Re: [piecepack] Re: Using Anchor (instead of Fleur-de-lis) as a Piecepack suit (was:

[Aaron Waters <aaron.waters@...>]

On 5/26/13, Bill Browne <williamgeorgebrowne@...> wrote:

>> I believe (and I hope I'm not stepping on any toes here) that was
>> meant, at least to some extent, to be "A Modest Proposal on the Topic
>> of Sensible Expansions to Piecepack".
>
> Really? That's very interesting. I thought the 16 suit piecepack was a bit
> of a strain, but I found the author's ability to identify patterns in the
> existing piecepack and extrapolate them very impressive (even though the
> patterns were, I suspect, accidental rather than deliberate).

I think my overall feeling in reading it was influenced quite a bit by
the title of the piece. Had it been something more like "Some thoughts
about piecepack suit expansions" or something along those lines, I
probably would have read the whole thing differently. Perhaps I ought
to go back and do so anyway. There have been several companies and/or
individuals that have offered various expanion suits during the time
I've been subscribed to this group including seasons, weapons, zodiac
signs, elements, etc. Certainly plenty to choose from.

To the best of my recollection the only games that were designed with
any but the basic four suits in mind have used either the card suits
expansion and/or the four seasons expansion.

I actually thought the zodiac signs was a fairly good idea, just
because those particular symbols come imbued with such a rich and
varied set of ideas and topics you could link into probably just about
any type of game you were designing and they also inherently have at
least four of the five elements from the elements expansion (I believe
the other was electricity, definitely had a lightning bolt).

No strong feelings about anchor/fleur-de-lis, but I do think more
designs to choose from in the files area is almost certainly a good
thing anyway.