B on the grounds that the basic act of trading implies card for a card On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Kerim Aydin <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > On Wed, 14 Nov 2012, Jonathan Rouillard wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Tanner Swett <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > (d) Leave everything as it is, > > > (e) Make the contest easier by lowering the win threshold from 12 > > > different cards to (perhaps) 8 different cards, or > > > (f) Something else? > > > > As for the second question, I vote (f). Just trading cards isn't > > enough for the contest to be interesting - you'd have to willingly let > > someone win for it to happen. Maybe add a mechanic that would make > > cards change hands? Duels, maybe? I say we make a pit and bet on > > gladiator fights. Either that or we take up our own swords and prey on > > the weak. > > This is a valid point. As long as the only thing to do with cards is > trade them, AND as long as there's nothing else of value, why trade? > Only one person can win and all cards are destroyed, and all trades are > essentially of equal value - no motivation. > > I'd leave the Trading Card game as is, and hope to develop some sort > of other economy; e.g. so that someone working on collecting Rubles or > whatever can use cards to get rubles, and vice versa. > > Also note: I'm personally waiting to see if this becomes an official > Rule, so waiting for the promotor, to propose ideas like this. > > -G. > > > >
