Super Smash Bros. Board!

It kinda reminds me of a mix of Monopoly and Pokemon Master Trainer.

Along with making card games, making board games was another one of my endeavors as a child.
I tried to make a Ratchet & Clank board game, most notably. Which failed, hardcore. Like, it was awful.

At least, the board game itself was. I made the cards out of construction paper and I would kinda "layer" the cards.
So like, there'd be the card, which is colored grey. Then I would have a little yellow cutout of Ratchet. I would glue that cutout to the card. I would color in Ratchet from there, but I'd then add a third layer where Ratchet's wrench would be.
So, the card becomes layered to give off a sort of 3D effect. It was weird, but I liked it. If the card became too thick, I would just color in the rest of the stuff. They only got to about 3 layers thick.
The advantage of this is that they were so thick, you couldn't dent them unless you did it on purpose. This was before I knew about lamination.
I made these in the first grade.

I stuck to making card games after that. I stopped making layers and I started laminating them.


Now that I'm seeing this right here, though... I don't know.
It kinda crushes what I did as a child, but at the same time, it rebirths it.

All the board/card games I made as a kid were simply made out of paper, sometimes even lined paper. And the board would be a poster board.

I don't understand why every character has the same attacks, or why they're activated the same. That makes this seem dumb to me personally. I'd set it up where both combatants had two dice each so that items aren't the only way to win. ex: luigi roll's 1-2 which activates his fireball, ness rolls 1-1 and uses his down-b attack that heals him (moves him def+1 or 2 or something). This seems better then 1-2, both hit each other with the same attack with different names and the one who can't use his save loses. That probably made no sense to anyone.
I also just played a couple munchkin games over the weekend so maybe my nit-picky arguments from that carried over.

And I too tried making a board game when I was like 8. Believe it or not it was pokemon. I never had much artistic talent so I played with one of those pokemon handbook guide things to help visualize. But the main problem was that as an 8 year old I couldn't figure out how to balance it to make it multiplayer, so after awhile I just made myself catch Moltres, Articuno and Zapdos cause nothing could prevent me from doing otherwise. Then I got bored and my board game making career ended.

SkrΑlem wrote:

I don't understand why every character has the same attacks, or why they're activated the same. That makes this seem dumb to me personally. I'd set it up where both combatants had two dice each so that items aren't the only way to win. ex: luigi roll's 1-2 which activates his fireball, ness rolls 1-1 and uses his down-b attack that heals him (moves him def+1 or 2 or something). This seems better then 1-2, both hit each other with the same attack with different names and the one who can't use his save loses. That probably made no sense to anyone.
I also just played a couple munchkin games over the weekend so maybe my nit-picky arguments from that carried over.

I think he was going for a Monopoly kind of idea, where you can pick the piece you want, but they all do the same things. Also, the great thing about this game is that it's completely customizable, so you can change the character attacks if you wanted.

Monopoly is not a fighting game, and it's strategy is in real-estate. This, to me anyway, would make more sense if there was more emphasis on the different strategies for each character. The strategy emphasis seems to be on items. I know you don't want a game to be too complex but this seems too shallow.
If this was more munchkin style then I'd be more accepting of it.

Why did I not see this? lololol

This can improve if the characters were balanced according to the game. So if MK were to be in, he would win automatically. lololol