Heya,
Sooner or later every designer gets blocked. His (or her) game reaches a point where the design problems have no visible solutions or the play produced by the game isn’t hitting the goals he set for it. If it hasn’t happened to you yet, it will. So what can a person do? I’ve got six ideas that I’ve used in the past to help me get past design difficulties. Hopefully some of them will resonate with you as well.
Suggestion #1:
The first thing I suggest you do is to let your game sit for a while. Take three to seven days off from working on it. Then come back to it with fresher eyes and see if a solution reveals itself. Sometimes you may need to let a game sit three to seven weeks or three to seven months. Or even longer! That’s okay. In fact, it’s great. Letting a game incubate in your mind is much more preferable to forcing it out under some arbitrary or non-existent deadline. There’s no rule that a game should take only one year or two years or however long to finish. If a game you're working on needs more time to get right, then take the time to get it right.
Suggestion #2:
One thing I’ve found very helpful over the years is asking for help in an online forum. The Forge and RPGnet and even Story Games all have forums dedicated to designers and have offered me direct help in the past. I wouldn’t start a thread on each of them all at the same time. Each site will give you a totally different flavor of help. I have found that doing them in succession really helps you develop a better train of thought and a more complete idea of how outsiders view your game. Taking the time to digest what one site says regarding your design prepares you better for the questions and suggestions that the next site will give. The insight of veteran designers is invaluable IMO. I have found it most helpful in overcoming my own design blocks.
Suggestion #3:
Sometimes, if you get stuck, the “stuckness” may be a sign that the game is ready for playtesting. If the game is already in closed playtesting, it may mean that your design is ready for outside and independent testing. All your best guesses, intuitions, and mat calculations must come to an end at some point. There is only so much you can design through your own imagination and experience. There really is no substitute for playtesting. If you get to a point in your design work where you feel this is the case, put together an organized and readable prototype of your design. Then, turn it over to other people and start playing. You’ll be surprised how much you learn after the first session of playtesting. I guarantee it will be an eye-opener if this is your first time writing a game.
Suggestion #4:
Sometimes, even if you have had some playtesting done on your game, you may still have several design problems that need fixing. If the game is in a playable format, you might consider publishing it in PDF form for free. There are several free PDF makers online if you don’t have that capability at home. My favorite for simple PDFs is PDFonline.com. And there are several hosting sites like 1km1kt.net that will put your game up for free. If you have a Myspace page, you could use that too. Make sure, if you do this, to put the URL of any Actual Play or Playtesting forums in the text of your PDF. You want those who download and play your game to have an avenue to talk about their experiences in public. That way you can benefit from their play and have illustrations for how the game works in actual use.
Suggestion #5:
It is still possible that after a good amount of playtesting and putting your game up on the net for free that you could still have some mechanical issues with your design. If you have done several playtests and received feedback from outsiders on how your game plays, you may be ready to pursue an Ashcan publication. This is usually the final step one takes to solve all the last few design problems a game has before its full on publication. Matt Snyder and Paul Czege have lead the way in recent years when it comes to Ashcans. You can check out their Ashcan Front site here. In essence, an Ashcan is a beta publication that explicitly highlights the design goals and problems with the game in the text in the text of the game itself. It is sold relatively cheap (say $5-$10) and often comes with some sort of promise that anyone who buys, plays, and reports their results in a public forum will receive some kind of payoff in return once the game is published professionally. Typically, that is some sort of discount on a published copy but not always. An Ashcan is a great way to get that last 5-10% of your design polished up before a full public release.
Suggestion #6:
There is one final suggestion I have, though I hesitate a bit to make it. If everything else I have suggested here fails you, then you may want to consider abandoning the game altogether. If playtests, ashcan publications, letting the game sit for weeks, months, or years, and receiving help in online design forums all fail to give you the result you want for your game, then perhaps there is a problem with it that can never be solved. It’s possible that the type of play you are wanting to create with the game can never be achieved with your rules in that form. Sometimes this happens. It is NOT a failure. It is an experience that your learn from and take with you to the next design. Getting a game to that point takes a lot of serious effort and a lot of problem solving. Those experiences will help you in any future project you choose to undertake. Abandoning a game when all options have been exhausted is not a black mark on your record. It is a badge of honor that shows you’ve been through the war and come out a more experienced designer on the other side. It is not a defeat, but a foundation for future success.
Peace,
-Troy
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Is Character Advancement Necessary?
Heya,
When I was looking back over my Anthologies for this blog I was surprised I hadn’t really taken the time to cover Character Advancement. I mentioned it, briefly, in the Power 19, but I never wrote a full article on it to my satisfaction. I am correcting that oversight now.
Character Advancement is something that comes up during just about every design process. There are two questions that deal with it directly in the Power 19 and I usually give a whole section to it in my Design Outlines. The problem is that the P19 and Design Outlines don’t really give the reader any guidance as to what Character Advancement actually is nor do they state whether it is necessary for a game or not. So is Character Advancement necessary? Well… that depends on how you want to define “Advancement.”
The Provisional Glossary does not have an entry for that term, and “Advancement” gets used in many ways in many places. For a game like DnD, it usually means bigger numbers and larger resource pools. For a game like Dogs in the Vineyard, it can sometimes mean that and sometimes not. For a game like Standoff, as characters get more of what they want (Truth), their resource pools diminish- the very antithesis of DnD. So what is needed before we talk about whether or not Character Advancement is necessary for a RPG design is a common and agreed upon definition for it.
Coming to a common and agreed upon definition for any term in a community full of people where many pride themselves on individuality or who enjoy endlessly debating semantics is nearly impossible without years of work and numerous examples of that definition in practice. That’s not something one can really accomplish on a blog. Therefore, I’m not even going to try. Instead, what I am going to do is come up with a working definition for the purposes of this blog and this article. Bearing that in mind, I submit that we define Character Advancement as, “changes that happen to a character over time.”
I like this definition for several reasons. First, it is open to broad interpretation for designers and thus is unrestrictive in its use. Designers won’t be limited to what other games have termed as “advancement.” Second, it is a very inclusive definition. It covers the most traditional methods of Character Advancement as well as cutting edge techniques found in many independent roleplaying games. Third, it would be hard to find a RPG in which the player-characters do not, in some way, form, or fashion, change. And finally, I like it because this definition lets us definitively address the question this article poses.
Given the definition above, should a RPG have Character Advancement? My feeling is that it certainly should. As a story progresses, characters change. On a small scale, they age, learn, add new acquaintances, and increase their sphere of experiences. On a larger scale, they can become injured, deformed, powerful, famous, loved, hated, and so on. Mechanically in a RPG, characters can increase or decrease their resources, gain or lose access to other game mechanics (such as skills or feats), and progress further and further through the range or possible mechanical options or outcomes the game and the actual play have in store for them.
IMO, a game designer should consider all three realms of possible advancement (small scale, large scale, and mechanical) even if he rejects putting some of them explicitly into his rules text. Considering how characters might advance and how their advancement will impact other areas of the game like Setting, System, and Color is vital to ensuring a smooth transition from beginning play to finishing play. It’s been my experience that failure to include some form of advancement in a design will only force players to construct methods of advancement on their own either in conjunction with or in complete disregard of the rules as written. To me, that would not be desirable both from the designer’s perspective and the players’ perspective.
So, to sum up, character change over time is a necessary part of a RPG’s design. I call that change “Character Advancement,” and I truly believe it is a useful thing for designers to consider and implement as they create their game.
Peace,
-Troy
When I was looking back over my Anthologies for this blog I was surprised I hadn’t really taken the time to cover Character Advancement. I mentioned it, briefly, in the Power 19, but I never wrote a full article on it to my satisfaction. I am correcting that oversight now.
Character Advancement is something that comes up during just about every design process. There are two questions that deal with it directly in the Power 19 and I usually give a whole section to it in my Design Outlines. The problem is that the P19 and Design Outlines don’t really give the reader any guidance as to what Character Advancement actually is nor do they state whether it is necessary for a game or not. So is Character Advancement necessary? Well… that depends on how you want to define “Advancement.”
The Provisional Glossary does not have an entry for that term, and “Advancement” gets used in many ways in many places. For a game like DnD, it usually means bigger numbers and larger resource pools. For a game like Dogs in the Vineyard, it can sometimes mean that and sometimes not. For a game like Standoff, as characters get more of what they want (Truth), their resource pools diminish- the very antithesis of DnD. So what is needed before we talk about whether or not Character Advancement is necessary for a RPG design is a common and agreed upon definition for it.
Coming to a common and agreed upon definition for any term in a community full of people where many pride themselves on individuality or who enjoy endlessly debating semantics is nearly impossible without years of work and numerous examples of that definition in practice. That’s not something one can really accomplish on a blog. Therefore, I’m not even going to try. Instead, what I am going to do is come up with a working definition for the purposes of this blog and this article. Bearing that in mind, I submit that we define Character Advancement as, “changes that happen to a character over time.”
I like this definition for several reasons. First, it is open to broad interpretation for designers and thus is unrestrictive in its use. Designers won’t be limited to what other games have termed as “advancement.” Second, it is a very inclusive definition. It covers the most traditional methods of Character Advancement as well as cutting edge techniques found in many independent roleplaying games. Third, it would be hard to find a RPG in which the player-characters do not, in some way, form, or fashion, change. And finally, I like it because this definition lets us definitively address the question this article poses.
Given the definition above, should a RPG have Character Advancement? My feeling is that it certainly should. As a story progresses, characters change. On a small scale, they age, learn, add new acquaintances, and increase their sphere of experiences. On a larger scale, they can become injured, deformed, powerful, famous, loved, hated, and so on. Mechanically in a RPG, characters can increase or decrease their resources, gain or lose access to other game mechanics (such as skills or feats), and progress further and further through the range or possible mechanical options or outcomes the game and the actual play have in store for them.
IMO, a game designer should consider all three realms of possible advancement (small scale, large scale, and mechanical) even if he rejects putting some of them explicitly into his rules text. Considering how characters might advance and how their advancement will impact other areas of the game like Setting, System, and Color is vital to ensuring a smooth transition from beginning play to finishing play. It’s been my experience that failure to include some form of advancement in a design will only force players to construct methods of advancement on their own either in conjunction with or in complete disregard of the rules as written. To me, that would not be desirable both from the designer’s perspective and the players’ perspective.
So, to sum up, character change over time is a necessary part of a RPG’s design. I call that change “Character Advancement,” and I truly believe it is a useful thing for designers to consider and implement as they create their game.
Peace,
-Troy
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
What Should I Design?
Heya,
The best answer, in fact the only answer, to that question is, “Something you want to play.” In my experience, the games I’ve had the most fun playing and talking about are the ones where the designer created the instructions for play that suited his own play style and preferences- games where his vision for what he found fun in play was brought to life. I’ve most enjoyed games where the designer was inviting me to take part in the fun he was already having. Essentially, I guess what I’m saying is that if you create a game that is rocked-out fun for you and your group, chances are good it will be rockin’ good fun for someone else.
Why is that? Well, there’s several reasons. One of them, I think, is sincerity. When you read some text, it can be from any medium, where the author has intimate knowledge of the subject and is really excited about the topic, it is reflected in the writing. That sense of knowledge and excitement passes from the words to the reader and gets him excited and knowledgeable about that topic too. A game that is fun for you and your group is something you will be knowledgeable about and be really excited to share. That means a lot to a reader and increases the likelihood he/she will try it. Excitement is viral. For RPGs, excitement comes from intimate knowledge on how fun that game is to play.
Another reason is focus. Let’s take the phrase, “fun for someone else” for a sec. I’ve seen several novice designers (myself included) on various game design forums make statements like, “I’m going to make a game that appeals to a broad range of gamers, so that other people will buy and enjoy my design.” Other people…a broad range of gamers…Who’s that? Seriously, anyone know what that is? These phrases speak of an undefined, nebulous group of people without discussing for one moment the types of things they find fun in RPGs. DnD sells more than any other RPG, but does that mean each group enjoys DnD the same way? Don’t believe that for a minute.
One thing that an author in any medium must do is be aware of his/her audience. You have no experience being “a broad range of gamers” or “other people.” You do have a lot of experience being yourself and gaming with your friends. And the cool thing is, that you aren’t alone in the world. There’s all kinds of players out there who enjoy the same sorts of things you do. By trying to appeal to a nebulous cloud of something as intangible as “the majority of the RPG player base” you will totally miss something that is very tangible: “people like me.” And trust me, there’s plenty of those out there.
Another thing is timidity. A lot of first time designers are a bit timid when doing their first game. That’s totally understandable. It’s a daunting, difficult, and very personal undertaking. Some people (and I am an example of this) start feeling that success is more important that communicating what they love about RPGs, and how their design can do it better than any game before. So they start making compromises. Thoughts in the back of their heads start sounding like this: “Oh, no one else would do it like that. No one will understand, better take that mechanic out. More people will like your game if you just simplify and cut out a big chunk of your design. That’s not popular!” I hate those thoughts. They make designers betray the wonderful thing they are in an honest but misguided attempt to increase the audience for their game. Ignore those fears in the back of your mind.
One more thing that I feel is tremendously important to remember is that if you and your playgroups are enjoying your design, then your design is creating FUN! Fun play is the whole purpose of designing a game. If yours can do that, then you don’t have to worry about “a large portion of the gamers out there.” If your game is fun, more than enough gamers will come and find you. They’ll hear about your excitement, and the excitement of those who first tried your game, and they’ll line up to buy what you’ve got.
You see, you don’t really want to chase down “other people” to play your game by designing something you *think* they might find fun. (There’s always a chance, a big chance actually, you will be wrong) You get them by designing a game you find fun and that you’re excited to talk about and post play reports about. You get them by inviting them to join in on the fun you’re already having, by sharing that wonderfulness you possess as a person who loves RPGs.
What you *think* might be fun is unproven. What you’ve had fun playing is definitively proven. Which would you rather take to the market?
Peace,
-Troy
The best answer, in fact the only answer, to that question is, “Something you want to play.” In my experience, the games I’ve had the most fun playing and talking about are the ones where the designer created the instructions for play that suited his own play style and preferences- games where his vision for what he found fun in play was brought to life. I’ve most enjoyed games where the designer was inviting me to take part in the fun he was already having. Essentially, I guess what I’m saying is that if you create a game that is rocked-out fun for you and your group, chances are good it will be rockin’ good fun for someone else.
Why is that? Well, there’s several reasons. One of them, I think, is sincerity. When you read some text, it can be from any medium, where the author has intimate knowledge of the subject and is really excited about the topic, it is reflected in the writing. That sense of knowledge and excitement passes from the words to the reader and gets him excited and knowledgeable about that topic too. A game that is fun for you and your group is something you will be knowledgeable about and be really excited to share. That means a lot to a reader and increases the likelihood he/she will try it. Excitement is viral. For RPGs, excitement comes from intimate knowledge on how fun that game is to play.
Another reason is focus. Let’s take the phrase, “fun for someone else” for a sec. I’ve seen several novice designers (myself included) on various game design forums make statements like, “I’m going to make a game that appeals to a broad range of gamers, so that other people will buy and enjoy my design.” Other people…a broad range of gamers…Who’s that? Seriously, anyone know what that is? These phrases speak of an undefined, nebulous group of people without discussing for one moment the types of things they find fun in RPGs. DnD sells more than any other RPG, but does that mean each group enjoys DnD the same way? Don’t believe that for a minute.
One thing that an author in any medium must do is be aware of his/her audience. You have no experience being “a broad range of gamers” or “other people.” You do have a lot of experience being yourself and gaming with your friends. And the cool thing is, that you aren’t alone in the world. There’s all kinds of players out there who enjoy the same sorts of things you do. By trying to appeal to a nebulous cloud of something as intangible as “the majority of the RPG player base” you will totally miss something that is very tangible: “people like me.” And trust me, there’s plenty of those out there.
Another thing is timidity. A lot of first time designers are a bit timid when doing their first game. That’s totally understandable. It’s a daunting, difficult, and very personal undertaking. Some people (and I am an example of this) start feeling that success is more important that communicating what they love about RPGs, and how their design can do it better than any game before. So they start making compromises. Thoughts in the back of their heads start sounding like this: “Oh, no one else would do it like that. No one will understand, better take that mechanic out. More people will like your game if you just simplify and cut out a big chunk of your design. That’s not popular!” I hate those thoughts. They make designers betray the wonderful thing they are in an honest but misguided attempt to increase the audience for their game. Ignore those fears in the back of your mind.
One more thing that I feel is tremendously important to remember is that if you and your playgroups are enjoying your design, then your design is creating FUN! Fun play is the whole purpose of designing a game. If yours can do that, then you don’t have to worry about “a large portion of the gamers out there.” If your game is fun, more than enough gamers will come and find you. They’ll hear about your excitement, and the excitement of those who first tried your game, and they’ll line up to buy what you’ve got.
You see, you don’t really want to chase down “other people” to play your game by designing something you *think* they might find fun. (There’s always a chance, a big chance actually, you will be wrong) You get them by designing a game you find fun and that you’re excited to talk about and post play reports about. You get them by inviting them to join in on the fun you’re already having, by sharing that wonderfulness you possess as a person who loves RPGs.
What you *think* might be fun is unproven. What you’ve had fun playing is definitively proven. Which would you rather take to the market?
Peace,
-Troy
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
A Long Way Back
Hello there!
It has been a very long time since I have posted on this blog. The reasons are legion. If you want to read what I've been up to in the intervening time period between May 31 '07 and February 12 '08, you can read about it on my Design Blog.
This announcement is basically to serve notice that new articles for Socratic Design will be forthcoming. I'm looking forward to getting back to what I enjoy most.
As always, if you've got questions, ask 'em! See you soon! :)
Peace,
-Troy
It has been a very long time since I have posted on this blog. The reasons are legion. If you want to read what I've been up to in the intervening time period between May 31 '07 and February 12 '08, you can read about it on my Design Blog.
This announcement is basically to serve notice that new articles for Socratic Design will be forthcoming. I'm looking forward to getting back to what I enjoy most.
As always, if you've got questions, ask 'em! See you soon! :)
Peace,
-Troy
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Socratic Design Anthology #4
Heya,
Every summer I take the month of June off to travel, enjoy nature, and recharge my emotional and mental batteries. I won't post here at Socratic Design again until some time in July. I may do some posting over on my design blog. Maybe.
Anyhow, before I sign off for a bit, I want to leave you with the latest SD Anthology. For those of you who are new, here are the first three anthologies:
Socratic Design Anthology #1
Socratic Design Anthology #2
Socratic Design Anthology #3
I do these every so often just to keep a running history of my work and make it esier for newer readers to catch up. I think it's important to see how a person's views change over time and to understand the context for a person's entire body of work. I hope you enjoy them. :)
The following articles are part of the Socratic Design Anthology #4:
What is Character?
What is Color?
What Else Besides Dice?
What is a 'Sacred Cow' ?
Why Do People Do RPGs?
Why Should I post my Power 19?
Are There any Design Outlines?
How Can My Game Teach Mechanics?
What is it Like to Publish a RPG?
What is a Fulfillment Service?
What is the Future of RPGs?
As always, please report any links that don't work. See you guys in July!
Peace,
-Troy
Every summer I take the month of June off to travel, enjoy nature, and recharge my emotional and mental batteries. I won't post here at Socratic Design again until some time in July. I may do some posting over on my design blog. Maybe.
Anyhow, before I sign off for a bit, I want to leave you with the latest SD Anthology. For those of you who are new, here are the first three anthologies:
Socratic Design Anthology #1
Socratic Design Anthology #2
Socratic Design Anthology #3
I do these every so often just to keep a running history of my work and make it esier for newer readers to catch up. I think it's important to see how a person's views change over time and to understand the context for a person's entire body of work. I hope you enjoy them. :)
The following articles are part of the Socratic Design Anthology #4:
What is Character?
What is Color?
What Else Besides Dice?
What is a 'Sacred Cow' ?
Why Do People Do RPGs?
Why Should I post my Power 19?
Are There any Design Outlines?
How Can My Game Teach Mechanics?
What is it Like to Publish a RPG?
What is a Fulfillment Service?
What is the Future of RPGs?
As always, please report any links that don't work. See you guys in July!
Peace,
-Troy
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
What is 'Character' ?
Heya,
I'm finishing up my essays here on the five aspects of Exploration. This one is about "Character." The provisional glossary defines it as "A fictional person or entity which may perform actions in the imaginary situation."
So let's break that down a bit. First, let's begin with "fictional." The Character is the insubstantial person (or entity) in the game. He is the imagined personality, the dream given realization but not form. This means that the Character is a wholly separate object from the Player. Some games like to entwine these two. They have phrases like, "your character knows only what you (the player) knows." Other games demand that they be kept separate, hence the infamous division between "player knowledge" and "character knowledge."
From a design perspective, it is important to note that the fictitious Character and the real Player are separate beings. What the character does and what the player does can, and often will, be two different things. Phrases like, "the players go on an adventure" in a game book bug me a bit. The players don't go anywhere. They portray characters that go on an adventure, and vicariously through them experience that adventure. It is not the same thing.
Next in the definition we have "person or entity." This definition here is broad because a character doesn't have to be a person. In the RPG Cats the characters are cats! Also, I could imagine an RPG where the characters are aspects of a person's psychology- say the Id, Ego, and Superego for instance. The key is that the character is the player's interface with the exploration going on during play. He, she, or it is a tool that the player uses explore whatever interests him during play.
Which brings us to the last part of the definition, "which may perform actions in the imaginary situation." Characters, of whatever type, perform actions. They are dynamic. They must do something. A character that is inert is not a character at all, he is no more interesting than a piece of furniture for all intents and purposes. When designing, make sure that the characters, especially the player-characters, can do things in the imagined world that are fun, interesting, and provoking. Give the players tools to portray their characters and put them in situations that challenge the players to explore your game's potential. That is what a Character really does- facilitates the exploration of your wonderful creation. Keep that in mind at all times and your game will improve.
I may revisit this aspect of Exploration again in the future. There is much to talk about here. Immersion, flags, bangs, and so on are keys to creating dynamic and fun characters. However, this will serve as a brief definition of Character and provide a future context for my essays. :)
Peace,
-Troy
I'm finishing up my essays here on the five aspects of Exploration. This one is about "Character." The provisional glossary defines it as "A fictional person or entity which may perform actions in the imaginary situation."
So let's break that down a bit. First, let's begin with "fictional." The Character is the insubstantial person (or entity) in the game. He is the imagined personality, the dream given realization but not form. This means that the Character is a wholly separate object from the Player. Some games like to entwine these two. They have phrases like, "your character knows only what you (the player) knows." Other games demand that they be kept separate, hence the infamous division between "player knowledge" and "character knowledge."
From a design perspective, it is important to note that the fictitious Character and the real Player are separate beings. What the character does and what the player does can, and often will, be two different things. Phrases like, "the players go on an adventure" in a game book bug me a bit. The players don't go anywhere. They portray characters that go on an adventure, and vicariously through them experience that adventure. It is not the same thing.
Next in the definition we have "person or entity." This definition here is broad because a character doesn't have to be a person. In the RPG Cats the characters are cats! Also, I could imagine an RPG where the characters are aspects of a person's psychology- say the Id, Ego, and Superego for instance. The key is that the character is the player's interface with the exploration going on during play. He, she, or it is a tool that the player uses explore whatever interests him during play.
Which brings us to the last part of the definition, "which may perform actions in the imaginary situation." Characters, of whatever type, perform actions. They are dynamic. They must do something. A character that is inert is not a character at all, he is no more interesting than a piece of furniture for all intents and purposes. When designing, make sure that the characters, especially the player-characters, can do things in the imagined world that are fun, interesting, and provoking. Give the players tools to portray their characters and put them in situations that challenge the players to explore your game's potential. That is what a Character really does- facilitates the exploration of your wonderful creation. Keep that in mind at all times and your game will improve.
I may revisit this aspect of Exploration again in the future. There is much to talk about here. Immersion, flags, bangs, and so on are keys to creating dynamic and fun characters. However, this will serve as a brief definition of Character and provide a future context for my essays. :)
Peace,
-Troy
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Last Chance!
Heya,
If you have independantly published your own RPG, then the Forge Booth for GenCon is still accepting buy-ins until June 1st. If you've never done the Forge Booth before, it'll just cost ya $100 plus the cost of a badge. This is a great deal. If you've never been to GenCon before, it is a convention in Indianapolis Indiana that brings in thousands and thousands of gamers. If you have a new game you want to show off, this is the place. You can get more information about the Forge Booth -Here-
Peace,
-Troy
If you have independantly published your own RPG, then the Forge Booth for GenCon is still accepting buy-ins until June 1st. If you've never done the Forge Booth before, it'll just cost ya $100 plus the cost of a badge. This is a great deal. If you've never been to GenCon before, it is a convention in Indianapolis Indiana that brings in thousands and thousands of gamers. If you have a new game you want to show off, this is the place. You can get more information about the Forge Booth -Here-
Peace,
-Troy
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
What is Color?
Heya
Color is identified by the Forge as one of the five main areas of Exploration. It is defined in the Provisional Glossary as, “Imagined details about any or all of System, Character, Setting, or Situation, added in such a way that does not change aspects of action or resolution in the imagined scene. One of the Components of Exploration.”
Okay….so what does that mean? Think of Color as synonymous with Detail. Any description or item that adds detail to the game’s SYSTEM, Characters, Setting, or Situation, is considered to be Color. How about some examples?
-SYSTEM with no Color:
The character kills the other character.
-SYSTEM with Color:
The Warrior uses his mighty great sword to lop off the head of King Moligant on the roll of a critical 20.
-Setting with no Color:
A town.
-Setting with Color:
1602 in the year of our Lord., near the village of Malbork, nestled among the Frozen Mountains outside the Enchanted Forest.
-Character with no Color:
A man.
-Character with Color:
Drakh the level 20 Barbarian from the southern wastes of Hallowfell.
-Situation with no Color
A village in crisis
-Situation with Color
The small hamlet of Esteria is suffering from a malignant plague brought on by undead agents under the command of a local demagogue who is advocating rebellion against the town council.
When I think about Color, I divide it into two categories: Essential and Casual. Essential Color is something that the players need to know in order to correctly use and understand the item being described. For instance, knowing that a cleric is a dwarf in DnD is Essential Color. That designation brings with it a lot of consequences. You certainly would expect different things from the character if he were an elven cleric, or a Halfling cleric, or a drow cleric. Essential Color is used as a cue to the players as to how they should react to or use the item in question.
Casual Color, on the other hand, is pure description for aesthetic purposes. For instance, saying that the same cleric is bald is unlikely to have any consequential effect on play. It could just as easily be ignored and play would continue on just fine. However, Casual Color is important because it adds detail to play and can help players immerse themselves in the world. Casual Color piques interest and gives players a chance to express their creativity while they play.
However, both kinds of Color can run amok if over used. When it comes to Essential Color, imagine if you put all the weapon tables for DnD together or compiled all the damage tables for Rolemaster that have ever been printed. It would be overwhelming! And what good would it do? Many of the weapons/tables are redundant and would just get in the way of players trying to have fun by increasing the handling time greatly. Likewise, Casual color (whether in a textual Setting description or description that comes from the mouth of a GM) can be overdone to the point where it wastes time rather than increases interest.
When designing your game, balancing the amount of Color you include won’t be all that tricky. Read what you have written for yourself. Do you get tired of reading about the same thing for three pages? If you do, chances are someone else will also. Similarly, when you read over your writing, is there something that jumps out at you that makes you wish you had written more about it? If so, then write more about it! However, the best test for the right mixture of Color is to have someone other than yourself read it. Get some outside feedback, and see what they find interesting, boring, or inconsequential. Use that as your guidepost.
Peace,
-Troy
Color is identified by the Forge as one of the five main areas of Exploration. It is defined in the Provisional Glossary as, “Imagined details about any or all of System, Character, Setting, or Situation, added in such a way that does not change aspects of action or resolution in the imagined scene. One of the Components of Exploration.”
Okay….so what does that mean? Think of Color as synonymous with Detail. Any description or item that adds detail to the game’s SYSTEM, Characters, Setting, or Situation, is considered to be Color. How about some examples?
-SYSTEM with no Color:
The character kills the other character.
-SYSTEM with Color:
The Warrior uses his mighty great sword to lop off the head of King Moligant on the roll of a critical 20.
-Setting with no Color:
A town.
-Setting with Color:
1602 in the year of our Lord., near the village of Malbork, nestled among the Frozen Mountains outside the Enchanted Forest.
-Character with no Color:
A man.
-Character with Color:
Drakh the level 20 Barbarian from the southern wastes of Hallowfell.
-Situation with no Color
A village in crisis
-Situation with Color
The small hamlet of Esteria is suffering from a malignant plague brought on by undead agents under the command of a local demagogue who is advocating rebellion against the town council.
When I think about Color, I divide it into two categories: Essential and Casual. Essential Color is something that the players need to know in order to correctly use and understand the item being described. For instance, knowing that a cleric is a dwarf in DnD is Essential Color. That designation brings with it a lot of consequences. You certainly would expect different things from the character if he were an elven cleric, or a Halfling cleric, or a drow cleric. Essential Color is used as a cue to the players as to how they should react to or use the item in question.
Casual Color, on the other hand, is pure description for aesthetic purposes. For instance, saying that the same cleric is bald is unlikely to have any consequential effect on play. It could just as easily be ignored and play would continue on just fine. However, Casual Color is important because it adds detail to play and can help players immerse themselves in the world. Casual Color piques interest and gives players a chance to express their creativity while they play.
However, both kinds of Color can run amok if over used. When it comes to Essential Color, imagine if you put all the weapon tables for DnD together or compiled all the damage tables for Rolemaster that have ever been printed. It would be overwhelming! And what good would it do? Many of the weapons/tables are redundant and would just get in the way of players trying to have fun by increasing the handling time greatly. Likewise, Casual color (whether in a textual Setting description or description that comes from the mouth of a GM) can be overdone to the point where it wastes time rather than increases interest.
When designing your game, balancing the amount of Color you include won’t be all that tricky. Read what you have written for yourself. Do you get tired of reading about the same thing for three pages? If you do, chances are someone else will also. Similarly, when you read over your writing, is there something that jumps out at you that makes you wish you had written more about it? If so, then write more about it! However, the best test for the right mixture of Color is to have someone other than yourself read it. Get some outside feedback, and see what they find interesting, boring, or inconsequential. Use that as your guidepost.
Peace,
-Troy
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
What is a 'Sacred Cow' ?
Heya,
Every now and then on game design boards or blogs you hear people talk about "shooting a sacred cow." While I applaud this, the phrase is rarely ever explained nor are examples amply given. This post tries to do both of those things. Basically, a "Sacred Cow" in RPGs is a design mechanic or motif that seems inextricably part of RPG design. In other words, if you don't have this "thing", whatever it is, your game is not an RPG. Well this is, of course, absurd. In every field of art, science, and culture the envelope has been pushed and definitions of what a thing is or isn't has been stretched. RPGs are no different. In the last 7 to 10 years, many Sacred Cows have been shot dead and the definition of what a role-playing game is has been stretched a great deal.
But what are a few examples “Sacred Cows?” Here's a few off the top of my head:
Sacred Cow #1: Every game needs a GM
---Shooters: Universalis, Capes, Cutthroat
Sacred Cow #2: RPGs shouldn't deal mechanically with the idea of romance
---Shooters: Breaking the Ice, It was a Mutual Decision, Blue Rose
Sacred Cow #3: You must use dice for resolution
---Shooters: Amber Diceless, Castle Faulkenstein, Dust Devils
Sacred Cow #4: Each player should have only one character
---Shooters: Ars Magica
Sacred Cow #5: Characters who lose in combat should die
---Shooters: Dogs in the Vinyard, Toon, Hierarchy
Sacred Cow #6: All characters should be "people"
---Shooters: Cats, The Secret Lives of Gingerbreadmen, Puppetland
There are plenty of others. And sometimes, a design might require one or more Sacred Cows. There's nothing wrong with taking advantage of design patterns that have worked in the past. They've worked for a reason! However, there is also nothing wrong with taking a step out of what has been done and looking for something that hasn't. Don't be afraid to shoot some of those Sacred Cows. They could be the very thing holding back your design.
Peace,
-Troy
Every now and then on game design boards or blogs you hear people talk about "shooting a sacred cow." While I applaud this, the phrase is rarely ever explained nor are examples amply given. This post tries to do both of those things. Basically, a "Sacred Cow" in RPGs is a design mechanic or motif that seems inextricably part of RPG design. In other words, if you don't have this "thing", whatever it is, your game is not an RPG. Well this is, of course, absurd. In every field of art, science, and culture the envelope has been pushed and definitions of what a thing is or isn't has been stretched. RPGs are no different. In the last 7 to 10 years, many Sacred Cows have been shot dead and the definition of what a role-playing game is has been stretched a great deal.
But what are a few examples “Sacred Cows?” Here's a few off the top of my head:
Sacred Cow #1: Every game needs a GM
---Shooters: Universalis, Capes, Cutthroat
Sacred Cow #2: RPGs shouldn't deal mechanically with the idea of romance
---Shooters: Breaking the Ice, It was a Mutual Decision, Blue Rose
Sacred Cow #3: You must use dice for resolution
---Shooters: Amber Diceless, Castle Faulkenstein, Dust Devils
Sacred Cow #4: Each player should have only one character
---Shooters: Ars Magica
Sacred Cow #5: Characters who lose in combat should die
---Shooters: Dogs in the Vinyard, Toon, Hierarchy
Sacred Cow #6: All characters should be "people"
---Shooters: Cats, The Secret Lives of Gingerbreadmen, Puppetland
There are plenty of others. And sometimes, a design might require one or more Sacred Cows. There's nothing wrong with taking advantage of design patterns that have worked in the past. They've worked for a reason! However, there is also nothing wrong with taking a step out of what has been done and looking for something that hasn't. Don't be afraid to shoot some of those Sacred Cows. They could be the very thing holding back your design.
Peace,
-Troy
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
Why Do People Do RPGs?
Heya,
A while back I posted a series of 5 questions on Game Craft in the spirit of Socratic Design. I wanted to share the answers here on this blog partly as research. The responses are non-scientific, but are never-the-less useful. Designers should know how other people passionate about RPGs feel and what/why they play. Perhaps some of the answers posted to the questions on Game Craft will inspire you to write something.
Why Do You Design?
Why Do You Play?
What Do You Play?
What Do You Play With?
What Are You?
Like I said, the answers are just data if you're doing some non-scientific research for a project. But I feel we can all learn from each other as we share our views, experiences, and preferences. If you like, feel free to add to these answers by replying here on Socratic Design. You will only add to the tapestry those respondants started.
Peace,
-Troy
A while back I posted a series of 5 questions on Game Craft in the spirit of Socratic Design. I wanted to share the answers here on this blog partly as research. The responses are non-scientific, but are never-the-less useful. Designers should know how other people passionate about RPGs feel and what/why they play. Perhaps some of the answers posted to the questions on Game Craft will inspire you to write something.
Why Do You Design?
Why Do You Play?
What Do You Play?
What Do You Play With?
What Are You?
Like I said, the answers are just data if you're doing some non-scientific research for a project. But I feel we can all learn from each other as we share our views, experiences, and preferences. If you like, feel free to add to these answers by replying here on Socratic Design. You will only add to the tapestry those respondants started.
Peace,
-Troy
Sunday, May 06, 2007
Why Should I Post My Power 19?
Heya,
For a while it was a really hip thing to post your Power 19 at the Forge or Story Games. Over time, it slightly fell out of favor. Andy discourages people from posting them at SG and the new guys at the Forge are now far removed from the post I made back in 2005. But recently Ralph Maza suggested that we start posting our Power 19’s again, and I couldn’t agree more. There are several good reasons for doing this, but I’ll just give your three.
Reason #1: New designers can learn from the answers of veteran designers. If you are a published game designer and are working on a new game, post your Power 19 on the Forge or on GameCraft. There are so many designers out there who can benefit just from reading the responses you created when meeting the challenges outlined in the Power 19. The questions on character creation, rewards, resolution, and target audience are all key questions IMO that stump newbie designers. Seeing veterans post their solutions to those problems is an education in and of itself. A bank of Power 19’s on the Forge or GameCraft would become like a library for newer designers to go, check out, and learn from.
Reason #2: You might (GASP!) get some useful feedback on something you had never thought of before. I have a feeling that some designers hesitate posting a Power 19 publicly because they are afraid of getting bad or useless advice that will either eat up too much of their time responding to or send them down a path that ruins the game. Phooey! Feedback, even misguided or lackadaisical can be useful to a designer as it help you reinforce and defend your ideas. At worst, the feedback will help you sharpen your edge. And who knows, someone might actually offer something insightful that helps your game way more than a playtesting session would have.
Reason #3: Speaking of playtesting, it is way easier to get outside playtesting if you have talked about your game in public. The Power 19 is an excellent hyping tool for a game. It lets the readers know all about your game, the key components, and what you plan to do with it in the future. If you are looking to get some people invested in your playtesting or ashcan release of your game, then publicly posting a Power 19 on it is a great way to get that ball rolling. Just try it. See what kind of response you get.
Posting your Power 19 is a win-win for everyone. The Forge and GameCraft get more traffic. You get useful feedback and promote interest in your design. Future designers get a resource they would, otherwise, have no contact with. I encourage you, if you’ve gotten to the point in your game where you can answer most of the questions in the Power 19, go for it!
Peace,
-Troy
For a while it was a really hip thing to post your Power 19 at the Forge or Story Games. Over time, it slightly fell out of favor. Andy discourages people from posting them at SG and the new guys at the Forge are now far removed from the post I made back in 2005. But recently Ralph Maza suggested that we start posting our Power 19’s again, and I couldn’t agree more. There are several good reasons for doing this, but I’ll just give your three.
Reason #1: New designers can learn from the answers of veteran designers. If you are a published game designer and are working on a new game, post your Power 19 on the Forge or on GameCraft. There are so many designers out there who can benefit just from reading the responses you created when meeting the challenges outlined in the Power 19. The questions on character creation, rewards, resolution, and target audience are all key questions IMO that stump newbie designers. Seeing veterans post their solutions to those problems is an education in and of itself. A bank of Power 19’s on the Forge or GameCraft would become like a library for newer designers to go, check out, and learn from.
Reason #2: You might (GASP!) get some useful feedback on something you had never thought of before. I have a feeling that some designers hesitate posting a Power 19 publicly because they are afraid of getting bad or useless advice that will either eat up too much of their time responding to or send them down a path that ruins the game. Phooey! Feedback, even misguided or lackadaisical can be useful to a designer as it help you reinforce and defend your ideas. At worst, the feedback will help you sharpen your edge. And who knows, someone might actually offer something insightful that helps your game way more than a playtesting session would have.
Reason #3: Speaking of playtesting, it is way easier to get outside playtesting if you have talked about your game in public. The Power 19 is an excellent hyping tool for a game. It lets the readers know all about your game, the key components, and what you plan to do with it in the future. If you are looking to get some people invested in your playtesting or ashcan release of your game, then publicly posting a Power 19 on it is a great way to get that ball rolling. Just try it. See what kind of response you get.
Posting your Power 19 is a win-win for everyone. The Forge and GameCraft get more traffic. You get useful feedback and promote interest in your design. Future designers get a resource they would, otherwise, have no contact with. I encourage you, if you’ve gotten to the point in your game where you can answer most of the questions in the Power 19, go for it!
Peace,
-Troy
Monday, April 30, 2007
How Can My Game Better Teach Mechanics?
Heya,
One of the largest barriers, if not the largest barrier, to playing an RPG is learning the mechanics. Human beings are so unpredictable in the way they use words, understand words, and act upon words. For instance, back in the 90's I played ADnD with three different groups. Each group interpreted the text differently. Everything from the number of spells wizards got per level to how to roll initiative was slightly different- not because of house rules, but because people just read the official rules differently. IMO, this sort of thing is not all that desirable. So how can we avoid it?
First, examples play a key role in helping people understand new content. Giving players a model to follow offers them a template for their own experiences with your game. There are three types of examples I'd like to talk about for a moment: Generic, Faux-play, and Actual Play.
Generic examples are quick bites of information just to make an abstract idea concrete. For instance, if you were to give an example for Stats, you might say "John's character has a Strength of 5, an Agility of 4, a Logic of 10, and a Charisma of 8." That's a Generic example. Usually, you are not recounting anything that actually happened while someone was playing the game. It doesn't matter what the numbers were or who the players were, and the example will have no further bearing on the text beyond the section where it is included.
Faux-play examples are very common in RPGs. They often appear at the beginning (like my own Ember Twilight), during the resolution chapter, or at the ending of a book. They are usually written as a script where players are sitting around a table talking through their play. Sometimes, they include an over use of words like "Awesome" or have lots of exclamation points. Such an example might go something like this:
GM (rolls and 18): Okay, the orc swings and hits you with his club. 5 Damage. Your turn, Jake.
Jake: Ouch that hurts. I'm going to swing back. (rolls a 17). I hit!
GM: Nice hit, Jake! He takes 8 damage and dies.
Jake: Awesome!
I call this a Faux-play because it's totally manufactured. This is hardly how people play an RPG, but it is how play is commonly portrayed in an RPG text. However, these kinds of examples are still useful. They can demonstrate the order of mechanics and how various parts of the system work in concert with each other.
An Actual Play example is when a writer uses an Actual Play report, either one posted on the Internet or one he wrote for his own reflection, and includes that in the text. This isn't done too often. However, an Actual Play example provides the reader with an authentic model for play. By reading an Actual Play report within the text of a game, the reader will gain much more insight as to how the game truly works with real people in the real world. This can be invaluable especially if the game has a lot of complex mechanics.
There is room for all three kinds of examples in an RPG. A writer should be aware of each and use them appropriately.
A second way an RPG can teach its mechanics is to be aware of how learning takes place. Over on Story Games, Doyce Testerman wrote a series of posts talking about adult learning styles. Rather than replicate his work, I'll link them here for you:
[Teaching Your Game] Rules for Teaching Adults
[Teaching Your Game] Teaching Specific Tasks
[Teaching Your Game] Attention Span and Effective Use of Time
[Teaching Your Game] Readability – The Fog Index
[Teaching Your Game] Using Adult Learning Techniques to Deliver Game Content
Finally, a game can teach its mechanics through a tutorial. Some games turn themselves into graphic novels that visually and literarily teach the mechanics to the readers. Sometimes a game will offer a step by step procedure for the players to follow to create and use their characters for the first time. This is most common on CRPGs or MMORPGs, but tabletop games can do the same. It becomes a matter of writer's choice.
It is very important to be aware that a game must do its best to teach the mechanics it contains to the reader. Failure to provide clear examples or failure to understand how people read and learn will cause real problems when people sit down to play your game. If you would like to test the "learnability" of your game, give it to someone who's never seen it before and ask them to make a character and tell you how they will use that character in play. It might just surprise you.
Peace,
-Troy
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
What Else Besides Dice?
Heya,
I’m going to talk just a little bit about resolution systems today- specifically using things other than dice. Nothing too deep. I just got back from Forge Midwest and grad school is still swamping me with work. But anyway, I haven’t made a real post in a while, and I thought I it’s about time I did.
First, let me say that not using dice in your resolution system does not automatically make your game cool or awesome. Nor does it instantly garner you some kind of “indie cred” with other designers if that’s the sort of thing you’re after. Choosing not to use dice will not make your game any better if all the other mechanics don’t hold up on their own. Do not interpret this as a call for more diceless games or an article extolling the virtues of non-traditional resolution systems. This is simply an informational post about a certain portion of resolution mechanics I’ve either used, toyed with, or played with in some way. Also, do not mistake this as an exhaustive list of how to use non-dice resolutions mechanics. These are just the ones I’ve considered at some point. Maybe you’ll find them useful too :)
Cards: A deck of cards can be a useful set of randomizers to use instead of dice. Without the jokers, you have 52 possibilities. That’s quite a few, and may give you the range of possibilities you want for your game if a d20 is too few and a d100 is too much. You can also organize cards into various groups. You have 4 suits, 2 colors, 12 face cards (not counting aces, 16 if you do), evens and odds. Depending on how often you want a certain result to come up, you can look at card groupings to get percentages and probabilities. If you decide to include jokers, you have the opportunity to throw in really rare or powerful effects when the jokers do get played that won’t come up so often that they break the game, but often enough that they get noticed. Also, don’t overlook the fact that there are already many games out there that use a standard 52 deck of cards. Games like poker, blackjack, and euchre can all be employed by an RPG designer to act as the resolution system itself. They become a game within a game.
Coins: Coin flipping is a game almost everyone has played as a child. It usually involves very low stakes gambling, and provides binary results (heads or tales). However, coins can be expanded in an RPG to where players are flipping multiple coins and checking the results either against another player’s flip, a table of some kind, or a difficulty rating. Coins are fairly accessible, but can be a pain to keep up with if the numbers coins getting flipped gets too high. But the fact that they are quick, easy to find, and can serve double as tokens or currency markers, makes coins a viable choice for RPG resolution.
Dominos: Dominos are seldom used by RPG designers, but they are just as legitimate as anything else. There are several different sets you can get on the market. Some sets go from double zero (a blank domino) to double 6 (six dots on both sides). There are others that go from double zero all the way to double 18! And, of course, there’s everything in between. Dominos can be used in several ways for resolution, and I’m sure there’s some that I won’t list here. First, you can use random draws w/ a comparison of the totals on the dominos to see who wins. A domino that is 6/8 would beet a domino that is 1/2. You could actually build a train of dominos on the table, and if a player want’s his character to do something, but can’t play a tile, then he is unable to act. The dominos would serve as gate keepers in this sense. Players could also possible build their own trains, then spend the dominos as currency throughout the game to gain the effects they want. And there’s plenty more creative uses for dominos in an RPG. The key to this, however, is to take advantage of the properties of the domino. That is, they are physical object, they have two values, probably have varying colors, and rules for a game that uses them already exists.
Tokens: Tokens can be anything from glass beads to plastic disks to rose petals. Tokens keep track of some resource a player has access to or can serve as a countdown to some endgame scenario. They are physical objects and thus, everyone at the table is probably going to know who has how many tokens everyone has available to them. In resolution, tokens can be used in bidding wars, comparisons, gambling, and spending. In a bidding war, players would go back and forth bidding tokens until one person gives up or they both run out. Comparisons between token pools would put an emphasis only on accumulating large numbers of tokens in order to defeat enemies. The more tokens you have, the stronger the foe you can overcome. Gambling is like a bidding war, but instead the winner would receive some amount of tokens back. The loser would lose all of his. Gambling puts an emphasis on resource management and risk-taking. Finally, spending tokens is the simplest way to use them. A player would simply need to spend X number of tokens to generate Y effect. There is no real randomness in that system unless the X is somehow variable and constantly changing.
Point Pools: Point pools are a lot like tokens, however they are easier to keep secret. Typically, there is a spot on a character sheet to track them. They can be used in much the same way tokens can, but don’t require the players to have physical objects at the table to manipulate during the resolution phase of the game. In fact, this is they system I’m using with one of my games that I’ll link over on my design blog once I get the chance. One nice thing about point pools vs. tokens is that trading points between different pools is quite easy. Shift points from your “Power Pool” to your “Relationship Pool” involves just an eraser and a couple pencil marks. This can be done quickly and easily. Counting out tokens, sorting different colors of beads or chips from each other, and stacking them all in a neat pile can be tedious and time consuming.
Talk: Finally, the last non-dice resolution mechanic I’m going to cover is talking. Of all the gimmicky things I mentioned, talking is probably the most basic. In fact, you probably do this all the time in your group. The GM might say, “Okay, you walk into the bar…” and another player replies, “No wait, I want to get something out of the trunk of my car first…” That right there is an example of talk resolving a conflict. An entire game can work like that, however, there has to be a significant “buy-in” by all the players. You, as the designer, are counting on them not to just run wild and describe themselves conquering the world in a single instance of resolution. You’re also not giving the players much to work with. IMO, people generally do feel more comfortable with some “objective” item telling them what happens. Dice, cards, and points are all popular for a reason. Talk can be tricky to incorporate into the actual mechanics of a game. Use it with caution.
Like I said earlier, nothing profound here. Just a simple catalog of a few non-traditional mechanics. I am neither encouraging nor discouraging their use, but I definitely wanted to get this up on my blog for future reference. It’s good to be aware of the wide variety of possibilities out there when it comes to resolution systems. Take care all! :)
Peace,
-Troy
I’m going to talk just a little bit about resolution systems today- specifically using things other than dice. Nothing too deep. I just got back from Forge Midwest and grad school is still swamping me with work. But anyway, I haven’t made a real post in a while, and I thought I it’s about time I did.
First, let me say that not using dice in your resolution system does not automatically make your game cool or awesome. Nor does it instantly garner you some kind of “indie cred” with other designers if that’s the sort of thing you’re after. Choosing not to use dice will not make your game any better if all the other mechanics don’t hold up on their own. Do not interpret this as a call for more diceless games or an article extolling the virtues of non-traditional resolution systems. This is simply an informational post about a certain portion of resolution mechanics I’ve either used, toyed with, or played with in some way. Also, do not mistake this as an exhaustive list of how to use non-dice resolutions mechanics. These are just the ones I’ve considered at some point. Maybe you’ll find them useful too :)
Cards: A deck of cards can be a useful set of randomizers to use instead of dice. Without the jokers, you have 52 possibilities. That’s quite a few, and may give you the range of possibilities you want for your game if a d20 is too few and a d100 is too much. You can also organize cards into various groups. You have 4 suits, 2 colors, 12 face cards (not counting aces, 16 if you do), evens and odds. Depending on how often you want a certain result to come up, you can look at card groupings to get percentages and probabilities. If you decide to include jokers, you have the opportunity to throw in really rare or powerful effects when the jokers do get played that won’t come up so often that they break the game, but often enough that they get noticed. Also, don’t overlook the fact that there are already many games out there that use a standard 52 deck of cards. Games like poker, blackjack, and euchre can all be employed by an RPG designer to act as the resolution system itself. They become a game within a game.
Coins: Coin flipping is a game almost everyone has played as a child. It usually involves very low stakes gambling, and provides binary results (heads or tales). However, coins can be expanded in an RPG to where players are flipping multiple coins and checking the results either against another player’s flip, a table of some kind, or a difficulty rating. Coins are fairly accessible, but can be a pain to keep up with if the numbers coins getting flipped gets too high. But the fact that they are quick, easy to find, and can serve double as tokens or currency markers, makes coins a viable choice for RPG resolution.
Dominos: Dominos are seldom used by RPG designers, but they are just as legitimate as anything else. There are several different sets you can get on the market. Some sets go from double zero (a blank domino) to double 6 (six dots on both sides). There are others that go from double zero all the way to double 18! And, of course, there’s everything in between. Dominos can be used in several ways for resolution, and I’m sure there’s some that I won’t list here. First, you can use random draws w/ a comparison of the totals on the dominos to see who wins. A domino that is 6/8 would beet a domino that is 1/2. You could actually build a train of dominos on the table, and if a player want’s his character to do something, but can’t play a tile, then he is unable to act. The dominos would serve as gate keepers in this sense. Players could also possible build their own trains, then spend the dominos as currency throughout the game to gain the effects they want. And there’s plenty more creative uses for dominos in an RPG. The key to this, however, is to take advantage of the properties of the domino. That is, they are physical object, they have two values, probably have varying colors, and rules for a game that uses them already exists.
Tokens: Tokens can be anything from glass beads to plastic disks to rose petals. Tokens keep track of some resource a player has access to or can serve as a countdown to some endgame scenario. They are physical objects and thus, everyone at the table is probably going to know who has how many tokens everyone has available to them. In resolution, tokens can be used in bidding wars, comparisons, gambling, and spending. In a bidding war, players would go back and forth bidding tokens until one person gives up or they both run out. Comparisons between token pools would put an emphasis only on accumulating large numbers of tokens in order to defeat enemies. The more tokens you have, the stronger the foe you can overcome. Gambling is like a bidding war, but instead the winner would receive some amount of tokens back. The loser would lose all of his. Gambling puts an emphasis on resource management and risk-taking. Finally, spending tokens is the simplest way to use them. A player would simply need to spend X number of tokens to generate Y effect. There is no real randomness in that system unless the X is somehow variable and constantly changing.
Point Pools: Point pools are a lot like tokens, however they are easier to keep secret. Typically, there is a spot on a character sheet to track them. They can be used in much the same way tokens can, but don’t require the players to have physical objects at the table to manipulate during the resolution phase of the game. In fact, this is they system I’m using with one of my games that I’ll link over on my design blog once I get the chance. One nice thing about point pools vs. tokens is that trading points between different pools is quite easy. Shift points from your “Power Pool” to your “Relationship Pool” involves just an eraser and a couple pencil marks. This can be done quickly and easily. Counting out tokens, sorting different colors of beads or chips from each other, and stacking them all in a neat pile can be tedious and time consuming.
Talk: Finally, the last non-dice resolution mechanic I’m going to cover is talking. Of all the gimmicky things I mentioned, talking is probably the most basic. In fact, you probably do this all the time in your group. The GM might say, “Okay, you walk into the bar…” and another player replies, “No wait, I want to get something out of the trunk of my car first…” That right there is an example of talk resolving a conflict. An entire game can work like that, however, there has to be a significant “buy-in” by all the players. You, as the designer, are counting on them not to just run wild and describe themselves conquering the world in a single instance of resolution. You’re also not giving the players much to work with. IMO, people generally do feel more comfortable with some “objective” item telling them what happens. Dice, cards, and points are all popular for a reason. Talk can be tricky to incorporate into the actual mechanics of a game. Use it with caution.
Like I said earlier, nothing profound here. Just a simple catalog of a few non-traditional mechanics. I am neither encouraging nor discouraging their use, but I definitely wanted to get this up on my blog for future reference. It’s good to be aware of the wide variety of possibilities out there when it comes to resolution systems. Take care all! :)
Peace,
-Troy
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Interview Part 2
Heya,
The guys over at Cannon Puncture have posted the second part of my interview with them. It's my first podcast interview and I'll have to say it was intimidating at first. But I got to talk about two things I really love: playing and designing games. Oh, and I got to plug my two favorite OOP CCGs, too! That rocks. Anyway, hope you enjoy :)
Peace,
-Troy
The guys over at Cannon Puncture have posted the second part of my interview with them. It's my first podcast interview and I'll have to say it was intimidating at first. But I got to talk about two things I really love: playing and designing games. Oh, and I got to plug my two favorite OOP CCGs, too! That rocks. Anyway, hope you enjoy :)
Peace,
-Troy
Monday, April 02, 2007
Game Chef Update
Heya,
Life has gotten really busy for me lately. Between participating in the Game Chef competition and grad school, I haven't had must time for blogging. So I'll point you towards some other guys who are talking about the competition. Over on Canon Puncture, several designers (including myself) are doing some interviews about their games and the competition in general. Andy Kitkowski gives a really good description about the contest and what he hopes comes from it. Give it a listen if you get a chance :)
Peace,
-Troy
Life has gotten really busy for me lately. Between participating in the Game Chef competition and grad school, I haven't had must time for blogging. So I'll point you towards some other guys who are talking about the competition. Over on Canon Puncture, several designers (including myself) are doing some interviews about their games and the competition in general. Andy Kitkowski gives a really good description about the contest and what he hopes comes from it. Give it a listen if you get a chance :)
Peace,
-Troy
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Want to Win a Contest?
Heya,
The best way to get better at game design is to practice game design. I firmly believe every nascent designer should give it a go in the public eye so they can get some feedback on their ideas and though processes. So here's your chance. Right now the Iron Game Chef is going on sponsored by Andy Kitkowski (of Story Games and 1KM1KT fame). This is a contest where random "game ingredients" (which are really just game terms used to inspire design) are passed out to the contest participants. Everyone has two weeks to create a design and post it for general feedback. It's a lot of fun and a great learning opportunity.
If you are reading this, then you need to do it. No, don't blow it off. Go to THIS THREAD right now and sign up! I've done it and as a result I've got The Holmes and Watson Committee RPG coming out this year. Other people have done it and produced games like Polaris, The Mountain Witch, and Crime and Punishment. So this is your opportunity to strike gold. Please, please join in and feel free to use the resources I've posted at Socratic Design to help you gain an edge. Trust me, you won't regret the decision to enter.
Peace,
-Troy
The best way to get better at game design is to practice game design. I firmly believe every nascent designer should give it a go in the public eye so they can get some feedback on their ideas and though processes. So here's your chance. Right now the Iron Game Chef is going on sponsored by Andy Kitkowski (of Story Games and 1KM1KT fame). This is a contest where random "game ingredients" (which are really just game terms used to inspire design) are passed out to the contest participants. Everyone has two weeks to create a design and post it for general feedback. It's a lot of fun and a great learning opportunity.
If you are reading this, then you need to do it. No, don't blow it off. Go to THIS THREAD right now and sign up! I've done it and as a result I've got The Holmes and Watson Committee RPG coming out this year. Other people have done it and produced games like Polaris, The Mountain Witch, and Crime and Punishment. So this is your opportunity to strike gold. Please, please join in and feel free to use the resources I've posted at Socratic Design to help you gain an edge. Trust me, you won't regret the decision to enter.
Peace,
-Troy
Monday, March 05, 2007
Are There Any Design Outlines?
Heya,
Why yes there are! So glad you asked. Actually you didn't, I just needed a way to set up this article. heh heh
Anyway, this blog is suposed to be about practical design theory and useful design tools. I've gotten away from that for a little bit, but I hope to get back to that in earnest. So, in that vein, I'm going to share something personal with you. Ever since I wrote Cutthroat, I've been thinking about what it takes to make a complete game. As in, what components have to be there in order for a game to be considered playtest-able. I noticed that when I wrote Cutthroat, I made sure certain things were present. When I wrote Hierarchy, I noticed a lot of those same things were again purposely added to the game. Mainly these are subsystems like, character creation, resolution, reward systems, the endgame, and so on. That's nothing new.
But what I decided to do was take careful note of the mechanics I unconsciously included and then from those notes, I developed an outline. Then I wrote Standoff! And the outline didn't fit, so I modified it. Then I wrote Holmes and Watson, and the outline needed further redrafting. Since Cutthroat I have written seven games. Each time I refined my outline more and more. This is what I give to you:
Outline for Design #1
Outline for Design #2
Outline for Design #3
Outline for Design #4
Outline for Design #5
Outline for Design #6
Outline for Design #7
Outline for Design #8
Outline for Design #9
As you can see, each one is a refined copy of the one that precedes it. Game design is a process that never ends. I imagine that I'll continure to refine this outline, and I will likely edit this article to include future editions.
Here's the thing you need to keep in mind, though. These aren't the only outlines you can use for designing a game. These are just the ones I've used. Plenty of designers use different ones, or don't use one at all. What they do is help me organize my thoughts and signal me when I've finished enough for a playtestable draft. They help me know when I've met the minimum requirements for a finished design.
Also, even if you do like them, not every outline will be right for you. You might find #3 suits you better than #5. Or you could find that none of them suit you. Or it could be that #7 is the very thing you've been looking for. Take these outlines for what they are: one potential tool out of many. If this kick-starts your design, then awesome! If not, that's cool too. These are just here to help those who need it :)
Peace,
-Troy
PS: Please feel free to report any non-functioning links. Appreciate it! :)
Why yes there are! So glad you asked. Actually you didn't, I just needed a way to set up this article. heh heh
Anyway, this blog is suposed to be about practical design theory and useful design tools. I've gotten away from that for a little bit, but I hope to get back to that in earnest. So, in that vein, I'm going to share something personal with you. Ever since I wrote Cutthroat, I've been thinking about what it takes to make a complete game. As in, what components have to be there in order for a game to be considered playtest-able. I noticed that when I wrote Cutthroat, I made sure certain things were present. When I wrote Hierarchy, I noticed a lot of those same things were again purposely added to the game. Mainly these are subsystems like, character creation, resolution, reward systems, the endgame, and so on. That's nothing new.
But what I decided to do was take careful note of the mechanics I unconsciously included and then from those notes, I developed an outline. Then I wrote Standoff! And the outline didn't fit, so I modified it. Then I wrote Holmes and Watson, and the outline needed further redrafting. Since Cutthroat I have written seven games. Each time I refined my outline more and more. This is what I give to you:
Outline for Design #1
Outline for Design #2
Outline for Design #3
Outline for Design #4
Outline for Design #5
Outline for Design #6
Outline for Design #7
Outline for Design #8
Outline for Design #9
As you can see, each one is a refined copy of the one that precedes it. Game design is a process that never ends. I imagine that I'll continure to refine this outline, and I will likely edit this article to include future editions.
Here's the thing you need to keep in mind, though. These aren't the only outlines you can use for designing a game. These are just the ones I've used. Plenty of designers use different ones, or don't use one at all. What they do is help me organize my thoughts and signal me when I've finished enough for a playtestable draft. They help me know when I've met the minimum requirements for a finished design.
Also, even if you do like them, not every outline will be right for you. You might find #3 suits you better than #5. Or you could find that none of them suit you. Or it could be that #7 is the very thing you've been looking for. Take these outlines for what they are: one potential tool out of many. If this kick-starts your design, then awesome! If not, that's cool too. These are just here to help those who need it :)
Peace,
-Troy
PS: Please feel free to report any non-functioning links. Appreciate it! :)
Sunday, March 04, 2007
Not Ready for GenCon? Yes you are!
Heya,
Let's say you've got a game you've been working on for a while now. You have playtested it many times with your buddies and maybe even had an outside playtest or two. The game is fun, but you know it's not ready for full scale publication and sale in stores or at IPR. You would like to have your game ready for GenCon, but you're wise enough to know that if you could just get some more playtesting and feedback, your game would be a thousand times better. Enter Paul Czege.
He has a proposal for you. Paul knows what he's doing with it comes to self-publication. My Life With Master has been a hit since the day he released it. But now he wants to turn his attention to regular Joe's that need just a little more help getting their game ready for the big time. His offer is extremely generous, and guys, if you have a game that can fit his criteria I HIGHLY recomend you take him up on his offer. There's a discussion going on about the details and sign ups at the Forge. Post there if you have questions or concerns. This is something that could benefit a whole lotta designers, and help you "get your foot in the door."
Peace,
-Troy
Let's say you've got a game you've been working on for a while now. You have playtested it many times with your buddies and maybe even had an outside playtest or two. The game is fun, but you know it's not ready for full scale publication and sale in stores or at IPR. You would like to have your game ready for GenCon, but you're wise enough to know that if you could just get some more playtesting and feedback, your game would be a thousand times better. Enter Paul Czege.
He has a proposal for you. Paul knows what he's doing with it comes to self-publication. My Life With Master has been a hit since the day he released it. But now he wants to turn his attention to regular Joe's that need just a little more help getting their game ready for the big time. His offer is extremely generous, and guys, if you have a game that can fit his criteria I HIGHLY recomend you take him up on his offer. There's a discussion going on about the details and sign ups at the Forge. Post there if you have questions or concerns. This is something that could benefit a whole lotta designers, and help you "get your foot in the door."
Peace,
-Troy
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
RPG Design Contest
Heya,
If you haven't heard, Story Games is down. On another blog Andy (the guy who runs the site) and another guy (Mark) mentioned that you could write an RPG in the time that SG takes to get back up. What a great idea! So I started a contest on the Forge. The rules are this:
-Get it finished before SG is back up
-Use the basic rules of 24 Hour RPG (except the time limit)
-Encorperate the theme BLACKOUT in some way, shape or form.
Okay, get to work guys! Let's see what you got!
Peace,
-Troy
If you haven't heard, Story Games is down. On another blog Andy (the guy who runs the site) and another guy (Mark) mentioned that you could write an RPG in the time that SG takes to get back up. What a great idea! So I started a contest on the Forge. The rules are this:
-Get it finished before SG is back up
-Use the basic rules of 24 Hour RPG (except the time limit)
-Encorperate the theme BLACKOUT in some way, shape or form.
Okay, get to work guys! Let's see what you got!
Peace,
-Troy
A Rare Chance
Heya,
One of the biggest influences on me as a young game designer was John Wick. Back in 2000 he wrote a series of game design articles about a game called Orkworld. This was one of the first games that could truly be considered an "Independant RPG." I think Ron Edward's Sorcerer came out just a year ahead of Orkworld. Anyway, John is making a great offer (click here). Until 12pm (noon) on Wednesday, February 28th, you can get eight of his games on PDF (normally $55) for only $25. That's a great deal, IMO. You do have to have a PayPal account, but if you contact him personally, you might be able to make some other kind of arangement. I don't know. But if you are new to RPG design, I highly recomend this. If you like John Wick games, I highly recomend this. Heck, if you just like RPGs I highly recomend this :)
Peace,
-Troy
One of the biggest influences on me as a young game designer was John Wick. Back in 2000 he wrote a series of game design articles about a game called Orkworld. This was one of the first games that could truly be considered an "Independant RPG." I think Ron Edward's Sorcerer came out just a year ahead of Orkworld. Anyway, John is making a great offer (click here). Until 12pm (noon) on Wednesday, February 28th, you can get eight of his games on PDF (normally $55) for only $25. That's a great deal, IMO. You do have to have a PayPal account, but if you contact him personally, you might be able to make some other kind of arangement. I don't know. But if you are new to RPG design, I highly recomend this. If you like John Wick games, I highly recomend this. Heck, if you just like RPGs I highly recomend this :)
Peace,
-Troy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)