# Fortune Cards Threads [Merged]



## blalien (Jan 7, 2011)

I know the stock response is supposed to be, "What is this, Dungeons and Dragons TCG?  I have kids to feed!"  But I am actually tempted.  Since the DM owns and controls the cards, it wouldn't be an arms race like Magic.  And when I ran Gamma World, the Alpha Mutations were definitely the player favorite.  I think introducing the fortune cards would actually spice up the game.

The problem is the price.  Eight cards for four dollars is unacceptable.  You'd need to buy around five packs to have enough variety for six players.  And Wizards obviously intends to capitalize on micropayment addiction a la Farmville.  If the price is going to fall into book territory, I'd rather just get a book.

I think I'm just going to wait a few weeks until Wizards discontinues the cards and my FLGS is desperate to get rid of them.


----------



## Alaxk Knight of Galt (Jan 7, 2011)

*Fortune Cards ?!?*

Fortune Cards

Some notes and questions about them



> Fortune Cards are available in 8-card booster packs with differing levels of rarity (common, uncommon, and rare), and serve as another avenue for excitement at the game table.




Where are the mythic rares?  Are we looking for them in the first expansion pack?

Can the game handle more excitement?



> With each booster, a player’s tactical options for their character during the game alter and expand in interesting new ways.




This is good, especially if you are in the camp that PCs don't have enough actions to pick from each combat turn.  It seems to be a common complaint that the combat grind isn't long enough in the current edition.  This should increase that by giving every player additional options during combat.



> It's important to point out that Fortune Cards are not a requirement for D&D play; they are an enhancement that simulates blind luck, the winds of fate, or divine influence.




Don't panic.  Your DM doesn't have to kick you out of the game if you forget to bring your fortune cards.

I'm glad we have another mechanic to simulate luck/divine fate.  That d20 sometimes rolled low and that player didn't have any fun for a whole turn.  If you bring your own fortune deck, you can make sure the only luck you have is good luck.



> They have a thematic place in your D&D games.




They do!



> For some Wizards Play Network programs aimed at experienced players, Fortune Card purchase will be a requirement to participate




This is the *rare case* where the DM will have to kick you out of the game session if you don't have your fortune cards.  But don't worry, you can always buy some and continue with your DnD experience.


----------



## Zaran (Jan 7, 2011)

Collectible cards have no place in a rpg. I believe WotC has forgotten that an rpg is about being a character in a story and not about pushing miniatures around a game board and flipping the next card in a deck to see what happens.


----------



## Riastlin (Jan 7, 2011)

Well, WotC or Hasbro.

All in all I'm not particularly bothered by them.  I don't plan to use them.  I don't think they're necessary, etc., so I just won't buy them.  In the end sales will determine whether or not it was a good idea.  If they sell well, we'll see more of them.  If they sell poorly, we won't.  My guess is that they'll sell poorly and will die a fairly quick death.


----------



## Scribble (Jan 7, 2011)

They sound cool to me. 

From what we know, they seem kind of like the Twitter buffs.

I kind of wish/hope they would also include some negative effects as well though.



			
				Zaran said:
			
		

> Collectible cards have no place in a rpg. I believe WotC has forgotten that an rpg is about being a character in a story and not about pushing miniatures around a game board and flipping the next card in a deck to see what happens.




Meh- as long as they add something fun to the game, I don't care what form it takes.


----------



## renau1g (Jan 7, 2011)

Scribble said:


> I kind of wish/hope they would also include some negative effects as well though.




They might, but then if a player is bringing his own deck to LFR games I need to then inspect each deck to make sure there actually are bad ones, and I also need to ask each player to properly shuffle their decks, or do it myself as some people can pull out card tricks to stack the decks.


----------



## Scribble (Jan 7, 2011)

renau1g said:


> They might, but then if a player is bringing his own deck to LFR games I need to then inspect each deck to make sure there actually are bad ones, and I also need to ask each player to properly shuffle their decks, or do it myself as some people can pull out card tricks to stack the decks.




True... 

Thinking about it, I think a better idea is limiting when they can be used... which is probably how they work.


----------



## KahnyaGnorc (Jan 7, 2011)

You could house-rule it for your campaign to have a Master Deck, built by the DM, instead of individual decks for each player.


----------



## DaveMage (Jan 7, 2011)

Fortune cards?  Interesting.

*Collectable* fortune cards?

Hilarious.  

Have fun with that....


----------



## Tequila Sunrise (Jan 7, 2011)

As an optional add-on, I'll likely never use FCs. I think the game has enough options.

But if 5e were to use randomized cards in conjunction with the core powers...well, that just might be the bee's knees!


----------



## Tortoise (Jan 7, 2011)

I pre-ordered a box of boosters and this is why . . .

I see these as another form of random encounter, under my control.

As a DM I sometimes plan out areas where strange events (or "wandering monster encounters) can happen, either pro or con for the characters. Mostly minor stuff designed to keep things interesting.

I'll be putting these together in small decks tailored to different areas. Since I'm planning them into the adventures it isn't totally random, though it does give it enough randomness that I can be pleasantly surprised and it adds to the re-visit value of a location for the players.

Since they are not a requirement for the game I do not see them as a problem.


----------



## MrMyth (Jan 7, 2011)

I'm sad they are basically just 'free bonus powers' - I had been hoping for something that would more represent random events and conditions that could be good or bad. 

As it is, I wouldn't want to see PCs just running around with them. I could see some house-ruled approaches for their use: Handing them out in place of Action Points, or giving them out as a sort of consumable treasure, or whenever the PCs get one, so does the DM. 

Basically - if I had them, I'd find a way to use them, but I don't feel the need to go out and buy them, especially for the price.


----------



## TarionzCousin (Jan 7, 2011)

Scribble said:


> From what we know, they seem kind of like the Twitter buffs.



What are "Twitter Buffs" and where can I see them?


----------



## Scribble (Jan 7, 2011)

TarionzCousin said:


> What are "Twitter Buffs" and where can I see them?




On Twitter- every Wednesday if you follow the WoTC twitter account.


----------



## blalien (Jan 7, 2011)

I could see using them instead of action points.  If you add one level of complication, it would make sense to take away another.  But my players love their action points, and I don't think they'd want to lose them in favor of something random and uncontrollable.


----------



## Tortoise (Jan 7, 2011)

See my response in the other thread about this:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/299223-fortune-cards.html


----------



## Dausuul (Jan 7, 2011)

Scribble said:


> Thinking about it, I think a better idea is limiting when they can be used... which is probably how they work.




I agree. In fact, I already have a house rule in mind to determine when they can be used in my games:

"Fortune cards may be used at any time when at least 6 layers of the Nine Hells have the cold keyword."


----------



## C_M2008 (Jan 7, 2011)

The CCG company wants to make D&D into one? --shocking.

I imagine this is but the first step - race & class boosters coming soon to a store near you............


----------



## Riastlin (Jan 7, 2011)

Personally, they are not my taste.  I just don't think they'll add that much to the game and when you add that to the randomness and price of the packs, it makes it even less desirable.

However, I am fine with WotC giving it a try.  Obviously MTG has done pretty well for them so I think they and/or Hasbro are trying to find a viable way to implement the collectible model into the D&D line.  I see it as likely a relatively low cost (thus low risk) investment for WotC.  If they sell well, we'll see more, but if they flop (which is my guess) we won't.  The cost of producing the cards though is likely far less than the cost of a book, so even though I don't think it'll sell well, it still seems like something that is worth a shot from their perspective.


----------



## renau1g (Jan 7, 2011)

KahnyaGnorc said:


> You could house-rule it for your campaign to have a Master Deck, built by the DM, instead of individual decks for each player.




Can't houserule in LFR IIRC... that's where I see this type of thing potentially being problematic. In a home game I can trust my fellow gamers of 10+ years not to be complete jackasses and cheat, but in LFR games...well there's some "interesting" people out there that need to win at D&D (probably the same guys that play online games to pwn noobs or something)

*ugh* and don't get me started on the Twitter boosts. How is it explained in game Scribble? (I ask you because you seem familiar with them). The gods have granted you a boon because you follow their Twitter update account? It's silly...maybe next if I friend them on Facebook I can get a auto-crit on my next attack, or if I follow them on LinkedIn I can get more buffs...


----------



## Stumblewyk (Jan 7, 2011)

They're not for me or my game.  But as long as I don't have a player show up to the game with a deck of them saying "let's use them!" (which I don't anticipate happening with my group) then I don't have a problem with them.


----------



## BriarMonkey (Jan 7, 2011)

If they poured this same effort into something useful, such as giving us spell cards; monster cards; equipment cards; etc., then it might be of value.  Otherwise, this is just a money grab - pure and simple.


----------



## Alaxk Knight of Galt (Jan 7, 2011)

renau1g said:


> *ugh* and don't get me started on the Twitter boosts. How is it explained in game Scribble? (I ask you because you seem familiar with them). The gods have granted you a boon because you follow their Twitter update account? It's silly...maybe next if I friend them on Facebook I can get a auto-crit on my next attack, or if I follow them on LinkedIn I can get more buffs...




I'm derailing my own thread.  If you follow WotC on twitter you get in-game bonuses for your characters?  What sane DM allows this?


----------



## Sebastianelgar (Jan 7, 2011)

From what my friends that play in the Wednesday Encounters.  The twitter boosts are minor boons that can occur during Encounters, I think they said one was a mist forms around you granting cold resist 2 for the rest of the encounter.  But they aren't for all games just the weekly game at YFLGS running Encounters.


----------



## renau1g (Jan 7, 2011)

I believe it's an LFR bonus. Sorry Encounters.

Here's the announcement link from Trevor
Whoops! Browser Settings Incompatible


----------



## weem (Jan 7, 2011)

TarionzCousin said:


> What are "Twitter Buffs" and where can I see them?




Here are some examples...



> Bahamut grants his divine power to the heroes in this fight against evil. Characters gain a +5 to Heal checks.
> 
> You find the strength to fight, despite the odds! Characters gain 3 temporary hit points when they miss with an attack.
> 
> ...


----------



## UnknownAtThisTime (Jan 7, 2011)

I think fortune cards are a fine 'mechanic' for what many DMs already do.  If I happen by a pack in the store, I likely will grab ONE to check them out and spring them on an unsuspecting player.  Beyond that, I think we all agree this feature is something any DM could do (or not) on their own.

My real point of this post though, is to say I dpon't think this is a topic we will be debating very long.  I just don't see this as a viable product, and I presume they will be only briefly produced.


----------



## UnknownAtThisTime (Jan 7, 2011)

MrMyth said:


> I'm sad they are basically just 'free bonus powers' - I had been hoping for something that would more represent random events and conditions that could be good or bad.
> 
> As it is, I wouldn't want to see PCs just running around with them. I could see some house-ruled approaches for their use: Handing them out in place of Action Points, or giving them out as a sort of consumable treasure, or whenever the PCs get one, so does the DM.
> 
> Basically - if I had them, I'd find a way to use them, but I don't feel the need to go out and buy them, especially for the price.




Ahh, I too assumed they would be more 'random' and less 'power-ey' in nature.  And I too never presumed the players would carry them to the table and be able to spend them "indiscriminately".  I definitely viewed them as AP type 'rewards' that may or may not be totally beneficial when 'revealed'.


----------



## kristov (Jan 7, 2011)

These cards represent WOTC jumping the shark for me - too much of an obvious money grab. I stood by them during the Essentials - this ends my purchasing of products.


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 7, 2011)

Wizards of the Coast may be the only company in the world that believes that selling customers packages of random things is a viable business model.


----------



## Scribble (Jan 7, 2011)

renau1g said:


> *ugh* and don't get me started on the Twitter boosts. How is it explained in game Scribble? (I ask you because you seem familiar with them). The gods have granted you a boon because you follow their Twitter update account? It's silly...maybe next if I friend them on Facebook I can get a auto-crit on my next attack, or if I follow them on LinkedIn I can get more buffs...




Nah the Twitter buffs are designed for the Weekly Encounters thing- so they're tied into the adventure.  

Like a slippery cavern might grant a +2 or something to powers that cause an enemy to fall prone...

Players I think can only use one or two a night? 



Alaxk Knight of Galt said:


> I'm derailing my own thread.  If you follow WotC on twitter you get in-game bonuses for your characters?  What sane DM allows this?




They're usually not huge bonuses so allowing them isn't really going to cause any kind of nightmare scenario.




BriarMonkey said:


> If they poured this same effort into something useful, such as giving us spell cards; monster cards; equipment cards; etc., then it might be of value.  Otherwise, this is just a money grab - pure and simple.




The problem I have with your statement is it's based on the idea of there being One True Way (TM) to play D&D...

If you like the idea of the cards, then it's no more of a money grab then any other product out there to buy.

The statement in effect can be applied to anything for sale.


----------



## Scribble (Jan 7, 2011)

Dungeoneer said:


> Wizards of the Coast may be the only company in the world that believes that selling customers packages of random things is a viable business model.




Except for all those other ones doing it. 

But: Wizards of the Coast may be the only company in the world that believes that selling customers packages of random things is a viable business model when said customers tend to flip out about any change to a business model that's been largely unchanged since the 70s...


----------



## Relique du Madde (Jan 7, 2011)

Correct me if I was wrong, back around the 4e announcement, wasn't there a fear that 4e was going to become "more like Magic?"  I guess this is proof that that line of thought wasn't quite wrong.  Good thing I stepped off the DnD train at 3.5 cause [ prediction] 5e looks like it will be pack based meaning that the players with the most expendable income will win the (card based) encounters due to the game's lack of an expansive monster manual (the cool monsters are in the monster booster set) and those who don't have expendable incomes will be stuck with basic attacks, spells and feats. [ /prediction]


----------



## fba827 (Jan 7, 2011)

MrMyth said:


> I'm sad they are basically just 'free bonus powers' - I had been hoping for something that would more represent random events and conditions that could be good or bad.




Yeah, I was also expecting/hoping "randomized events" rather than "randomized buffs"

_maybe_ they just so examples from the random buff types and that some random event types are also mixed in?  I have no evidence one way or the other, just holding on to hope I guess


----------



## fba827 (Jan 7, 2011)

Zaran said:


> Collectible cards have no place in a rpg.




To be fair, they aren't marketing it as collectible cards. cards yes, collectible cards no.  "Collectible cards" has an implication of buying a lot and picking and choosing what/how to build your deck, etc.  At least in early product podcasts about this, they mentioned a few times it wasn't meant to be collected, instead you open it at the table, and get what you get sort.  however, if they have since changed that stance, that is another story entirely.



having said that, the previewed cards are really randomized buffs.  i was hoping it would be more randomized events (i.e. both good and bad stuff to pcs).  so maybe they only previewed the good stuff and negative stuff for pcs is also mixed in. but the curiosity i had in them is gone if it is just buffs and not events.


----------



## TarionzCousin (Jan 7, 2011)

BriarMonkey said:


> If they poured this same effort into something useful, such as giving us spell cards; monster cards; equipment cards; etc., then it might be of value.  Otherwise, this is just a money grab - pure and simple.



I want a Birthday Card -- and it should contain a d20 that only rolls 20's. IS THAT TOO MUCH TO ASK?


----------



## hayek (Jan 7, 2011)

Scribble said:


> If you like the idea of the cards, then it's no more of a money grab then any other product out there to buy.
> 
> The statement in effect can be applied to anything for sale.




This. Why is it evil and underhanded for a business to try to make money?


----------



## Ktulu (Jan 7, 2011)

I think it sounds kind of cool and I'll be buying some to try them out.  

I fully suspect that if they sell well, we'll see stuff like encounter cards, and curse cards, etc...  And I'd be down with that.


----------



## renau1g (Jan 7, 2011)

Well I had a player try something similar once... good ol' cheating dice.

d6's with no 1's (another 6) when rolling up PC's... d20's with no 1 (another 20)... he wasn't allowed to bring his own dice after that...kinda sad actually...


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Jan 7, 2011)

My response is kind of Meh!. I may buy a pack if I come across some in a store on the rare occaasions when I get to a store, to try them out. 

Not sure otherwise. We will see it guess. This is what ENWorld is good for, after all. Other people try things out and let the rest of us know how it panned out.


----------



## Obryn (Jan 7, 2011)

I was pretty indifferent to them until I read that web page.  Now, I simply don't like the idea of them at all.

The idea of players buying randomized booster packs and constructing decks for an RPG is just ... well, I don't like it, and I won't be allowing it at my table.  I also don't think I'm exactly alone in this - I have a feeling this product is simply not needed for a game of D&D, and that most players and groups will pass them up completely.  I'm not giving up on WotC or anything silly like that - but I think it's a misguided idea, and I don't see it being very successful.  (Then again, at *$0.50 per card*, WotC may not need to sell that many to recoup their costs.)

I genuinely like the idea of having a deck of fortune cards for use at the table.  I simply don't like the idea of players getting in-game advantages by spending money to build a better deck of cards.

-O


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 7, 2011)

Obryn said:


> Then again, at *$0.50 per card*, WotC may not need to sell that many to recoup their costs.



I know, seriously.  Between these and the Gamma World cards, they must be printing them on solid gold.  Either that or China is buying up all the world's card stock*.



> I genuinely like the idea of having a deck of fortune cards for use at the table.  I simply don't like the idea of players getting in-game advantages by spending money to build a better deck of cards.




There are lots of cool things that you could do with decks of cards.  In fact I am working on a Desert Event deck for Dark Sun.  And of course there's the fabled Deck of Many Things.

But any player that shows up at my table with a box of buff cards is in for a shock.

* I believe this is the plot of the next Bond movie.


----------



## mudlock (Jan 7, 2011)

renau1g said:


> Well I had a player try something similar once... good ol' cheating dice.
> 
> d6's with no 1's (another 6) when rolling up PC's... d20's with no 1 (another 20)... he wasn't allowed to bring his own dice after that...kinda sad actually...




I have a (fair!) pair of 2d6s that include an 8 on one face.

Always a hoot to see people's faces when that comes up.

(And yes, the pair is actually fair. 1/6 chance of a 7, 1/36 of a 2 or 12, etc.)


----------



## Festivus (Jan 7, 2011)

I think I understand why LFR dropped the campaign cards now... because WoTC is going to make it so that you can play with these cards in public play.

Ugh.  Probably the straw that will break LFR's back in my opinion (if it's not already broken).  I was happy to see the rewards cards go... I'll be sad when they come right back in retail form.

This is something I for sure do not want to deal with.


----------



## delericho (Jan 7, 2011)

Well, there goes any hope I had for 5e.

And my attitude to WotC was just returning to neutral from the Character Builder debacle, too.

Dear WotC,

Why do you hate D&D?


----------



## Zaukrie (Jan 7, 2011)

Not sure I understand the angst. Use them or not, just like any other part of the game. I could see them being interesting in the chaos planes of any DMs' world....

I'll likely pass, or, if I do use them, I'd also let the monsters use them...which is what I might do in certain cases.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jan 7, 2011)

Dungeoneer said:


> Wizards of the Coast may be the only company in the world that believes that selling customers packages of random things is a viable business model.




Um, not really. It can be a great model though. MTG has been going strong for many years.



hayek said:


> This. Why is it evil and underhanded for a business to try to make money?




And this. They not only have a right, but a duty to thier shareholders to get as much revenue from thier IP as possible. The truth is that it doesn't matter if D&D is an rpg or a ccg so long as the money is right. This helps to insure the health and growth of the industry which is all that matters.


----------



## Festivus (Jan 8, 2011)

Zaukrie said:


> Not sure I understand the angst. Use them or not, just like any other part of the game. I could see them being interesting in the chaos planes of any DMs' world....
> 
> I'll likely pass, or, if I do use them, I'd also let the monsters use them...which is what I might do in certain cases.




My concern is in public play options... not home games.  In home games they are totally optional.  In public play... probably optional for players, but DMs have no choice but to deal with them (and the adventure writers too).

One of the arguments for the removal of the LFR reward cards was that they made crafting the adventures too difficult.

I too will likely pass on them.


----------



## Zaran (Jan 8, 2011)

Dungeoneer said:
			
		

> Wizards of the Coast may be the only company in the world that believes that selling customers packages of random things is a viable business model.




So true.


----------



## hayek (Jan 8, 2011)

Like'em or not, they are some definite power creep. I know their random, but they seem to be all good things. Why not make a character take a feat or give up a power in return for the option to use'em? I also think they'd be cool if they were given out as a magic item - a deck of these would make for an interesting redux of the Deck of Many Things in 4e terms - crazy, exciting randomness, but it's not permanent.


----------



## blalien (Jan 8, 2011)

I am absolutely amazed that people are talking about 5th edition now.  I doubt even Wizards is talking about it yet.  I am also not cynical enough to believe that they'd introduce random cards into the core rules.  Even with Gamma World, they made it very clear that the booster packs were optional.  If Wizards was going that route, they would have made these fortune cards collectible and much more powerful.

Now if Wizards really wanted to be a pack of jackasses, they would have released cards with new powers or magic items.  But then they'd have to be uploaded into the Character Builder anyway, completely defeating the purpose.  Ooh, maybe the cards could have unique codes on them, which you need to activate them online!  That would be wicked.


----------



## samursus (Jan 8, 2011)

Dungeoneer said:


> Wizards of the Coast may be the only company in the world that believes that selling customers packages of random things is a viable business model.




Believes???

*Looks at the success of Magic et al*

Knows.


----------



## Aberzanzorax (Jan 8, 2011)

fba827 said:


> To be fair, they aren't marketing it as collectible cards. cards yes, collectible cards no. "Collectible cards" has an implication of buying a lot and picking and choosing what/how to build your deck, etc.





Read the lines underneath the two bottm example cards:

"_An example of an Uncommon card from_ 
Shadows Over Nentir Vale "

_"A example of a Rare card from_ 
Shadows Over Nentir Vale"


*Sure SOUNDS collectible.*


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Jan 8, 2011)

It's a product I'm sure some will enjoy!  I, myself, am not a fan and will likely not be using it.


----------



## Almacov (Jan 8, 2011)

blalien said:


> I could see using them instead of action points.  If you add one level of complication, it would make sense to take away another.  But my players love their action points, and I don't think they'd want to lose them in favor of something random and uncontrollable.




Just looked at two of the sample cards, and what I'd be tempted to do is: Allow each player to pick a few of them that fit particularly well with their character's personality, then allow them to spend their action points on _either_ an extra action or their pick of one of the card effects. (non-random)

That actually seems pretty appealing if the range of effects supports a good number of personality types.

Though, again, it _would_ be much nicer to be able to buy a full deck. (And for a reasonable cost...)


----------



## Obryn (Jan 8, 2011)

fba827 said:


> To be fair, they aren't marketing it as collectible cards. cards yes, collectible cards no.  "Collectible cards" has an implication of buying a lot and picking and choosing what/how to build your deck, etc.  At least in early product podcasts about this, they mentioned a few times it wasn't meant to be collected, instead you open it at the table, and get what you get sort.  however, if they have since changed that stance, that is another story entirely.



That was what I had remembered, too, but they have indeed changed their stance.  When you start talking about pre-built decks, trading cards, and the like - it's definitely a collectible sort of thing which rewards players for purchasing additional boosters and stacking their decks with rare cards.

Also interesting is the part where they're non-optional for organized play.



			
				the link said:
			
		

> Fortune Cards are available in 8-card booster packs with differing levels of rarity (common, uncommon, and rare), and serve as another avenue for excitement at the game table. Players can crack open boosters of cards just prior to participating in a game session, *or come to their game with pre-built decks. *With each booster, a player’s tactical options for their character during the game alter and expand in interesting new ways. _Integrated into all Wizards Play Network programs and other D&D organized play games in 2011_, Fortune Cards create an instant, inexpensive purchase for players on the day of a D&D event at your store. *For players playing at home, Fortune Card decks can be customized to suit a player’s character in an ongoing campaign as well. Players can also collect and trade cards with their friends as they build their Fortune Card decks*.




-O


----------



## Mr. Wilson (Jan 8, 2011)

Once again, this is something that in theory I should like, but recent WoTC comments makes me unlikely to buy.

First, I want to point people to this thread: http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-fan...dex-cards-fly-setting-plot-collaboration.html

I've been using this idea since May, and it has been a huge hit around the table.  Each player draws two cards from a deck at the beginning of the game, keeps one of them, and may hold on to them week to week if they like the card, but don't get a chance to play it.  

Most of the cards have little impact on combat itself, but are fun character and plot hooks.  I think I'm upward of 75ish cards created, so while there may be some repeat, you'll go months at a time without seeing the same card played.

Indeed, in each of the last two campaigns, a card being played between characters has impacted the campaign in insanely fun ways (in Star Wars, it created a love interest NPC out of a bounty they were hunting, and in Eberron a huge plot twist occurred involving an NPC the party was initially friendly towards).

The fact that they want each player to have a deck, if I'm reading this correctly, really makes it unappealing to me.


----------



## fba827 (Jan 8, 2011)

Aberzanzorax said:


> Read the lines underneath the two bottm example cards:
> 
> "_An example of an Uncommon card from_
> Shadows Over Nentir Vale "
> ...




When I think of a collectible card system/game, rarity is a feature of it, but (to me) not a defining criteria, merely that some cards are, well, rarer than others in the pack. (but maybe i just have a skewed perception and definition)

HOWEVER ....

After rereading the link, particularly the portion that Obryn quoted ( http://www.enworld.org/forum/5421556-post56.html ), I do agree that they changed the direction on it (from it's originally stated purpose) and it is in fact being marketed as a collectible card system, but for reasons other than rarity; once you talk about collecting, trading, and building decks, yeah, you've crossed that line into a feature that i would consider defining of such a card system.

You win this one, but next time.... next time....!!! *shakes angry fist*


----------



## Kelvor Ravenstar (Jan 8, 2011)

I also am a big proponent of SabreCat's thread for plot twist cards. I've got around 160 cards in my own deck for my gaming group, with effects culled from a number of similar products and threads.

But, I don't think I'll be using the Fortune Cards in my home campaigns, what we've seen so far are only combat effects, and not very interesting ones either. I'll probably pick up a few packs for the WPN Encounters program, but that's assuming that my FLGS actually orders some in, and I doubt they will.


----------



## delericho (Jan 8, 2011)

hayek said:


> This. Why is it evil and underhanded for a business to try to make money?




It's not. However, with this product it is clear that the issue of what is good for the business is the primary motivation, and the question of what is good for the game is a much lesser consideration (if it is being considered at all).

D&D is (or was) a collaborative game. Game balance is about trying to ensuring that nobody is overshadowed by anybody else, because that's not fun (and wasn't eliminating the not-fun one of the key parts of the 4e rollout?).

The structure of this product means that the player who spends the most will have the best character, and probably not just slightly. They're sacrificing game balance for money, and that's why this is not a good thing.



blalien said:


> Even with Gamma World, they made it very clear that the booster packs were optional.




Due to the much more "wahoo!" nature of Gamma World, there was a place for the boosters: at a one-off session, everyone gets 1-3 unopened boosters, open them at the table, and build their characters based on the cards they get.

I absolutely would not use them for campaign play in Gamma World (nor play in a campaign where they were used). And where I would use Gamma World mostly for one-offs, D&D I use mostly for campaign play.



blalien said:


> If Wizards was going that route, they would have made these fortune cards collectible and much more powerful.




Remember how "Book of Nine Swords" was a test-bed for the mechanics of 4e? This is almost certainly a test-bed for the mechanics of 5e - if this product flies, expect to see the 5e powers available on a deck.

(And, yes, I would expect to see the 5e power cards having unique codes to tie in to the DDI. Also, virtual boosters available through the DDI. And, probably, some powers being unique to each delivery method, with some of the best combos possible only by combining the two.)

Or, I'm wrong, and this is genuinely just another attempt at them improving our games. How I hope I'm wrong on this one...


----------



## JoeGKushner (Jan 8, 2011)

M'eh.

I'd rather see focus on setting material or stuff I'll actually use but it is a business and they're going to try to maximize that profit level.


----------



## SkidAce (Jan 8, 2011)

I think I might buy enough for one deck.  Then let the party find the deck in game.  AS an artifiact.

"The Hand of Fate" as it were.  So they can draw a card to alter fate.  (And I will add slightly bad events if they are not already included).

Each time they use it...they alter reality and raise the artifiacts concordance...until...eventually...the UNTHINKABLE happens...


----------



## Dungeoneer (Jan 8, 2011)

I don't see this product, as it exists today, really taking off.  It's just completely extraneous to the game.  Why would you spend your money collecting expensive cards that add very little value to the game?  These cards aren't going to enable you to 'win' at D&D.

For this to work, the cards would have to be much more integral to the game.  As others have suggested, they would have to replace powers or in some other way be integral to a character.  

Incidentally, I really _really_ hope they don't figure that out.


----------



## Nytmare (Jan 8, 2011)

Lots of us have shuffled ideas like this into our own games, http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-fan.../271191-brainstorming-action-point-cards.html.  Some of us have even gone so far as to have common, uncommon, and rare cards!

I don't really see this as the death knell some people are fearing.  Yes it's a blatant marketing ploy to maximize sales, but so what.  I'm kind of bummed that they're turning character options into a marketable war of escalation between players, but I don't think that we have to worry about it making one player being noticeably more powerful than the others because someone dropped 50 bucks on cards instead of 5.

[EDIT]

In the end, I'm probably not going to end up buying these, or letting them into my game.  I kinda feel like our table is at maximum capacity for physical prop/resources, cards, marks, and tokens.  They seem so close to what we're already doing with our action points, I'll probably just end up swiping a couple of ideas and mechanics and calling it a day.


----------



## Bluenose (Jan 8, 2011)

I think I might pick up a few packs next time I'm going to be GMing 4e. Then, when someone manages something that makes people laugh/emote, rather than hand out a few XP, I'll crack a pack open and hand them one card. I like the idea of more random unexpected things happening; makes it more like real life.


----------



## OnlineDM (Jan 8, 2011)

I put up a blog post about this, as have many others.  Simply put, I plan to ignore these cards.  I won't allow them in games that I DM, and if I'm a player in a home game I would vote against their inclusion.

My main worry is about Living Forgotten Realms - if they're REQUIRED in order to play, that makes me sad.  I don't want to use them, so I would hope that I would be allowed as a player to just not use them or borrow some commons from someone and then not touch them.  It annoys me that I will probably have to allow them as an LFR DM; I'd rather not.  I wasn't a fan of the bonus cards that were legal in LFR until December 31, either, but I lived with them.  I prefer to hand out bonus points for players doing awesome things that can be cashed in to add or subtract one from a die roll.

Yes, WotC is trying to make more money here, and that's their job.  I don't expect this to work very well, at least based on the two cards they've shown so far (they look boring).  I do find it distasteful, but I don't really care all that much since I won't be using the cards in my home games.


----------



## blalien (Jan 8, 2011)

delericho said:


> Remember how "Book of Nine Swords" was a test-bed for the mechanics of 4e? This is almost certainly a test-bed for the mechanics of 5e - if this product flies, expect to see the 5e powers available on a deck.




Well then that's a good thing, because I have very little confidence these cards will actually sell.  My FLGS has three unwrapped boxes of Gamma World boosters sitting in the corner, collecting a thin layer of dust.

What you will probably see in the near future is your FLGS requiring you to buy Fortune boosters to play in their events.  Which I have no problem with, because they go through a lot of trouble to organize these things.


----------



## Riastlin (Jan 8, 2011)

OnlineDM said:


> I do find it distasteful, but I don't really care all that much since I won't be using the cards in my home games.




While I agree with you on the point that they are not for me, I think calling them distasteful is a bit harsh.  Unnecessary?  Sure.  Boring?  Perhaps.  Detrimental to fun?  Possibly.  Distasteful?  No.  But of course, it all depends on one's definition of distasteful.  

I do have to agree though that I kind of hope they are not successful since as others have suggested they might lead to a design decision for 5th ed.  Collectible elements are fine with me so long as they are not a core part of the game.  If feats/powers/traits/items/etc. suddenly require the randomly collected card, that would be bad.  It would take away from what makes RPGs great (imho), which is the theory that you can play whoever/whatever you want.  It would change it to "You can play whoever you want so long as you have enough money."


----------



## OnlineDM (Jan 8, 2011)

Riastlin said:


> While I agree with you on the point that they are not for me, I think calling them distasteful is a bit harsh.  Unnecessary?  Sure.  Boring?  Perhaps.  Detrimental to fun?  Possibly.  Distasteful?  No.  But of course, it all depends on one's definition of distasteful.




Sorry, I wasn't trying to use overly harsh language.  I meant that the idea that players who are willing to spend more money to get the "good" cards would have an advantage over the other players is distasteful.  If that doesn't turn out to be the case with these cards, great!  But from my previous years of playing Magic: The Gathering, I worry that this might happen.

The requirement to buy a pack or two of cards every time you want to play in an organized event that previously didn't require such purchases would also be distasteful if it happens.  However, that might not happen, either.


----------



## Cyronax (Jan 8, 2011)

*YES!!!* 








*NO!!! *


----------



## blalien (Jan 8, 2011)

I'm so sick of Chuck Norris jokes.  If you actually read about him you'll find out he's kind of a terrible person.


----------



## Cyronax (Jan 8, 2011)

blalien said:


> I'm so sick of Chuck Norris jokes.  If you actually read about him you'll find out he's kind of a terrible person.




Oh chill out.


----------



## SteveC (Jan 9, 2011)

Dear WotC,
Please make some more products I actually want to buy. It's been a while, but I still love your core product... you're just not making anything for it anymore.

In case you're wondering, this ain't it.


----------



## Ryujin (Jan 9, 2011)

Any of you, who are familiar with the Torg roleplaying game, will be familiar with a similar concept of card use. Our gaming group played Torg for quite a long while to the point that our usual DM, who was a player during the Torg campaign years, became quite enamoured of the concept.

As a result he has tried to incorporate them into several other games. He used them in D20 Modern and, most recently, put a huge amount of work into adapting them to 4e. Rather than giving out Action Points, he gave out these cards.They seemed to work well enough but, given their highly variable nature of use, I opted to not continue their use in my own campaign when he stepped aside from running the game. I thought them to make it too hard, to balance encounters. They also added a mechanic that screws with the benefits of many Paragon Paths.


----------



## renau1g (Jan 9, 2011)

delericho said:


> It's not. However, with this product it is clear that the issue of what is good for the business is the primary motivation, and the question of what is good for the game is a much lesser consideration (if it is being considered at all).
> 
> D&D is (or was) a collaborative game. Game balance is about trying to ensuring that nobody is overshadowed by anybody else, because that's not fun (and wasn't eliminating the not-fun one of the key parts of the 4e rollout?).
> 
> The structure of this product means that the player who spends the most will have the best character, and probably not just slightly. They're sacrificing game balance for money, and that's why this is not a good thing.




Well... to be honest, in 2e/3e (maybe 1e?) a player who bought all the splat books to build his PC could likely build a more powerful foe than just a PHB using player. So it's got precedent that players with deeper pockets can have more options (usually more powerful ones as power creep sets in). 4e is great with the CB allowing access to all source materials so if someone can afford that then they're all on the same playing field...this brings that back unfortunately.


----------



## Nytmare (Jan 9, 2011)

renau1g said:


> Well... to be honest, in 2e/3e (maybe 1e?) a player who bought all the splat books to build his PC could likely build a more powerful foe than just a PHB using player.




I don't think that I was ever part of a group where the books weren't a shared resource though.  This product is basically set up so that each player has  (I'm assuming) their own private stack of cards geared around their own character's schtick.  Sure people can share/trade the cards that they aren't using, but sharing leftovers is an entirely different thing.

Pretend you have a 100 page splat book that you payed 20 bucks for.  That's 5 cents a page.  Let's pretend some more and say that you could maybe fit 10 powers on each page.  That's half a cent per power, and you could share it with all your friends.  Heck you could even have two characters in the same game using the same power at the same time.

If this ends up working for them, that's 50 cents for a 1/10th of a page of a book that no one else can use.

[EDIT] 

God, the full weight of that is just hitting home.  It's bordering on brilliant, I just wish they were saving it for a game I didn't want to play.


----------



## Dice4Hire (Jan 9, 2011)

I think this could be optimizer heaven, but will have very little impact on the game

I know if I were to do them, I would have my own deck (as the DM) and hand them out occasionally, to be sued that session.

Unfortunately, it looks lik Amazon Japan is not selling htem.


----------



## delericho (Jan 9, 2011)

renau1g said:


> Well... to be honest, in 2e/3e (maybe 1e?) a player who bought all the splat books to build his PC could likely build a more powerful foe than just a PHB using player.




Obviously, I don't know how it worked for you, but in all the games I have ever been involved in, the way it worked was that if a sourcebook was available for use at all, it was available for use by everyone.

(In fact, I would never have allowed a book to be used in my games unless _I_ personally owned a copy, and could therefore vet it for balance. From there, of course, it's a short step to ensuring that everyone gets to access/use it.)

I simply would not have played in a game that allowed a player to bring in a sourcebook for his exclusive use (or one where the book was supposedly open for everyone, but the player 'forgot' to bring it to game sessions, so no-one else could actually check it).


----------



## jbear (Jan 9, 2011)

Is the idea of random cards changing elements of an encounter attractive to me: Yes

Is the idea of these cards potentially placing the narration of the adventure temporarily in the PCs hands to a certain random degree as per the aforementioned Purple Plot Collaboration Cards interesting to me: Yes

To a limited degree I already use cards based on the Torg cards as a reward system.

Do I find the notion of random player power cards interesting ... less so, but I can imagine my players might enjoy it. But it is not something I would ever let be in the players control, as in 'wait, I'm going to pull something from my random deck!'

Where I disconnect is at the price. $4 for only 8 cards. I don't know how expensive cards are to produce but that seems expensive. When something like this becomes interesting is when you have a deck of 50-100 different, random interesting stuff that rarely ever repeats itself. If we were talking about a 60 card deck for 9 or 10$, and the cards were DM designed random 'more than just power-stuff' like encounter terrain, hazards, wandering monsters, plot cards, improvised challenge cards, negative or favourable change in conditions, and random powers mixed in together I'd be well interested.

The product as it stands does little more than inspire me to print out my Torg-based cards to make a proper random deck, MSEditor the Purple cards designed by Sabrecat and add my own ones. 

All that said and done ... do we have an example of what one of these cards actually offers?


----------



## Aberzanzorax (Jan 9, 2011)

jbear said:


> All that said and done ... do we have an example of what one of these cards actually offers?




Yes. Read the link. There are two cards at the bottom of it that are examples.


----------



## Aberzanzorax (Jan 9, 2011)

delericho said:


> This is almost certainly a test-bed for the mechanics of 5e - if this product flies, expect to see the 5e powers available on a deck.




And that's my big concern. I'm okay with 4e, but prefer 3e/pathfinder. If WotC goes in this direction for 5e, it is basically creating a game I will never play.

The randomness of it is fine with me (like the card versions of deck of illusions and deck of many things....both of which I own).

BUT the collectible nature of it...that makes character creation about money spent rather than CREATING A CHARACTER YOU WANT TO ROLEPLAY (never mind the power issues). This takes the utilization of a "character" one more step away from his story and choices he makes/events that happen....and one more step toward being a game piece.

I can see it now:

"Guys, I just got 2 rare powers from my new deck and one ultra rare feat! I'm so powerful now!"

DM: "Ok, let's roleplay how you developed those powers in game."

Player: "Naw, let's roll some dice! I wanna try em out!"


Aberzanzorax: *Is sad.*


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jan 9, 2011)

Randomness is fun!

Collectability makes me want to throw up.

Yay for Drama Decks, for Decks of Many Things, for Gambler Rolls, for Wandering Prostitute Tables! Yay for randomly rolling origins in Gamma World! 

Boooooooooooo for "This is a Rare Expensive Doxy from the _Whores of the Free City_ deck!" and "This is a Common Sly Pimp from the _Tentacles of the Illithids_ deck!"

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

It adds no value to the game for me. 

So I will use the Paizo GameMastery Decks instead.

Screw. This. Collectability. Noise.


----------



## DumbPaladin (Jan 10, 2011)

blalien said:


> I'm so sick of Chuck Norris jokes.  If you actually read about him you'll find out he's kind of a terrible person.




Two things: 
1) Every person is kind of a terrible person.  That's why we're all people, and not called "perfects" or "angels".

2) I'm not really sure what Chuck Norris has to do with a thread on Fortune Cards.  Is Chuck Norris actually the name of one of these D&D fortune cards, or did you just decide you wanted to try and hijack this thread?

As to the actual topic at hand: one point has been made that I feel most strongly.  It's wonderful that WotC thinks that creating products that require collecting (and lots of purchasing) in order to keep up with other people who are doing so (we're talking about people using Fortune Cards in their D&D game, here) should become a basic part of D&D.

So officially, we'd like D&D to become something where people without disposable income will be at a disadvantage to the idle rich?

I have one finger on both of my hands that can succinctly describe how I feel about this mentality ...  but I am otherwise at a loss for words to describe how terrible this is.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Jan 10, 2011)

Nytmare said:


> Pretend you have a 100 page splat book that you payed 20 bucks for.  That's 5 cents a page.  Let's pretend some more and say that you could maybe fit 10 powers on each page.  That's half a cent per power, and you could share it with all your friends.  Heck you could even have two characters in the same game using the same power at the same time.
> 
> If this ends up working for them, that's 50 cents for a 1/10th of a page of a book that no one else can use.




Your point still stands, however...

$20 = 2000 cents / 100 pages = 20 cents/page.
20 cents/page / 10 powers/page = 2 cents/power.


----------



## The Human Target (Jan 10, 2011)

Zaran said:


> Collectible cards have no place in a rpg. I believe WotC has forgotten that an rpg *is about being a character in a story* and not about pushing miniatures around a game board and flipping the next card in a deck to see what happens.




I thought it was about being a character in a game.

And for the record- I have zero interest in buying random booster card sets for 4E. There is plenty of cool stuff already, no need to add more into my game in this fashion.


----------



## Cyronax (Jan 10, 2011)

DumbPaladin said:


> Two things:
> 1) Every person is kind of a terrible person.  That's why we're all people, and not called "perfects" or "angels".
> 
> 2) I'm not really sure what Chuck Norris has to do with a thread on Fortune Cards.  Is Chuck Norris actually the name of one of these D&D fortune cards, or did you just decide you wanted to try and hijack this thread?
> ...





I put a picture of TSR's D&D Deck of Many Encounters from the mid-1990's. I said 'Yes.'

I then put a picture of a power card, a la, Pokemon or Magic style. I just used a Chuck Norris-mock card since it was in the same style. I then said 'No."

I was saying that I prefer 'event' cards that actually help build the game with more than just a few fiddly powers or bonuses. That was directly related to the discussion at hand. 

So no dude I wasn't threadjacking.


----------



## Zaran (Jan 10, 2011)

The Human Target said:


> I thought it was about being a character in a game.
> 
> And for the record- I have zero interest in buying random booster card sets for 4E. There is plenty of cool stuff already, no need to add more into my game in this fashion.




No, it's about being a character in a story.   That's why you have one guy who works out a plot and gives a narrative. That's why you make a character with motives and quirks.  If I wanted to take the story out of DnD I would play Warhammer Quest or some other dungeon crawl type board game.


----------



## TerraDave (Jan 10, 2011)

Also meh. 

As pointed out upthread, a small number of RPGs integrate cards in fun ways to really let the PCs (or GM) do things they couldn't do with other mechanics. 

These aren't really integrated into the game (overall, a good thing) and they do pretty much excactly the same kinds of things that existing class abilities, powers, feats, and magic items are doing now. 

No thank you.


----------



## Riastlin (Jan 10, 2011)

OnlineDM said:


> Sorry, I wasn't trying to use overly harsh language. I meant that the idea that players who are willing to spend more money to get the "good" cards would have an advantage over the other players is distasteful. If that doesn't turn out to be the case with these cards, great! But from my previous years of playing Magic: The Gathering, I worry that this might happen.
> 
> The requirement to buy a pack or two of cards every time you want to play in an organized event that previously didn't require such purchases would also be distasteful if it happens. However, that might not happen, either.




I agree in principle that a character should not be based upon how "lucky" one's "draws" were or how much money that person had to spend, which is why I agree it would be terrible if they made power/feat cards a requirement for 5th Ed.  As for requiring cards to be purchased for organized events, I'm kind of "meh" about it.  I don't want the fortune cards, I don't plan to buy them.  If they make them a requirement to play at a gameday, I just won't play at the gameday.  I'll simply vote with my wallet.

As for the earlier comments about the splat books (not referencing OnlineDM here), I think the point is that while its true that anyone would ordinarily be allowed to use the same subset of books, its highly probable (in my experience) that the person who owns "The Splat Book of Ninjaness" is going to be much more likely to use something from it than the guy who only gets to reference it on gameday.  Technically, they can both use the book, I just don't think its as likely they'll both use it.  As with all things though this will vary from group to group.


----------



## renau1g (Jan 10, 2011)

So they just threw up a few more onto their January & Beyond page.

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (January and Beyond)

"An exclusive to game stores, Fortune Cards provide a new, optional dynamic to the game. Here's how they work:

    * At the start of each encounter, shuffle your deck and draw a card.
    * You can play one card per round. It requires no action to play. The rules on each card state when you can play it and what effect it has. A card takes effect just once unless it states otherwise, and you discard the card when its effect ends.
    * You can have only one Fortune Card in your hand at a time. At the start of each of your turns, you can do one of the following:
          o Discard the card in your hand and draw a new one.
          o Draw a new card if you don't have one in your hand.
          o Keep the card that's in your hand if you haven't played it.

Easy enough! Now, let's show off a few of these cards and what they can do:"

So...what do they do you ask?

1) When you use a close or area attack, omit one creature from the attack. 
2) Adjacent target is hit by melee or ranged power, change target to you instead. 
3) When you are bloodied by an attack or hit while bloodied gain a Stroke of Luck. That can be used to re-roll any d20 roll you make.

Wow...so 1/round I can add these buffs in and I can make my deck however I want? 

The last one is rare, the first is common, and the second is uncommon.


----------



## Aegeri (Jan 10, 2011)

Personally I feel Fortune Cards are the dumbest thing that Wizards has done so far. Given that Wizards have done a lot of dumb things to compete with this in terms of "Dumbest thing that Wizards has done", this is a pretty solid and remarkable achievement. I actually don't have a complete irrational hatred of cards either - I feel they work and brilliantly so in gamma world. But do I need to add another layer of complexity onto an already complex and variable filled game like DnD is (compared to the base simplicity of gamma world in particular)? No. No I do not.

Not only are they overly expensive, compared to magic cards but you don't get a good chunk to start like gamma world. I mean I can add a few boosters to gamma world if I like - but I don't have to by any means if I don't want to do so. These don't feel like a well thought out or integrated piece of the game, while again Gamma World's cards are definitely both. Not to mention that you can use fortune cards much faster than you can the alpha mutations/omega cards of GW (Minding you can also have more of these active in GW in fairness). 

I won't be using these in any of my games and have no interest in using them myself in any way.


----------



## Nytmare (Jan 10, 2011)

renau1g ala January and Beyond said:
			
		

> "An exclusive to game stores..."




If this is being combined with an effort to prop up the local game stores and they don't sell these online I will, somewhat begrudgingly, not completely hate the idea.


----------



## ki11erDM (Jan 10, 2011)

I like them.  I wont buy them.  If the players bring them I will use them while I DM.


----------



## smtwtfs (Jan 10, 2011)

As someone touched upon early in the thread, LGS that run LFR and the D&D Encounter events have an opportunity to make a buck from a customer (if these events rule the use of this product). Of course LGS are not forced to sell this product if doesn't fit their business model.

Last time I played LFR it ran for 3-4 hours. I believe the D&D Encounters are designed for an hours worth of play, once a week, for 12 weeks. These events are free (*) at the cost of the LGS's time and available space. Maybe this is WotC way of trying to give back to the LGS for their cooperation while the customer has something tangible from the event. Sounds like a win - win - win for everyone (WotC - LGS - customer).

I've no issue in paying $4 for an hour (or more) worth of entertainment; hell I even get to keep 8 playable cards to give away or trade as I please. The last time I went to a movie or a concert it cost me $8-$25 and all I got was a paper ticket for my scrapbook.

The real questions: will I purchase this product for a home game? Most likely not since the DM, other players and myself create our fun using the <insert your favorite RPG here> system.
.
Do I believe 8 cards (Fortune Cards, Gamma World) vs 16 cards (MtG) per pack for the same price feels odds; yes I do.
.
.
Just because it cost you $4 (plus tax) doesn't mean WotC makes $4 per pack; doesn't mean the LGS pockets $4 per pack.
.
.
.
* A LGS where I played LFR last, charged me $2 for the game. This money went to the DM in the form of a store gift certificate. The LGS was upfront and I had no issue of this practice.
.


----------



## The Human Target (Jan 10, 2011)

Zaran said:


> No, it's about being a character in a story.   That's why you have one guy who works out a plot and gives a narrative. That's why you make a character with motives and quirks.  If I wanted to take the story out of DnD I would play Warhammer Quest or some other dungeon crawl type board game.




Story if for sure part of the DnD game, but its a game first and foremost. 

But I don't wanna derail the thread.


----------



## Festivus (Jan 10, 2011)

I'd hope there will be some deck building rules... otherwise stacks of nothing but what you need will be in there.

I'd also hope that the DM would get to use them too...one for each bad guy otherwise the power curve just tipped farther to the players.


----------



## OnlineDM (Jan 11, 2011)

I talked to my local store owner about these, and he said that while he doesn't have any more information than we do yet, he believes there's no way these cards will be REQUIRED for Living Forgotten Realms since it's not run through Wizards of the Coast any more.  And he does not want them to be required for LFR, either - he wants to keep LFR cheap.  Our store, like the one mentioned by smtwtfs upthread, charges players $2 each to play and gives the DM a $10 gift certificate for running the game.

The game store owner also said that he will ALLOW the use of fortune cards in LFR games, and that he's expecting that they'll probably be required by WotC for Game Day events (which have been free in the past).

This is about what I expected, based on the original announcement.  Having seen the additional cards that WotC has previewed, they seem more interesting than the first two, but I still have no interest in them for my own games.  I'd prefer they not exist at my LFR table, either, but I know that I won't have a choice on that one.


----------



## OnlineDM (Jan 11, 2011)

Festivus said:


> I'd hope there will be some deck building rules... otherwise stacks of nothing but what you need will be in there.
> 
> I'd also hope that the DM would get to use them too...one for each bad guy otherwise the power curve just tipped farther to the players.




My guess is that the deck building rules will be like Gamma World - at least 7 cards in the deck, no more than 2 copies of any particular card.  That's just a guess, though.

As for DM use, I'm guessing it might be a common house rule, but probably not an official rule.  Again, just a guess.


----------



## DumbPaladin (Jan 11, 2011)

Cyronax said:


> So no dude I wasn't threadjacking.





I agree.  I wasn't referring to your humor post ... but to the very non-sequitur post that followed it. 

Thanks for pointing that out, Aberzanzorax.


----------



## jimmifett (Feb 14, 2011)

Ok, so i've bought and played with these, and have a review of them:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/301293-fortune-cards-review.html

So, here's what they are in a nutshell for the TL;DR crowd:
Minor random bonuses during play (mostly combat, but some useful for skills).

thats it.

no extra powers, no additional character options for those that spend the money, no "rich kid 'wins' DnD" scenario, no plot hooks, no burning of prior/current editions, and no killing of cute animals (unless they have rather large fangs).

The are rules for building decks. You can only have 1 card in your hand at a time, so there are no "combos", let alone "game breaking pun-pun mega combos of doom". These are *vaguely* similair in concept to LFR Rewards.

All the effects are small. A +2 here, a re-roll of an at-will there, shift as a minor over there, here a CA, there a +2 to speed, everywhere something minor. eieio.

You have 3 groups of cards.
Attack (bonuses useful for attacking / killing things)
Defense (bonuses useful to be harder to hit / take less damage)
Tactics (bonuses usfeul for movement and positioning)

You can have a communal deck everyone draws from, or personal decks.

Personal decks can be any size, but must be a multiple of 10.

For each 10 cards, you must have a minimum of 3 cards from each group.
10 cards: 3 from each group min.
20 cards: 6 from each group min.
30 cards: you get the idea

You can only have duplicates of cards if you exceed 10 cards.
You can only have one copy of a card per 10 cards.
So if you have 3 "card name xxx" cards in your deck, you better have a 30 cards deck.

Every encounter, you shuffle your deck (re-adding any discards from the prev encounter)

usage:
At the start of your turn, you can do one of these:
a) Draw a new card if you don't already have one.
b) Keep the card in your hand if you haven't used it.
c) Discard you currently held card and draw a new one.

Each card states when they can be used. A lot are used at the start of your turn (after the 3 steps above), some are usable after a triggered event occurs.

Example:
Some CardName XXX
Use at the start of your turn.
Gain a +2 to your first attack roll this turn.

You have to use it at the start of your turn, you can't make your roll and then decide "hmmm, that +2 might make it hit". I have used this twice and rolled a hit on the die, and the +2 was just icing on the cake to hit.

Next turn up, i have no card in my hand, so i get to draw a new one. Most rounds, i'd sit on a card while waiting to be in what i thought would be a good oppurtuniy to use it.

Are they worth the cost? Meh, I dunno. It brings a little extra fun at the table, I enjoy opening new stuff, wether it be cards from other CCGs or minis. My FLGS sells them for $3 a pop, so it's definately in the "casual purchase" sweet spot for me.

Are they the pokemon of DnD? No, I don't feel the urgent need to catch them all, or at least, i'm not going to spend a huge chunk of change on the secondary market to get them all. I'll likely trade with others at my store. I don't really see a high resale value of them.

If you just want to add some fun to a game, pitch in and buy 2 packs for the table as a communal deck.

The overreaction to these cards is really overblown.


----------



## MrMyth (Feb 14, 2011)

I think the problem is that "random minor bonuses" is, in many way, equivalent to "piles of new free utility powers". 

Now, most of the time, players won't control what card they drew and whether it is useful or not - so nothing gamebreaking there. 

The bigger issue is if someone has built a deck of effective, reliably useful rares. All my attacks are "Mind over Metal" - letting me always have my attacks target Will instead of AC. We've got daily item powers or encounter powers that do that sort of thing - but now players can basically get it on nearly half their attacks, for free. 

Various Defense and Tactics cards can give you a "Stroke of Luck", which is a free reroll - usually when something bad has happened to you, but that includes stuff like provoking OAs, which you can set up. So suddenly a player is potentially generating free rerolls every other round, and a reroll is at least equivalent to an encounter power, if not a daily. 

Will players with a handful of random Fortune Cards unbalance the game? Not really. But ones with an optimized deck _will _have a pretty direct increase in power level. Now, that is not _inherently_ a bad thing. 

But the players in my group are already pretty effective - no one really needs a power boost, especially one that adds even more fiddly bits to the game. 

I can see uses for Fortune Cards outside of the way WotC is presenting them. But the default use for them just isn't something I have any need for. It might for others, and that's fine, but I don't think one can really declare them as having no impact on the game, either.


----------



## jimmifett (Feb 14, 2011)

MrMyth said:


> Various Defense and Tactics cards can give you a "Stroke of Luck", which is a free reroll - usually when something bad has happened to you, but that includes stuff like provoking OAs, which you can set up. So suddenly a player is potentially generating free rerolls every other round, and a reroll is at least equivalent to an encounter power, if not a daily.




There are only 8 cards that grant strokes of luck, only two of those are triggered by OA, and only one of those is triggered by YOU instigating the OA (the other requiring an ally to be attacked by an OA).

So, to get your reroll that you set up yourself via OA, you have a 1/10 chance at the start of encounter of drawing that card. You can't have multiples unless you increase the deck size by 10, and then it's only 1 additional copy per 10 cards, so it's always 1/10 chance at the start of the encounter. More copies means more potentially oppurtunities to use, but after that first use, your best chance of getting another copy is 1/19, 2/29, 3/39 etc.

Then you have to actually trigger your use of the power, sitting on that card for however many rounds until you use it. During those rounds, you aren't using other fortune cards.

So, under best conditions, you have 8/10 cards in your deck granting a re-roll. Of those, only 1 card can you activate through your own actions by triggering an OA against yourself, and one card an ally can trigger an OA for you to use that other card.

Once that card is used, it is discarded for the rest of the encounter. The rest of the stroke of luck cards have trigger conditions beyond your ability to control, so you have to sit on that card and not use any other fortune card bonuses that encounter, or discard it to try for another fortune card, and then it is gone the rest of the encounter.

Sounds fine to me.


----------



## Scribble (Feb 14, 2011)

jimmifett said:


> Sounds fine to me.




So you're saying when you DO actually benefit from these it's rather fortunate?


----------



## jimmifett (Feb 14, 2011)

Scribble said:


> So you're saying when you DO actually benefit from these it's rather fortunate?




Exactly. The times i've used them at the start of my turn for hit bonuses, I hit on the d20 roll anyway. The tactics cards seem more useful so far.

The one I like is the one that allows you to move through enemies (albeit granting him a +2 to OA against you) so that you can get past the large brute blocking the hall and set up flanking for the rest of the party.


----------



## jimmifett (Feb 14, 2011)

MrMyth said:


> The bigger issue is if someone has built a deck of effective, reliably useful rares. All my attacks are "Mind over Metal" - letting me always have my attacks target Will instead of AC. We've got daily item powers or encounter powers that do that sort of thing - but now players can basically get it on nearly half their attacks, for free.




You are only allowed 1 copy of a card per 10 cards, so you can't have a deck filled with "Mind over Metal". So you get it maybe once an encounter. The larger your deck to have more copies significantly reduces your chances at being able to use a second copy.


----------



## Dice4Hire (Feb 15, 2011)

jimmifett said:


> You are only allowed 1 copy of a card per 10 cards, so you can't have a deck filled with "Mind over Metal". So you get it maybe once an encounter. The larger your deck to have more copies significantly reduces your chances at being able to use a second copy.




I don't think you are answering the point. I think the point is having all rares in a deck, and if that will be more powerful than a deck of mostly commons. I have looked on Troll an Toad and seen a lot of the cards, and an all-rare deck could be a lot better than all commons, though it vareis.

Another thing that worries me is making decks for specific characters. Like my rogue having lots of CA granting cards. Could be pretty strong.


----------



## boolean (Feb 15, 2011)

jimmifett said:


> You are only allowed 1 copy of a card per 10 cards, so you can't have a deck filled with "Mind over Metal". So you get it maybe once an encounter. The larger your deck to have more copies significantly reduces your chances at being able to use a second copy.




The "1 copy per 10" rule is specific to LFR. The general rules only require that at least 3 out of every 10 be each type.

So, for non-LFR play it is in fact legal to have four of the same card.


----------



## jimmifett (Feb 15, 2011)

Dice4Hire said:


> I don't think you are answering the point. I think the point is having all rares in a deck, and if that will be more powerful than a deck of mostly commons. I have looked on Troll an Toad and seen a lot of the cards, and an all-rare deck could be a lot better than all commons, though it vareis.
> 
> Another thing that worries me is making decks for specific characters. Like my rogue having lots of CA granting cards. Could be pretty strong.




Nothing big there. The thief build of the rogue can get CA nearly every single round with the right move action at-will.

Also, keep in mind DnD is a cooperative game, not mtg. No deck is going to "win" dnd. If anything, the DM will just throw harder monsters at you. Or, the DM can simply state that if fortune cards are going to be used, they be used in a communal pool, and then any "strategy" of a deck is out the window.

On a side note, seriously, what is with the vitriol against paper cards (or anything wotc happens to release), or players with money, or a company trying to make money? Is it simply a case of cheese being moved or is there something deeper? It's not like you are _required_ to buy anything to play, aside from MAYBE a PHB1 or one of the Essentials books, and more often then not there are pregens or you can borrow a book. Does it really matter if someone has more damage output in combat? The enemies still die, and the players still get an equal share of XP when the battle is over. If anything, you get combat over with faster and can get back to actual roleplaying and story telling.


----------



## Evilhalfling (Feb 15, 2011)

jimmifett said:


> On a side note, seriously, what is with the vitriol against paper cards (or anything wotc happens to release), or players with money




Because it separates players into groups based on disposable income.  The cards allow you to do more "cool things" based on the amount of real world money you spend on them. As a person with a small gaming budget, and who abandoned CCG in 2000, I have no interest or money to invest in a deck. So I resent the fact that a person could build the same character I have, but with the equivalent of an extra utility power which could be used multiple times in an encounter.  
When running a game, I don't want to discourage my more casual players from playing the game, or slow down combat further with the additional set of minor tactical options.  Some of my players would handle it quickly, others not so much.


----------



## Storminator (Feb 15, 2011)

I've been thinking about some kind of hero points, like M&M. I used to hand those out for good jokes, cool RP moments, bringing beer, etc. Action points are too powerful for that, but Fortune Cards look perfect. I'll be bringing some to my next game.

PS


----------



## jimmifett (Feb 15, 2011)

Evilhalfling said:


> Because it separates players into groups based on disposable income.  The cards allow you to do more "cool things" based on the amount of real world money you spend on them. As a person with a small gaming budget, and who abandoned CCG in 2000, I have no interest or money to invest in a deck. So I resent the fact that a person could build the same character I have, but with the equivalent of an extra utility power which could be used multiple times in an encounter.
> When running a game, I don't want to discourage my more casual players from playing the game, or slow down combat further with the additional set of minor tactical options.  Some of my players would handle it quickly, others not so much.





While I can't speak for other players, the cards do not slow me down at all, requiring only a moment of additional thought based on the card in my hand if freshly drawn, otherwise, i've had the entire time during other player's turn to decide how I want to use the card.


Without venturing _too_ deeply into some form of political or sociological tangent, is it one's job as DM to limit content allowed in a game based on the financial capabilites of one's self or the other players? Does a DM have reasonable justification to exclude 1st party material such as PHB 2, 3, the Powers books, adventurers vaults, or the essentials lines based soley on other players have not yet had the oppurtunity to buy it themselves and only have PHB 1? Is there reasonable justification for first party DDI material to be excluded since it's available only to those that wish to pay for DDI. There, one has clear cut feats, classes, races, powers and actual game changing character creation options available only to those that pay a premium.

If one is not willing to exclude DDI character creation content, or supplements beyond PHB1, it is hypocrisy to then exclude something like Fortune Cards that grant minor buffs simply because it costs money, or those with larger expendable income can afford to purchase cards of a rarer nature by bypassing randomized booster packs.

That goes for any game system that has more than just a core rulebook. If one wants extra options, such as those found in Pathfinder's Advanced Player's Guide, that person pays to get those options and advantages beyond the core options that everyone else has. Other players have that same ability if they so choose to invest their money as such. If they choose not to exercise it, one does not penalize or ostracize the person that did choose to buy those extra options.

If a source of 1st party options does not interfere with the campaign world (for instance, reasonable arguments can be made about excluding psionic or another power source as it does not mesh with a given campaign world, or specific deities, specific themes or specific artifacts) then I can see no reasonable justification to deny payed content in any cooperative system.


----------



## OnlineDM (Feb 15, 2011)

I disagree that it's hypocritical to limit content. D&D is a cooperative game. I personally feel that it works best when the members of a party are of a similar power level overall. If you have super-optimized characters alongside characters that are built purely based on flavor with no thought toward stats, combat is going to be less fun, in my opinion. Either the optimized character will be bored, or the non-optimized character will be dead (or fleeing).

Restricting feats and powers that are overpowered relative to others is reasonable (if the players trust the DM, of course). The same goes for restricting things like Fortune Cards.

Again, this is solely my opinion, but I firmly disagree with a player who says, "Well, this is official material, Mr. / Ms. DM, so you have to allow me to use it." No, no I don't. And if there's that antagonistic relationship between the player and the DM, that's not a healthy dynamic.

I would hope that the DM could approach the player and say, "Listen, I know that you think Feature X is really cool, but it's pretty overpowered relative to the options that you see at the rest of the table. I think we'll have a better game if you choose something other than Feature X."

To be clear, I don't think the DM should spring this on the players as a surprise - they should know that the DM is an advocate of balance among the party and therefore not every piece of official material will get the green light. Also, this veto power should be used sparingly. But if something is going to let one player outshine the others most of the time, I think that diminishes the fun of the game as a whole.


----------



## jimmifett (Feb 15, 2011)

That's when a DM makes informed decisions to allow the player the ability to use something they find exciting, but perhaps puts limitations on usage. For example, while the non-LFR deck rules do not appear to limit dupe cards at the moment, simply enacting that rule from LFR at the table significantly eliminates abuse. The DM could tell the player "sure, we can use those, but we're going to use them as a communal deck." Finding a way to tell a player yes, but with conditions, is a lot more fun for everyone than saying no. Good DMs know something is overpowered when they see it and will try to reign it in. Fortune cards are far from over powered provided good deck construction rules.

What I am addressing is the out right dismissal of a product based on flawed perceptions of it's implementation and goals, some sort of envy or jealousy of others ability to bypass randomized distribution with money, that somehow money equals an uber-deck, or a company's desire to make money via an interesting product that may have demand. I'm looking at a list of all the cards, and the rares do not seem to be any more powerful on average that uncommon or common.

Where is the discussion of how useful they can be, ratings of each card, how they can be improved, alternate rules and uses, etc? Instead, for the most part, there is a dogpile of "big evil corporation making a profit", "rich-kid jealousy", and other "have vs have not" gnashing of teeth without even trying the product. Pre-conceived judgements adults kept telling us not to make back when we were growing up.

Then again, this is the intertubes and is to be expected i guess... 

Bottom line, players and DMs, give it a chance. Maybe you'll still hate it, maybe not, but don't use class warfare arguments to dismiss them as that argument just doesn't hold water with these.


----------



## MrMyth (Feb 15, 2011)

jimmifett said:


> There are only 8 cards that grant strokes of luck, only two of those are triggered by OA, and only one of those is triggered by YOU instigating the OA (the other requiring an ally to be attacked by an OA).
> 
> So, to get your reroll that you set up yourself via OA, you have a 1/10 chance at the start of encounter of drawing that card. You can't have multiples unless you increase the deck size by 10




I have to absolutely admit that I had missed the "no multiples" rule. It doesn't seem to be listed in the "Build Your Own Deck" rules they posted - just the limit on how many of each type of card you can have. 

My assumption was that you could stock up on 3 of each of those that you mention (3 Defense cards to gain SoL by triggering OAs, and 3 Tactics cards go give the same to an ally), plus 4 attack cards. 

If you are restricted to only one of each card, that definitely does reduce the abuseability. I still think there are enough reliably effective cards you can still get a significant boost from their use, and pretty much guarantee you are getting a free benefit (equivalent to an encounter utility power) every round of every combat... but it isn't quite as easy to do so as I had thought. 

Looking over later posts, it looks like that restriction is part of LFR. A good call, I think, on their part - much as I've seen many decent homebrew suggestions for useful ways for DMs to use these cards. 

Neither one, though, really changes the fact that as WotC has produced them, they can provide a significant boost in power level over what the game assumes is appropriate.


----------



## No Name (Feb 16, 2011)

20 commons
19 uncommons
41 rares

How does this compare to MtG?


----------



## blalien (Feb 16, 2011)

No Name said:


> 20 commons
> 19 uncommons
> 41 rares
> 
> How does this compare to MtG?




The latest large Magic set, Scars of Mirrodin, has 249 cards: 104 common, 58 uncommon, 52 rare, 15 mythic rare, and 20 basic lands.

An MTG booster pack costs $4 and has 16 cards: 1 marketing card, 1 basic land, 10 commons, 3 uncommons, and 1 rare or mythic rare (rare 7/8 of the time, mythic rare 1/8 of the time).

To get a specific card, on average you'd need to buy 11 booster packs for a common, 20 for an uncommon, 60 for a rare, or 120 for a mythic rare.

A Fortune Cards booster pack also costs $4 and contains 8 cards: 5 commons, 2 uncommons, and 1 rare.  That means to get a specific card, on average you'd need to buy 4 booster packs for a common, 10 for an uncommon, or 41 for a rare.

So, even though you don't get as many cards in Fortune Cards as in Magic, in general you are much more likely to find the specific card you want.


----------



## Badwe (Feb 18, 2011)

the fortune cards don't appeal to me, they don't seem interesting or worth the complexity.

on the other hand, the gloom deck or whatever it's called from the shadowfel boxed set sounds great to me, i would buy boosters of that. i'm also intrigued by the deck of many things they're promising for Gardmore abbey.

in summary: some cards are good, others are bad. i have no greate explanation for why i feel this way.


----------

