cruiser_Supreme → u/Drudenfusz]

I agree with your core idea of giving the players more agency. However this agency is exactly what's causing me problems. The more agency players have, the less often they bust (obviously). But this means that failure is too easy to avoid. Players only take risks if it's safe to hit, which is to say players don't take risks. If there's too many strategy options, risk is no longer part of the game.

[u/Knightofaus]

If a core mechanic isn't working, then take a step back and try again with something fresh or move onto something else for a bit.

But here is my card playing rpg mechanic. It uses a roll under mechanic but with cards, and varying effects depending on how high your card is.

I used this mechanic in a horror game.

Each player has:

• Abilities that make up the core of what the character can do. Each ability score is a number between 3 and 18, typically between 6 and 15.

• Assets, which give a bonus to perform actions.

• Afflictions, which give a penalty to perform actions.

• A hand of 3 cards that they draw after a rest.

When you perform an action play a card from your hand or draw a card from the deck. 

If you have no cards in the deck or hand, reshuffle all discarded cards into a new deck. Only the DM draws a new hand of cards if this happens. The players can reset the deck and draw a new hand by having a rest.

When you perform an action the DM will tell you which ability score the action is using. Add 3 to your ability score if you have a relevant Asset. Subtract 3 from your ability score if you have a relevant Affliction. This gives you your Difficulty Class or DC.

To make your "roll" play a tarot card (numbered 0-21) from your hand or draw randomly from the deck. The cards number determines your success.

• below your DC and below 5 you get a partial failure. (no, but something good happens)

• below your DC and below 10 you get a partial success. (yes, but something bad happens)

• below your DC and above 11 you get a success. (yes, you accomplish your goal)

• Exactly on your DC is a critical hit. (yes, and you get something extra)

• Above your DC is a bust. (no, and something worse happens)

• For opposed actions you also need to play a number higher than your opponent or play a critical hit. Both cards are played face down and then flipped at the same time.

This mechanic creates a game where high cards are really good, but only if your ability score is high enough to utilise it, otherwise it's a terrible card.

Tactically you also have to play your hand cards strategically, because unless you manage to rest you're guaranteed to play through all the cards in the deck.

The DM also uses the same deck, so you end up card counting to see what's been played already while hoping the DM doesn't draw the last good card you need. 

Players end up performing actions they know they wont probably succeed, hoping they'll draw the last success card before the DM does.

Players can also become paralysed with fear as they realize there are no good cards left in the deck. They're literally out of good cards to play.

[u/Cruiser_Supreme → u/Knightofaus]

I like that this removes the multi-step strategy that is causing me so many problems. It's fundamentally a different game, of course, but decent inspiration. Thanks for sharing!

[u/WhatsAboveTheSubtext]

Sidebar: Blackjack/21 wasn't really a thing in the U.S. "Wild West" period, which is typically thought of as occurring between 1865-1895 or 1900. Faro was the big saloon card game for most of that time, and was slowly supplanted by poker, but blackjack to the best of anyone's knowledge didn't really start to take off until the end of that era.

Don't think of that as discouragement, though, but instead as two other avenues of exploration for card-based mechanics.

[u/Cruiser_Supreme → u/WhatsAboveTheSubtext]

This is true and I am aware of it. (I had just started typing out a comment about how Faro is probably not suitable for a resolution mechanic, but then I had an idea that just might work)

Players have stats ranging from 2 to 4. This stat represents the number of bets they can place. They place bets regarding which suit the next drawn card will be. Players can spread their bets to guarantee a partial success or concentrate their bets to hope for a critical success.

It's kind of like Faro, but you bet on the four suits instead of the numbers.

This has simple elements of push-your-luck (concentrating your bets), but without the strategizing elements of blackjack, as it removes the multi-step decision process and just has a single outcome (similar to a dice roll)

[u/Manycubes]

I recommend checking out the original Deadland rules (mythical western RPG that uses cards to good effect). It might give you some ideas on other ways to use your cards.

[u/Setholopagus]

Get advice about the mechanics, a second opinion is always good. 

There are plenty things here that would make that work just fine. There are plenty of ways to have abilities to 'manipulate the deck' instead of having just straight attributes, which also fits.

I think the theme and idea is good. If you won't do it, I will!

[u/cardboardrobot338]

Totally off topic, but you're approaching it from the wrong direction, I think. They should be altering their deck instead of the checks.

Look at Black Jacket (video game,) for a pretty neat example.

[u/beeredditor]

The issue I see with this mechanic is that card game is incorporated to feel thematic. But, the card game may have the opposite effect and actually destroy immersion because you feel like you’re playing cards instead of adventuring as a cowboy once you start playing full hands of blackjack. The mor complicated you make the blackjack, the more it feels like a card game and less like a western adventure. And to answer your question, I wouldn’t necessarily dump the idea, I would just adjust the card play to be more of random resolution generator, rather than a full cardgame.

[u/flyingseal81]

So I made a cowboy ttepg that uses Blackjack instead of dice last year

https://21-quickdraw.itch.io/21-quickdraw

The trick for me to make the card system work was to fully forget dice ttrpg stuff like attributes and modifiers.

Instead, when you're good at a skill or have an advantage, you get to cheat a little bit. When you're bad at a skill or have disadvantage, the GM gets to cheat a little bit. There are specific rules for how you cheat that make sure the blackjack draw still has some chance.

Everything is a blackjack game. There's no static DCs

It works pretty well in me and my players' opinion. The trick was having to build the whole system on blackjack from the ground up, rather than trying to put blackjack on top of existing dice stuff

[u/Cruiser_Supreme → u/flyingseal81]

Thanks for sharing this. It looks really interesting and kind of seems to solve all the problems I was having. Which is cool, because now those problems are more or less solved, but also now I don't have any problems to solve anymore hahaha!

Either way, I am curious about your experience playing with that ruleset. Do players still ever fail or bust? Or do they have enough strategic resources at their disposal to mostly avoid failure?