Questionable Questing

Admittedly, that same philosophy is one of the biggest factors holding me back in life by to killing my motivation to do things due to fear of failure, but it also keeps me from biting off more than I can chew, so it's not all bad.

RL busyiness and some other mess usually cause a bit of derail in consistency. That and voter counts...

I do this mainly to bounce my muse around so it doesn't get stressed out or burnt out on any one thing. And also force myself to get focused on /something/. Hence it's not a good idea for others in general.

They're of differing genres/premises if you wanna take a look. Though I kinda suck at a good summary pitch.

Grand Lore - A Virtual Reality premised Trading Card Game quest. It's more on being a proper card game than most "card game" quests, so it winds up looking more complicated than not. (Like having a remotely decent card pool to build a deck from, as opposed to most/all your choices not being much different.)

Paradoxical Academy - A magical girl corruption quest, wherein you are playing the villain.

Ethereal Royal Academy - A survival quest set to an academy. (Newest)

LIME Isekai? - An academy corruption quest wherein you are now in another world. Making magical girls and prospering are goals ofc. (This is behind on update...)

As for whether to or not to run a quest, you could always start with a simpler, or more basic one and go from there. There's nothing wrong with rolling with a simple system and premise for a short romp as to get a hang of things.

People here are fairly forgiving about these things.

Yeah, whenever I consider starting a quest, I can never decide on how complex/simple I want the mechanics to be, what genre I want, or the kind of setting, etc. My mind is always all over the place on those things, which is why I doubt I'd be able to actually commit.

Ultimately, I just end up thinking about all those quests I used to enjoy before they died, and that urge to start a quest goes away real quick.

I'd rather be disappointed at myself for not trying than disappoint other people by getting them invested in something and dropping it.

Then do two. One simple. One complex. Likewise of two different genres. You can start with a short one, but leave it with room to do a sequel. Viola, problems solved.

That aside, cometh, take a look?

Maybe. Again, the main thing holding me back is that I find it hard to start things unless I'm confident I can follow through. I try not to make promises I don't know I can keep, and starting a quest feels--to me, at least--like an implied promise to the players.

Kind of irrational, I know, it's just how I feel about it.

As for those quests, I might give them a look later (maybe in a few hours, maybe a few days--assuming I don't forget, anyway). They sound interesting, at least (though I'm not sure about a Card Game quest; the only other ones I've seen always moved really slowly, even despite frequent updates).

That's fine. You'd want to make clear it's a short quest at best, and/or sporadic updates. Plus you're figuring things out. Making it clear goes a long way.

And the ones you've seen for card game quests being slow? Details?

I can't really remember. It was a while ago when I read them, and briefly at that. They just seemed to progress at about a turn per update, and from what I remember of playing card games (admittedly a long time ago), they can last a while at times.

It might warrant another look if my memories are this hazy. They just don't seem very well suited to the questing format, though.

I find its more that they don't really innovate since the medium is different. Drawing card by card from the deck simply doesn't translate well. It's why I opt for a no-draw, deck-as-hand setup.

Alternatively their handling means there's really little or no difference in between cards. Due banking on being too simplified.

Deck-as-hand means people can plan out in advance and thus smoothly have several turns in a update if warranted. Although so far it's mostly been 0~2 Turns per update during a match.

Averaging around 4 updates per match presently. This excludes one abrupt conclusion lasting 1 update.

Mine starts with the MC just starting out, hence card acquisitions is a bit fast tracked (unlike most instances of the GM handing players a non-starter deck). It's also so people can consider which they'd prefer/build towards (over time) or for situational cases (also later).

Narrative weaving is a legit tactic in mine, which means more freedom for deck construction. Only limited by deck size and board slots. Both expandable over time.

So there's no need to worry over too much choices. A good narrative or technical play are both viable. Hence making full usage of the medium.

Reading the card library parts off the bat is unadvised, since it's heavy. That's all for now. Sorry about wall of texting.

*poke checks on the 'assuming I don't forget' part*