Setup.

Dragon.

Kind of fun. Why don't you just try it out with each rule?

>>15902571
And you could call it Dorfs and Dragon.

Does the turn order go:
-Dragon
-Dorf
-Dragon
-Dorf

or

-Dragon
-Dorf
-Dorf
-Dorf

Because that changes the dynamic quite a lot.

>>15902597
I have no one to try it out with.

>The dragon dies if he ends his turn adjacent to 2+ dwarves, while a dwarf dies if the dragon enters his square.
I'm guessing diagonals don't count as "adjacent", right? 'Cause otherwise, the dwarves could just hunker down in their starting corner and win automatically.

>>15902611
Well, I was looking at.
-Dragon
-Dorf
-Dragon
-Dorf

Because if all three dwarves move at the same time, it might be too easy.
Then again, if the dragon renders squares useless, perhaps having all the dorfs move would be better.

>>15902617
;_;

>>15902628
Start with one per piece per corner instead. Then none of the pieces have advantage.

>>15902628
Well, a dwarf has to move each turn. So, staying there might be hard.

Unless I have all the dwarves start in different corners.

>>15902628
i believe the dragon will always be able to be on the outside of the dwarves cluster. if i'm wrong please show me an illustration

>>15902641
No one enjoys fantasy around where I live, there is also the fact that I live alone, on a farm, in the middle of nowhere, but enough about my Ranger-esque lifestyle and more about the game.

hmmm... this reminds me of THUD. Especially with the dwarf figurine in op's pic.

This game makes me think of THUD, from the novel with the same name by Terry Pratchett. Basically it's Trolls vs. Dwarves. I don't know if it have been made into a real game or only exists in the novel though.

>>15902681
>>15902693
THUDmind

>>15902656
>>15902651
Cornermind

we should run a few simulation about is there an always win tactic or not

>>15902658
This actually depends on the meaning of "adjacent" which isn't obvious in this case. If diagonals are adjacent then the dwarfs will most likely win unless the player makes a stupid error. Otherwise it's basically impossible for the dwarfs to win unless the dragon makes an error.

>>15902693
The game exists. As far as I know it's quite good actually.

>>15902707
Oh and b.t.w. this means the game is pretty much fucked in either case.

>>15902656

i would paint and use that ram dwarf for any dwarf character, shit

>>15902703
Alright, I'm down for some simulations since the always-win tactic thing was bothering me.

>>15902681
>>15902693
Thudmind. Anyway, i did a little bit of googeling, and i found this: http://www.thudgame.com/rules. I don't know what to do with it, but it might be interesting to check out.

>>15902707
>>15902718

What if the dragon also kills when adjacent?(Including diagonals)

>>15902707
What if the dragon had multiple segments, but the dorfs have to be adjacent to his head?

Also, making the square 5x5 might alleviate some of the problems with movement.

So I'm playing this on photoshop and have following rules:
- Not moving diagonal
- Adjacent means being in front and behind or above and below

So far the dragon's been trying to corner a dorf but then the other dorfs would move so that, if he killed one he would lose right after that.
So he moves back, dorfs try to surround him, back and forth back and forth.

>>15902707
ah yes i understand now
>dwarf dies if dragon enters square
makes more sense to me if it were instead
>dwarf dies if dragon ends turn adjacent

Alright, I got another idea concerning the dragon.
Say he is only 3-4 segments long, but the body segments has to follow the head in the same way that game "snake" does.

The head kills when adjacent to a dwarf.

The only way to kill the dragon is to have 2 dwarves adjacent to the head. (At the end of the dragon's turn would be impossibly hard)

Adjacent includes diagonals.

>>15902741
Then the dwarfs are fucked. Whatever their position is he can manoeuvre to kill one without being close to two.

>>15902748
How would these segments work?

The dragon is three piece long, two tail pieces and a head, the head shoots fire at the square in front of him and two dwarfs need to be touching the dragons side to kill it.

>>15902808
but the dwarves have the same amount of movement, and how does "not invincible" equal "fucked"

>>15902808
>Segments

They block the square on which the dragon was.

>>15902808
Instead of having a dragon snake along on a string, you make little tokens, one for a head and the others for the body.

Make him 5 squares long, maybe. Each time the dragon moves, you only move his head and place a body token where the head was.

Also, I had an idea. The dragon's body can't be moved through, but if two dorfs were on opposite sides, they could cut through a body segment.

>>15902823
This might work.

>>15902836
>Cut through a body segment
That is brilliant.

OP here.

If we get this going, I'll make the set.
3 dwarves, dragon, leather bag and all.

>>15902852
Cutting through a body segment on the dragon would also limit how long the dragon is. I'm not sure what that would mean for the body segments left behind, though.

It also makes sense with two dorfs needing to be adjacent to the head to win. They cut through it, y'know?

>captcha: izoncen thinketh

How about this?

If you're already in a tavern there's some easy Dwarf and dragon tokens for ya.

>>15902887
The dragon got to move twice, though.

>>15902827
The dwarfs have only one third of the movement form what I understand from this her opening post...
>The dragon makes the first move. Then 1 dwarf and so on.
This means that each time the dragon moves you must choose two dwarfs to not move. meaning the dragon is just going to walk up to you, nab one dwarf when the other two can't stop him then repeat it two more times. Assuming he kills by proximity and doesn't need to move into the space. Even more so if diagonals are adjacent.

Let's forget about the diagonals bit as they aren't that important here.

Look at it this way, the dragon moves, no dwarfs are adjacent to him, one dwarf moves into adjacent, one is close enough to move into adjacent next turn.

Now it's the dragons turn if he kills adjacent dwarfs now the first one is fucked if he kills after he moves he kills the second dwarf that hasn't moved, if there is a third dwarf there to stop him he just moves out of the first dwarfs way forcing the dwarf player to move the first dwarf or lose him next turn. And this can't be stopped because in that case there wouldn't be a third dwarf placed near enough to stop the dragon from killing the second dwarf.

The ideas with the dragon segments might actually make the game work though.

>>15902878
Should the dragon be able regenerate?
Mybe if he ate a dorf or should he get larger overall when eating a dorf?

Move all 3, require all 3 to kill dragon?

Is there any way to run simulations for this game? Like a board game balancing program?

>>15902930
Alright, say the dragon has to move in to eat + the segments cause a barrier wherever he has been.
It would balance out for the whole 1 dwarf at a time thing.

>>15902930
how would dragon segments fix the problem of dwarves not having enough mobility, unless their purpose is to decrease the dragon's mobility?

>>15902934
I dunno, I'm personally against it. If the dragon is using his body segments to block dorf movement, the dragon player gains a lot after killing one dorf which is 1/3 of his win condition. It's a bit too powerful.

>>15902960
Only if a programmer-bro makes one.

>>15902950
1 dies, game over?

What if the dragon kills 2 squares in front of him (fire), all three dwarves move once a turn and it takes a dwarf to move on to the head-tile to kill the dragon?

>>15902823
Also, bringing this back up again, the "breathing fire" bit is genius.

When you move the dragon, it breathes fire and you can point the head in one of the other three directions, but can't turn it until you move again.

>>15903002
So the dragon only kills 1 square in front of his head?

>>15903014
Yeah. This is assuming there's no diagonal movement in the game.

>>15903034
What if there is?

>>15903039
Then it would make more sense for the dragon to kill dwarves by entering the square.

>>15902971
Precisely. It doesn't let the dragon stay "in place" (walk back and forth between two tiles) because he is constantly blocked by himself, which makes it harder for him to position himself in a dwarf kill-spot.

However if indeed the dragon did not kill by being adjacent that might be enough to overweight it specifically because, body segments or not, if the dwarfs manage to form a line of three or a reverse of their starting position (move corner dwarf one up and one left, which they can do before the dragon reaches them) then its up to two possibilities. Either they kill the dwarf because he just got close enough to a group of two of them, or he goes for one of the outer dwarfs but can't kill him instantly and giving the dwarf enough time to escape and reform the formation before he gets dangerous again.

Now in this situation if we count in body segments this might actually cause the dragon to be forced into a position where he is killed, otherwise probably the dragon can retreat time after time until he is cornered.

>>15903053
So body segments are a go!

>>15903063
I drew up a dragon also except I added flames that take up their own square :D

>>15903053
The next question now is: Diagonal movement or no diagonal movement?

Also, how many body segments?

Assuming the dragon will be able to breath fire.
Can he only kill the dorfs with fire or could he just eat the damn things?

>>15903053
Diagonal movements are allowed.
The dragon may only visit each tile once, after which it is blocked by a body segment.
He dies if he is unable to move.
Has to go on to a dwarf tile to kill.

>>15903109
>Segments
16, since that is the number of squares.

>>15903109

Looking at these,
>>15903063
>>15903104
I think head, body and tail are okay.
Maybe not, if the dorfs should be able to cut the dragon anywhere.
If they might only be able to cut the tail, for whatever reason, then that's okay, but without his body the dragon would be dead anyway.

>>15903111
I think it's fair to say he an eat them if he moves into their square

>>15903109
>how many body segments
Personally I think two or three is enough unless you expand the board. Without diagonal movement the dragon is in both cases restricted to the same movement patterns though. With four you get more restrictions but it might be a bit too much for a small board like this.
>diagonal movement
What about diagonal kills?

>>15902571
>Now here is what I was wondering about, should the squares that the dragon visited become inaccessible? In that case, if the dragon can't move for a turn he is dead

Saharan Razortail variety: Named for the desert terror, the Saharan Razorail hunts by flying far from its lair deep in the desert to any of the various oases in its territory, using its flame breath to flush prey out of cover. As it turns out, this regular burning of the dead vegetation at the oases is a primary reason for their abundant growth.

This legendary beast is represented on the game board as leaving a trail of fire underneath it and below every square it moves through. Because the dragon can fly, it is unharmed by its own devastating ground attack.

>>15903142
I think the dragon should be a serpent.

So is this a bit like Snake where you die if you touch your own body segment/you die if you get cut off before boxing in something or reaching a side?

If moving diagonal is allowed, then the dragon may pass through the dorfs.

>>15903121
Hurmmmmm...
I assume dwarfs cannot go into tiles the dragon already occupied?
My prediction is that in the move in which you place the first dwarf next to his head (or is it possible to kill the dragon using dwarfs on diagonals?) he kills it before you make the next move. I.e. no-win situation for the dwarfs.

>>15903210
Wouldn't dragon would be dead in this case?

>>15903210
Doesn't that actually kill him? That image... It means he both started and ends his turn next to two dorfs.

>>15903210
But then he dies on the next turn, because two dwarves are now adjacent to his head.

New question/topic: What would be the best way to turn this into a betting game?

Dragon is dealer, and last person alive wins the pot? And if more than one dorf players manage to kill the dragon, they split the pot evenly?

>>15903246
You know your priorities, man.

If each dwarf is controlled by a different person, at least two of them have to cooperate to win.

>>15903246
So how does the Dragon ever win?
Also what's to keep the dealer from being a dick and just going after the person he doesn't like first?

>>15903246
I think the two player's who kill the dragon split the pot 50/50. If the player's can't kill the dragon, split the pot dealer/survivor 75/25

>>15903287
Doesn't matter, you are playing for money.
It would work, though. The players pool money, "the dragon's hoard", and play for it.

>>15903305
>You're playing for money
>Doesn't matter
What?

And if there were 3 dwarf players how would they move?

dragon -> dorf 1 -> dragon -> dorf 2 -> dragon -> dorf 3 etc?
Dragons kills everything forever because he always knows who moves next.

They have to decide between themselves who moves?
How?

>>15903315
He kills the guy he doesn't like, that guy doesn't get to share in the victory if the other dwarves kill the dragon.

>>15903322
Yeah, it should be a 1v1 game.

PROGRAMMERBRO HERE.
When you guys get a solid set of rules down, post it on 1d4chan or something. At that point, I will program something up and use my VAST KNOWLEDGE of artificial intelligence to run millions of simulations on game balance.

>>15903363
>If we get a solid set of rules down
FTFY

>>15903363
>At that point, I will program something up and use my VAST KNOWLEDGE of artificial intelligence to run millions of simulations on game balance.
"Does that mean you're going to brute force it?"
"...yes."

Maybe two dorfs should move for every 1 dragon move?

>>15903371
well, looking at it there's a very finite amount of moves. As far as I can tell you could just map out each sequence and see if the game is degenerate and to what level.

>>15903384
Which is why I expected you were going to brute force it.

Anyways, this kind of reminds me of Wizard Battle. That's a good thing, because Wizard Battle was badass.

>>15903405
Wizard Battle?
I don't believe I've heard of it. Care to explain?

>>15903416
Only real thing it has in common is that it's a /tg/ homebrew with relatively simple rules and fantasy themes.

http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/8941465/

>>15903363
Brute force it....with ALGORITHMS! Nah, seriously though I got this bigass book full of algorithms for AI's and I haven't even used half of them. This is kind of a good chance to crack some out.

>>15903451
speaking of which, we should archive this thread, too.

>>15903460
No reason to bother til we have an actual rules set instead of just vague 'that'd be cool'-ness.

dragon-dorf-dragon-dorf,
dwarves move up to 2, or diagonally?

>>15903470
I disagree. We got the basis. It'd be good to have it in a format that can be unearthed a while later in case people decide to work on it.

>>15903322
What if the Dragon could move twice, then a single player moves once, then the Dragon twice again, then another player?

-4x4 grid.
-1 Dragon.
-3 Dwarves.
-Dragon leaves body segments that block off squares.
-2 dwarves finish their turn next to the head = dragon dies.
-The dragon kills when he goes into a dwarf's square.
-Dragon's head can move diagonal and so can the dwarves
-Turn order is Dragon,Dwarf,dragon,dwarf etc.

Go ahead, Programmerbro, the stage is yours.

>>15903562
Samefag, by the way.

Bruteforce it so we have something to work with. If this ruleset works then yipdeeyayfuck we got ourselves a game, if not then we know that we have to keep on working.

>>15903561
Maybe Dragons can only move diagonally, whereas Dwarves can only move in lines?

>>15903585
Dragon would get stuck in corners like a champ

Anyone archive this yet, for posterity's sake, or shall I?

>>15903643
You can do so if you wish.

>>15903582
Why don't you try playtesting it?

Boot up MSPaint and give it a go.

>>15903742
A program would do every possible outcome in mere moments, showing us if the game is unbalanced.

Plus, programmerbro showed interest in doing it.

>>15903791
And you think he's 1) here and 2) going to get it done any time soon.

How cute.

>>15903886
I know, that is why I followed your advice and am currently playing.

>>15903562
Do the body segments block off even the dragon?
Early in the thread somebody mentioned having a limited length dragon. Admittedly, I skipped about half the thread (read the first and last 25%), did that idea get vetoed?

>>15903905
Make it block the dragon too.
As for the length, there is no maximum for now. Just have him grow with each move.

Archival complete!

http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/15902571/

>>15903943
Nice!

Right, so apparently I sold that book I was mentioning at the end of last year.
Good thing I made up a semi-brute force algorithm in my head just now.

>>15904275
Go Go Programmer bro

>>15904275
Programmerbro, fuck yeah!

Bump for Programmerbro

Dragon > dwarf 1 > dragon > dwarf 2 > dragon > dwarf 3?
Seems like a very unbalanced game, the dragon has loads of turns to go and nom up any dwarf that just moved.

Dragon > any 2 dwarfs > dragon > any 2 dwarfs

Is a better idea, but does each dwarf have to move at least every-other turn then or can one dwarf idle around for X turns?

>>15904623
Dragon>Anydwarf>dragon>anydwarf

Anyways, we shall see how programmerbro's test does, then we can decide on a new mechanic.

>>15904665
Hmm, that could make for an intresting game with strangers then, having to discuss who should go each turn

and remember strangers, only two dwarves need to be alive at the end to get that treasure....

>>15904686
But, it's a 1vs1 game, so far we have not decided on a more than 2 players mechanic.

Good news: My rabbit figured out he can get my attention by pressing the red light on the power strip.
Bad news: I don't save my work very often
Bonus news: Visual Studio 2010 has work recovery for just this situation.
Total progress lost: 5 minutes

>>15904770
Is that fatal?

>>15904783
We are not doing this game in FATAL. Our dragon's anal circumfrance is irrelevant.

>>15904770
You THINK that it isn't...

>>15904800
I think it's pretty relevant, brotato.

>>15904770
>Bonus news: Visual Studio 2010 has work recovery for just this situation.
>just this situation
"Hey man, this Visual Studio thing that we're working on, people are going to be putting a lot of time into making stuff, right?"
"Right, why?"
"Well what if somebody doesn't save very often and then his rabbit turns off the power to his computer?"
"Good point, let's code a feature to prevent that from being a problem."

>>15904829
I don't know why, but I lol'd.

>>15904770
>Good news: My rabbit figured out he can get my attention by pressing the red light on the power strip.

I lol'd.

This game has potential for /k/ommando friends in foriegn lands. I am monitoring this thread.

>>15904879
Orly? In what way does it have potential?

I like the concept

>>15904907
you could put it in a pocket and take it with you anywhere. Few pieces to loose that are easily replaced. Simple game is easy to teach. And it doesn't take much space to play. granted its not quite as versatile as a deck of cards but it still looks like fun.

Hey, look. The dragon is being a huge dick and encompassing all of the left/top walls, even though the code tells him to start in 1 tile????

fuck you, dragon

>>15905146
>mfw because 0*[any number] = 0 and I just revealed myself to be the shittiest programmer/mathematician ever

>>15905146
dragon confirmed for troll tier game peace

>>15905179
>>15905179
>peace

>>15905212
I think that was his way of saying goodbye. He's leaving and forgot to toss in a comma.

I should have expected it from the dorfs...

There are under 10000 possible boards.

It is trivial to brute force this game.

Look! They're behaving! Now I can work on the AI!
>>15905409
Good, cause that's basically my plan

>>15905409
Actually, the true number of meaningfully distinct states is closer to 1000.

I know why this is happening, I just wanted to share that our dragon is a shapeshifter.

Clever girl...

>>15905625
Dragon just went quantum...

>>15905625
Problem just came up. When does the game check to see if a dragon is surrounded? After each dwarf's turn, or after the dragon's turn?
In between each turn? The game becomes pretty easy as worded here

also the dragon keeps on growing heads DOES IT WANT TO DIE!?

>>15905780
It's a trap!

>>15905780
>The dragon dies if he ends his turn adjacent to 2+ dwarves
>his turn
Gotta follow the RAW, man.

>the dragon will also be a rope
>>15905625
>I'm a frayed knot

>>15905846
I meant to link to >>15903562 which states
>2 dwarves finish their turn next to the head = dragon dies.

That's the RAW I'm using here, but by yours, the dragon can never lose, I think. No matter what, the dragon will always be able to eat a dwarf before it ends it's turn.

Just want to throw two thoughts out here:
* Keep all alternate rule interpretations, use them as regional variations. The game is played in various places in the campaign world but different places often use different rules.
* In the same vein, think of alternate creatures
-Purple Worm + Kobolds
-Serpent + Goblins
-Kraken + Mermen

If it's going to be this simple, think of it as a fantasy tic-tac-toe.

Pick an outcome you want to be the normal one, and then make sure it is possible to do something really dumb and have it not turn out that way.

So...How is it looking?
Is the game broken and easily won?

>>15905952
I actually thought about 3 farmboys and a chicken.

>>15906150
But this is a game for three players.

Winner gets to fuck the chicken before supper.

>>15906150
If one farmboy is adjacent to the chicken, he dies?
That's a hell of a chicken.

>>15906216
lol
>>15906223
Well, I just assumed they tripped, smashed their face and ran back to their mother. Then again, a chicken that kills little boys is cool too.

I'm just waiting for programmerbro to inform us whether the game is more or less balanced. As soon as I get confirmation I can either begin working on the game with some materials that I have, or we can debate some more about what mechanics are best.

>>15906252
Dude, it's a game with like 1000 states, no randomness, and no stalemate condition.

The hard part is figuring out what the rules actually are. Figuring out who wins every time and how to do it is easy.

>>15906150
Not sure. When I said I could start working on the AI, I lied, since the movement code is broken. "Ghosts" are created an time anything moves beyond the first time.

So to pass the time until it starts working on it's own, I'm just staring at the code at yelling at it intermittently.
Progress.

>>15906279
A true programmer.

>>15902836
>>15902852
>>15902878

Maybe it's too late for this sort of thinking, but maybe you just wipe the segments that aren't attached to the head off the board. So dwarves can cut through to get somewhere if they need to, but it gives the dragon more places to go.

Dunno if dwarves would ever want to do that though. Also, in this case I'd say the head should stay alive no matter what happens to the body segments. Makes it a little more hydra-like though.

Progress continues!

Here is a snapshot of a few "turns" where only the dragon moves, with a dwarf starting right in it's face. It then proceeds to commit suicide upon the surviving dwarfs.

0=floor, 1=dwarf, 2=dragon head, 3=body

NOW that movement is all working, I can code a quick testing method (disclaimer: quickness not guaranteed)

>>15906503
this is the image I meant to attach

Programmerbro, you are my hero.

-5x5 grid
-unlimited length for dragon
-he moves and that block becomes impassable
-dorfs can teleport through walls to the other side
-dorfs also lose if they are trapped and can not move
-dragon also lose if he hit a wall

more dynamic

Yo dawgg, I heard you liked arrays so I put an array in your array so you can array while you array.

The gist of what I'm saying is I am dealing with so many arrays.

>>15906906
You know, the foundation that I made for this could have editable rules like that, using an external script file (kinda like Dwarf Fortress, but much simpler)

I am actually pretty pissed that I didn't use a linked list because GUESS WHAT, that makes testing a board to see if the dwarfs lose is a fucking breeze!

Is this thing still being worked on?

>>15907740
Yes, I am making data structures that will store every possible everything.

What I'm trying to say is, give me a night :/

>>15907794
exceedingly understandable man. Thanks for doing all the work that you've been doing! I just hope I'm on the board and see the thread for it's conclusion.