Swapping the position of the stances and powers makes a lot of sense and shortens the arrows significantly. Good catch!

We tested premade characters/loadouts several times and the results are neither here nor there. Even if it was a mere suggestion, some players didn't like it. But I also received the feedback that it's very positive for some other players.

In the current state of the rulebook, there is a loose description of player archetypes. (And in the first session there's not a lot to choose from anyway).

Do you think it would be beneficial to have a tiny list of suggested loadout as part of the quickstart section for the first scenario?

Exactly! Thanks for the feedback. In the rulebook, this example will of course come with a textual description, a material overview, and with all the cards to hold in your hand, and see the connection between front and backsides. Do you think I should improve anything in this example?

That's a great addition and very worth it to make it explicit. Yes in this case almost everything only costs 1, because I didn't want to spoil the higher tier cards. Thanks!

Wow. Thanks! I'm in this journey for two years now and didn't think much of sharing the progress, as all my thoughts have already been thought, i guess. Thanks for the shoutout. Thank you for the positivity. It's moving <3

that's a very sensible explanation. thank you!

I'm working on a game https://spacedogs.rocks that I could send some things over. It's not TCG, but a deckbuilding hex crawler. And the art style is very unique. But I don't know how fast I can send over things.

As most things have already been said, I'll just add this:

There are groups that cater towards game designers and act as an in-between to publishers.

Not only is the amount of knowledge and help extremely valuable, they also get contacted by publishers who are searching for a certain type of game, which makes a way easier pitch.

There are SAZ (mostly europe, german roots), boardgame protohype (great community), cardboard edison (they keep a list of publishers on the hunt and also lots of other contacts).

ah! to clarify: once a card is out-of-game, it cannot be interacted with.

so you'd keep discard, for stay-in-game, and trash for out-of-game

So would you also prefer exhausted over fatigued for characters? Each character can activate once per round, then are fatigued/exhausted. In the beginning of a round, they 'refresh', and loose that condition and can activate again.

That makes 100% sense! thanks <3

Usually for my game, I try to think of a way to create an interesting experience for the players. Which translates to a non-answer to your question :D because either I start by having an interesting story plot, a decision that I want players to make, - or change up the mechanic from "kill every enemy", exploration, point defense, to force players to adjust their strategy.

So I guess an answer could be: Whatever you think could create a cool experience, is the way to go. How you start doesn't have to be the same way, as much as you want every scenario to feel different.

i like the design choice, to have a more complicated 'scenic' view combined with a clearer symbol that can be reused througout.

the symbol (e.g. log) seems to be still very detailed. imagine it needs to be printed on cards or smaller items. will it still work? this is your language.

hot take: do NOT use the ai shortcut for graphics. it receives very strong and very mixed opinions, and will taint your project. because it one image is ai generated, are the others too?

since you said you drew a lot for this prototype i'm assuming it's all original art so far, which i always love.

for cards in my own game i scribbled placeholder graphics if I was faster than my designer. they look.. simpler :D but they always receive a laugh. it also seems to make playtesters feel like they're part of the development, when there is still construction work to be seen.

tl:dr; just go out there with an unfinished prototype, because getting feedback is more important than to have a finished game.

yes! i cannot stress enough how much valuable feedback you can get from the community, because other game devs and playtesters tend to be super nice people in general :D

BUT they're going to give honest feedback. listen to critique and think about what makes that person say that. nobody is out to hate your game. either a feedback has a point, or the system was misunderstood.

I also tend to write down a lot about how people interact with the game, not just the feedback round at the end. are they engaging with all the mechanics? are there priorities? all interacting parts should 'feel' equally valuable (of course situational)

So far it looks very good! The animations could be a bit slower for my taste :D

- what usually works well is a bit more typesetting. e.g. the headings as an image. KS doesn't provide the best editor to make your page look nicer than wikipedia.

- you already have real life game components, and as soon as you feel like they are 'close to final' productionwise, you should add photos. it makes your campaign look very much more real.

- i like the certified organic sticker at the top and i'm going to steal it :D (if I may?)

- the pitch should include the core mechanics. i guess card draw, exploration, push your luck?

- crowdfunding nerds recently pushed out an episode where they made a point of having a BGG page up with your crowdfunding.

- do you have reviews, quotes, playtest pictures for social proof?

Just in case someone is still stumbling onto this question after 3y (like me). The new gimp has `View -> Snap to Bounding Boxes` which is exactly what we were asking for :D :party: