I made a casual family card game.If I made double-sided cards like pic related, it would drastically reduce the size of the game box in half, reducing costs, while keeping the same amount of content.The thing is, I don't want to do that. By having Side A and B, you're also splitting the game in half, if that makes sense. An A card will never be played in the same game as a B card. I like each answer having its own dedicated card, because it means anything is possible.Yet so many other games do it. Is there any reason why besides the size and cost? Is there a creative or game design purpose for it that I'm not aware of? Obviously some games might have one side be a harder version, but for a more neutral game without different modes, is there any reason to split it?Sorry for a dumb question but I'm doing this carefully so I don't want to miss anything.
Just make the cards half the size?
>>96894013Ironically, that somehow costs more.
>>96894002>but for a more neutral game without different modes, is there any reason to split it?There's an infinite number of reasons you could decided to have the sides be different, aside from difficulty. It could be as simple as themes, or there could be mechanics tied to them (one side can be cashed in for points and the other side for more cards, etc.), it really depends on what kind of game you have and what you hope to do with it.
>>96894132I just mean completely neutral. Imagine if Cards Against Humanity had different sides. I've played a lot of games where the two sides did nothing different. For example, pic related is Really Loud Librarians. It has four words per card - two on front, two on back - numbered 1-4. Before playing, you decide which "number" the game would be. If you went with the "2", then 1, 3, and 4 would be ignored and not part of the game. It kept the packaging small with only 60 cards, but it felt like such a waste because so many categories were skipped over. I just wonder if there was another reason for that choice besides saving money.
>>96894002>Is there any reason why besides the size and cost?The other side of a card could be representing hidden information or damaged version of the card/unit it represents that gets flipped over in play. Some card games use cards as both units/active things and economy-via-discard with a number on the card somewhere but that's usually on the same side. Might be some that do it with the value on the back. Could be a neat way to have players vaguely aware of how good an opponent's hand is due to the values but not the details of what the cards are.
>>96894002>By having Side A and B, you're also splitting the game in half, if that makes sense. An A card will never be played in the same game as a B card.that would make your card game unique, and you have an opportunity to balance your game using this mechanic
>>96895228Balance it in what way? If it's a simple word game like >>96894196 then what does it matter?
>>96894002Consider how much diversity you need in your deck. You can always just have less cards and release an extra set later if the cards arent essential
>>96894002>An A card will never be played in the same game as a B card.Why? The only thing preventing you from doing it is the mechanics, and you as the designer are free to change them.Also, does your game feature card shuffling? Because if so, this is the big issue with double-sided cards, you can't properly randomize unrevealed cards if you can tell them by different backs.>>96894002>so many other games do it.Which ones?
>>96894071Because card sizes are standardized. Deviating from that requires custom die cutter settings, adding a labour expense that otherwise would not be present.
