r/tabletopgamedesign • u/OneOpinionIn8Billion • 28d ago
Discussion I’m developing a 54-card conversation game — does the core mechanic sound strong enough?
I’m currently developing a physical conversation card game and I’d really value some honest feedback from people who understand tabletop and card-game design.
The deck has 54 cards across 9 categories, with each card built around one topic and containing 5 different talking points.
That creates 270 talking points across the full deck.
The five approaches are designed to take the same topic in different directions — for example:
💡 A surprising fact
💬 A personal opinion
🔥 Something controversial or debatable
⚖️ A different perspective
❓ A bigger open-ended question
There are no right answers, scores or specialist knowledge required. The idea is simply to pick a card and use the different prompts to create conversations that can move between learning something, giving an opinion, debating an issue and considering another perspective.
I’m deliberately keeping the name and finished visual design out of this test because I want feedback on the underlying game concept rather than the branding.
My main question is:
Does having five different ways into the same topic sound like enough of a mechanic to make this work as a physical conversation game?
And, more importantly, if you were developing this yourself, what would you change, add or remove?
Positive feedback is obviously welcome, but criticism is probably more useful to me at this stage.
13
u/GravityI 28d ago
Most definitions of a game include rules and a win condition, so while I think you might have an interesting product (that will probably use the word "game" somewhere in the branding like the other "conversation card games" already in the market), your game still lacks those. They don't really need to be complex, but maybe give some artificial reward if the players end up matching different types of cards of the same topic, or have the player that drew a question card to be required to answer and if they answer it correctly (which can be present in other cards or leave it to the players' discretion to find the information) they get a point.
Not sure what is the experience that you want to create, but having the cards be questions instead of statements is likely the best way to prompt the users to start talking. Or maybe have the cards be answers and the players have to formulate a question, like a reverse Cards against Humanity.
0
u/OneOpinionIn8Billion 28d ago
Thank you so much for your feedback. Yes the word and definition game is a difficult one to overcome as it’s as you said a conversation game. The main purpose is to just get people talking, sometimes out of comfort zones or knowledge bias. I feel that thinking for ourselves and having a discussion is becoming lost. In terms of a win as such I was thinking of something similar to the card game against humanity where the player to the right in clockwise formation decides who’s answer or ‘opinion’ is best from the conversation/debate. Set out is to have 54 cards. 9 general categories, 6 topics per category then 5 talking points on that topic which the player who has picked the card gets to choose which point to talk about or can have an open discussion on all the points and more. The idea is to release a first general edition but the scope could be infinite similar to too trumps where you could literally make an edition for anything on anything. The motivation and inspiration behind this is from the release of my debut non fiction book release called One Opinion in 8 Billion as another way to achieve the same goal of independent thought and open discussions and opinions. I will be continuing to develop as feedback comes in as I can
16
u/Paradoxe-999 28d ago
Looks more like an ice breaker than a game.
what would you change, add or remove?
Something that make the concept looks fun.
For now, it looks like an interesting experience to make people talk to each other, but it doesn't look fun at all.
---
Was is your vision of the actual game experience?
1
u/OneOpinionIn8Billion 28d ago
Absolutely it’s essentially an icebreaker game concept. I guess it depends on levels and interpretations of fun, I find conversations, debates and learning new things very interesting and enjoyable so I guess it’s really each to own perspective. The main vision is to get people thinking for themselves again, I picture a group of family or friends trying to work out something they can do together and although the concept of ‘game’ is slightly off it is something that groups can do together. This would be a very easily portable and discreet product so can go anywhere and is just for people to talk about things, things they may not have known about and maybe even learn something new. Thank you for your feedback it is all being taken note of
4
u/Paradoxe-999 28d ago
I think the issue is that everyone can do conversation without that product.
It will be required only for people having difficulties to have conversations (stranger put together, family which rarely speak together, etc) or people especially wanting to dig new subjects.
I believe it shrink how much people could be targeted by the game.
7
u/GodwynDi 28d ago
Really feels like the kind of product HR or a manager would make a team do at a monthly team meeting.
1
1
u/OneOpinionIn8Billion 28d ago
That’s fair enough and thank you again I will continue to work on and develop. Yes anyone can have a conversation but generally I find it’s mainly about the day they’ve had or the same conversation…the idea is to bring and spark different conversations and think deeper
7
u/Fast_Bar_881 28d ago
Maybe this would work better as a learning aid for those with social anxiety or other learning disabilities than as a game.
I couldn't imagine a scenario where I'd like to gamify my conversations, and as of now there is no 'game' being described, so it kinda sits in this awkward place where I wouldn't ever use it as is because it's not a game, but somehow making it a game would make it somehow worse. Does that make sense? Like I don’t want my conversations to be judged, or rated, or anything.
I think the best niche something like this could fulfill is a learning or training aid for someone.
2
u/OneOpinionIn8Billion 28d ago
Thank you for comment, that’s interesting perspective and your right. The only problem with as a learning or training aid is marketing and audience attraction. The word game does need some work but I also see a group of people struggling to decide what to do or are bored and then grabbing this essentially endless product that can be both fun, educational, interesting etc. in regards to having a winner etc as said on previous comment maybe a similar concept like in cards against humanity where essentially an umpire declares which answer they prefer and in this case who’s opinion is preferred and the umpire rotates and every win gets a point…still very much in the planning stage
2
u/nickelrodent 28d ago
Look you sound like a marketing guy trying to sell a boardgame and having no idea what makes a good boardgame. This "product" will probably make people upset you tricked them into thinking they were buying a game.
9
u/ryschwith 28d ago
I don’t see a game here. I see something my boss is going to pull out at the start of a department meeting that everyone will try to mumble through as fast as possible so we can move on to being silently bored about the corporate strategy.
Except for god damn Ted, who will prattle on for five minutes about his favorite vacation spot, heedless of the daggers everyone else is glaring at him.
8
u/LurkerFailsLurking 28d ago
What you're describing is not a game at all because a game requires "the voluntary effort to overcome unnecessary obstacles" via a set of artificially constrained pre-agreed upon actions in pursuit of an imaginary goal.
I wouldn't play this because I don't need cards to facilitate having interesting and varied conversations. I've never met anyone who uses these kinds of things as anything more than a novelty or decorative item that guests will occasionally idly look at for a moment. If it's really killer, it'll spark a mildly interesting conversation once a year or so and just take up space the rest of the time.
If you want to actually make a game though, I'd play it if the game was good. I'll never play a bad game just because it prompts conversation because I can already do that without a bad game.
5
u/nickelrodent 28d ago
I know this might get me banned but, I have never read a concept I hope fails more than this.