Another Process

Heya,

This is a follow-up to Troy’s 12 Step Process. Another game author responded to my article and gave his design process. It’s a good read, IMO. You can check it out here: Mike Miller’s Blog Talk.

I’ll give you a brief outline of what he says his process is like. Before he begins, he divides the process into two distinct activities: Designing and Writing.

1st he designs his game at the genre level. He brainstorms about tropes, issues, conflicts, fun, etc. Generally, he accumulates a pool of ideas and emotions he associates with the initial game concept.

2nd he focuses on player interactions and behaviors. Followed closely by mechanical enforcement and reinforcement of those behaviors.

3rd he does some self-testing of various and potential resolution mechanics, all the while keeping the main themes of the genre in mind.

4th he takes it to trusted advisors. He does not even have a complete draft at this point. It is, essentially, an oral game, not a written game yet.

5th Notes from the closed playtest with his friends become the basis for the rules of the game.

After explaining the game in a verbal a sufficient number of times, he converts it to written form. The writing process is also broken down into stages.

1st is the outline stage, giving himself a template to follow.

2nd is the draft stage, where he creates the first complete written version of the game.

3rd, interestingly, he gets his artists working on graphics for the game.

4th he sends the game to an external reader who makes notes, suggestions, and edits.

5th the test-revision-test-revision process begins until he is satisfied that he has a complete and playable game ready to go.

It’s very interesting and very good to get multiple viewpoints on the RPG design process. Note that Mike relies very heavily on trusted friends. Relationships with people who think and play in ways similar to him are the key to his design process. He has built these relationships over years, I would assume, and uses them to help build his games. If you have friends like Mike, I encourage you to think about using this process or hybridizing it with the 12 step process I gave earlier. It will take practice and experimentation to find the process that works best for you. Good luck!

Peace,

-Troy

Where can I get Art for my Game?

Heya,

One of the things I’m working on right now is getting art together for the games I’m about to release. I’m on a pretty tight budget at the moment, so economical art is really what I’m after. I imagine you are too. So to help out, here’s a list of links I’ve been using to fill in the spaces for my games:

Ed Heil’s Art Trove:
Ed has done the RPG world a favor here. He’s got a collection very good art and an equally generous offer. You get access to all the drawings on this website for only 25 bucks! Not only that, he’ll draw another picture for you according to your specifications. If you’re new to RPG design, let me let you in on something- this is a steal! Take Ed up on it.

Dover Art:
For years Dover Publishing has been releasing “clip art” type books. You can use up to 10 images per book without violating any copyright laws. If you want to use more, just write them and ask. You can find books on almost any subject here. I own over twenty at the moment. This is another high recommend. Oh, and I recommend that you order the books that come with CDs if you can. They’re a little more expensive, but scanning art is a pain and can have certain complications as far as fuzziness and resolution scale of the images.

MSN Clip Art:
Clip art can serve a purpose to help break up a page or add in small designs for stuff like page numbers and backgrounds. I don’t recommend making a whole book out of clip art, but you should be able to find some useful images here. They are free to download, so help yourself!

Wikimedia:
As much as I loathe and despise Wikipedia for academic reasons, I hail Wikimedia as a gift from heaven. There are tons of free pictures here that are very applicable to RPG designs. Make sure you read the warnings at the bottom of each picture. Some require accreditation and some aren’t actually free. But if you’re working on your game setting, especially if it’s based on a real place (like London or New York for instance), then this website is an answer to your prayers.

RPGNow Stock Art:
RPGNow has several pieces and collections of Stock Art for sale. It can really vary in price and usefulness, but if you’re in a pinch, you might be able to find something here. Of all the options I’m mentioning, this will be the most expensive. But remember, these guys are just trying to make a buck just like you. They should charge whatever they feel they can get for their product.

So anyway, I hope that helps some of you out. I know from experience how much of a pain getting art can be. Good luck to you guys :)

Peace,

-Troy

What is Troy's 12 Step Process?

What is the design process?

Heya,

By now if you’ve been reading this blog, if you haven’t go back and look over the stuff in the Anthology #1, you’ve seen me introduce thoughts and suggestions on various aspects of design. Sometimes I’ve talked about components (Death Spiral, Magic, Situation) and sometimes about tools (Big Three, Alt 3, Power 19). What I haven’t really talked about is a process to use these things. So here’s what I’m going to do today. I’m going to show you the process I’ve used on my games like Cutthroat, Hierarchy, and Holmes and Watson. Perhaps, it will help you out also and perhaps someone can offer an alternate or better version of a design process.

#1-Initial idea-

The first stage is generating a game idea. I carry around two spiral notebooks wherever I go, and I’m never very far from a computer. In the notebooks I jot down any game idea that comes to me. I feverishly write down all my thoughts without worrying about if the idea is workable or playable. The reason is that I forget stuff very easily. If I focus on working out all the details right away, I’ll miss the next wave of inspiration when it comes. This is just a brain storming exercise at this point.

#2-Colation-

After several days or weeks of jotting notes, I sit down in front of my computer and type up everything I’ve written down. I organize it, categorize it, and delete redundant or extraneous ideas. It’s at this point where I actually see what I’ve created and where my imagination was going with this.

#3-The Big Three/The Power 19-

After gathering up all my notes and ideas, I see if I can answer the Big Three about the game. Usually I can, but if I can’t, I know that either it’s not a game I can make or I need to do more work. If the Big Three come easily, I set to work on the Power 19. I meticulously go through them and answer as many as I can. Sometimes the answer is “I don’t know yet” or “Not applicable” which is just fine.

#4-Feedback-

Once I have the Power 19 in hand, I’m ready for feedback on the Internet. Whether I post my answers or I post a more general idea of what I plan on creating depends on what I need for the game design to progress further. Feedback is important because it will point out gaps and inconsistencies that the Power 19 or other design tools aren’t able address. Sometimes I take the advice and run with it. Sometimes I politely say thank you and go with my original idea. I wish I could give you some method of knowing when to do which, but it’s very much based on the individual who is designing the game.

#5-Rethink-

After feedback, it’s time to rethink things. Questions like “Can I finish this?”, “Is this game worthy of being finished?”, or “Will this game be enjoyable if I do finish it?” are the way I approach this phase. If I can answer yes to all three, then it’s time to get to work. Reexamining the Key Components is the next step I take in the Rethinking process. I call Key Components of a RPG design the following: Chargen, Resolution, Reward Cycles, Currencies, and Color. Using the feedback I have gotten, I explore how each of these areas of the game can be improved and how they relate to one another. Once I have that done, I’m ready for the draft.

#6-First Draft-

The First Draft comes in at the 6th stage of the design for me. I think a lot of people start at the draft stage and get overwhelmed by the project. I really encourage people to make an outline, use the Power 19, or come up with some other sort of devise to organize and categorize their design thoughts before attempting to write a playable draft. The work of writing an RPG, even one that’s only 50 pages or so, is immense. Breaking it up into smaller parts helps make the job more manageable. In any event, for me, the first draft is intended to be a coherent, readable, and playable version of the game. This is the “Alpha” design stage.

#7-Feedback-

Getting feedback on a draft used to be the hardest stage for me. Mostly because I couldn’t figure out how to share the draft. Now, with so many designers having their own websites, it’s easy to get someone to help out in that department. I gotta thank Blankshield Press for helping me out with Cutthroat in that regard. They were awesome about helping me out. And there are many more out there willing to help just like them. Anyway, posting your draft on the ‘net and getting people’s reactions is the next stage. It’s here where your game will really be molded into the RPG it wants to be. Even though you’ve already done a lot of work, expect many more changes to your game to come as a result of this stage. Be persistent here. Sometimes it can be deflating when no one responds to your posts. Keep trying and try on many websites. The Forge, RPGnet, and Story Games are all open forums for this sort of thing.

#8-Revision-

After getting feedback on the draft, it’s time to revise. This step is pretty simple. Choose the feedback that makes the most sense and adapt it to your game. Disregard the feedback that doesn’t make sense to you or that simply praises your design. Sadly, praise isn’t all that helpful when it comes to revising a draft. You may revise your draft, post it again for more feed back, revise it again, post, and repeat this process many times. Once your revisions are finished (at least for now), it’s time for the most fun and most agonizing part of RPG design.

#9-Playtest-

Playtesting is fun because you get to actually play! But it is also excruciating because it is slow, shows SO many weaknesses and ambiguities in your game, and requires constant revision. When I playtest, there is one thing I hold as important. That one thing is to play the full playtest session with the rules as they are currently written. I don’t change the rules midstream during a session just because we hit a bump in the road. Like any new game, it can take while to learn the system. Allow for that learning curve to take place before changing anything. Also, it’s hard to know how playable your draft was if you keep changing things constantly as you go. Playtesting needs to give you a clear picture of what your game is like and can do. It can’t do that, in my opinion, if you’re constantly stirring the waters with new ideas and mechanics on the spot.

#10-Revision-

Our old friend Revision is back. This time we take the feedback from the playtest sessions and use that to upgrade and revise the game. It will probably take several “playtest and revise” cycles for you to get a design hammered into shape. There’s no exact number, but I can definitely tell you it is greater than one. Somwhere in the middle of these cycles, you ought to open up the playtesting to groups outside your direct influence. The feedback you get from them will be invaluable.

#11-Feedback-

After playtesting and revision, its good to open your game up for one final round of feedback on the ‘net. This is when they can point out what sections of your game need more words, better clarification, and more examples. It’s really helpful if people who have never read your game before are able to look at it at this point. A fresh set of eyes will usually find the vagaries and oversights in a design. Get as many people to read it as possible. And for heaven’s sakes don’t worry about someone stealing your design and publishing it before you do. That’s one of the biggest mental obstacles new designers face. No one is going to steal your design and publish it. They might take inspiration from your mechanics and write their own game, but that’s only good for you! More than likely they will mention your game as they write theirs and, boom! that's free advertising for you. Never fear about someone swooping in and taking credit for your work.

#12-Revision-

With the final feedback in hand, you are ready for what will likely be the last revision. At this point your game will probably not be perfect. But here’s the truth when it comes to that. Your game will never be “perfect.” At some point, you will have to cut off the playtesting, revision, and feedback. If you don’t, you’ll never publish the darn thing, and publishing your game will teach you more about the whole process than you can possibly imagine. Double check your spelling, grammar, punctuation, make an index and table of contents, get a cover, and do the layout. These are the last parts of revision you will pass through for your game. So the only thing left is the business stuff of publishing, and that’s a post for another time. :)

I hope that the process I use will be helpful to some of you out there also. I’m sure that many other designers have different and fascinating methods they use as well. Check into the processes used by designers you admire and see if you can adapt them to your style. As always, questions are always welcome here at Socratic Design :)

Peace,

-Troy

How can Magic be used in an RPG?

Heya,

First let me apologize for not posting in a while. Real life has been quite busy lately, and I’ve been participating in the Game Chef competition, which took up a lot of time. I’ve also been revising my upcoming RPGs (Cutthroat, Hierarchy, Standoff!) which is going well but not quickly. So anyway, I’m back. :)

Okay, back to the question at hand. Magic (and I include under that term things like mad science, alchemy, psionics, super powers, etc.) can often be a real obstacle in game design. The temptation to add it can be strong, but the ability to “do it right” is sometimes elusive. John H. Kim has some interesting articles and HERE that might be useful reading, though I plan to take a slightly different tack on the subject.

The title of this article might be a little misleading. This essay is not intended to give suggestions about how magic spells might be cast and/or created in a game, but what purpose magic can serve in a game design. The problem I run into personally, and can see in other games that are in the design stage, is a failure to focus the purpose of magic in the design. To me, I see three major purposes that magic can serve in a game’s design: Tool, Hazard, or Theme (motif).

If you are thinking about using magic in your game, there are three questions you need to ask yourself:

1. Is magic a tool the player-characters can use to accomplish their goals?

2. Is magic a tool the GM (or opposing player) can use to add hazards/danger to the situation the player-characters face?

3. Is magic a neutral element of the Setting’s theme?

The absolute worst answer is a knee-jerk “All three!”

Magic, mechanically speaking, is just one of many possible design elements (including weapons, technology, monsters, equipment, etc.). Its presence in a game can be useful to GMs, Players, Both, or Neither. Whatever you decide, magic in your game should matter. Using it should reinforce what your game is about and not just be something tacked on because “people like it.” Let’s look at, what I think, are some good answers to the above three questions.

--Answer 1A: Magic is a tactical tool used by players to enhance their options in contests.
--Answer 1B: Magic is a tool used by players to create effects that are necessary to advance the game’s events (ie A Story Telling Device).
--Answer 1C: Magic is used by the players to differentiate the player-characters from each other.
--Answer 1D: Magic is an exclusive, balancing tool used by the players to overcome other, equally potent resources used by the GM.

--Answer 2A: Magic is a tactical tool used by the GM to enhance his options in contests.
--Answer 2B: Magic is a tool used by GM to create effects that are necessary to advance the game’s events (ie A Story Telling Device).
--Answer 2C: Magic is a tool used by the GM to thwart and/or challenge the abilities and intentions of the player-characters.
--Answer 2D: Magic itself is the enemy the player-characters must overcome.

--Answer 3A: Magic is a tool used to circumvent normal conventions and allow necessary game elements to appear in the game that otherwise would have been forbidden or out-of-place.
--Answer 3B: Magic is used to create the Situation that the players will address in the game.
--Answer 3C: Magic is used as Color to enhance the description of the Setting.
--Answer 3D: Magic is an inherent element in all things that raises the overall threat level in contests.

Each of these answers focuses the use of magic in a specific way. They aren’t talking about a gigantic list of spells in the back of the book for anyone to use or not use however they see fit. They denote explicitly how magic will be useful in play.

When you are deciding what role magic will play in your game design, imagine what a session of play should look like. Then ask:

-Would magic help or harm play?
-What impact on strategic options would adding or subtracting magic have?
-Who would benefit from the availability of magic?
-Who would suffer from the availability of magic?
-Who could and who could not use magic?
-When could the use of magic be inappropriate?
-Does the magic help reinforce what this game is supposed to be about?

I’m sure there’s more I could come up with, but these are a good start. Question, and examine everything. Truthfully, it’s important to ask yourself these sorts of questions concerning each of your design elements as you go. Magic is just one of many possibilities that I happened to focus on today.

Peace,

-Troy

What is a Death Spiral?

Heya,

A lot of game design jargon gets tossed around sometimes. And sometimes it’s not explained all that well and there exists a certain amount of trepidation in those who don’t understand the meaning. Asking for a definition is sometimes intimidating because it seems like everybody already knows. And who wants to be left out? I know that people feel this way, because I am someone who has felt that trepidation many times.

Toady I’m going to talk about Death Spirals. First, what is a Death Spiral? It’s a game mechanic involving the resolution system that somehow creates diminishing capabilities of the character and makes it more likely for the character’s capabilities to further diminish. That is to say, suffering an initial failure makes the second failure more likely, which makes the third even more likely and so on. There is virtually no escape from a Death Spiral once it’s begun.

What about an example? Risus is a good downloadable example, but rather than make you read that and then come back here, I’ll give you a hypothetical example (do go download Risus, though). Okay, pretend for a moment DnD3e had a Death Spiral. Whenever your character takes damage in combat it would not only decrease his Hit Points, but also diminish he Strength and Dexterity. This means, not only is he closer to dying, but his ability to hit, deal damage, and avoid damage are also lowered. This makes it harder for him to defend himself and/or kill his opponent.

So what makes this so bad? Shouldn’t characters suffer penalties for losing? Sure, but here’s the thing about Death Spirals that make them so bad. After the initial exchange, none of the further exchanges have any meaning. The stakes of the situation have already been decided! Go back to the above example. With an opponent’s Atk, AC, and Hit Points lowered, the chances of your harming him again are much greater. The chances of him harming you are less. Baring a great stroke of luck, you will harm him again. Then his STR and DEX lower even more. Making him even easier to hit and less likely to hit you. Will further exchanges change the course of the future for that character? No. So after the initial hit, the fight was decided. People just ended up wasting a lot of time rolling more dice. That’s boring.

A second kind of Death Spiral is a Party Death Spiral. If you have ever played an MMORPGs then you know exactly what I mean. But let’s look at DnD again. I’m going to make up a typical party: Fighter, Cleric, Wizard, Thief, and Paladin. The party happens on a four orcs and combat commences. The orcs suddenly have a shaman show up with them and prove tougher than the PCs or the DM first imagined. So tough that the Paladin goes down. Okay, so we now have 5 orcs vs. 4 PCs. The fighter can at best keep 2 busy. The cleric can handle one, but the thief and wizard are made of paper. The wizard gets shellacked next. Now one of the party’s major damage sources is out. The thief goes down next, there’s too many and his HPs are low. Perhaps by now 2 of the orcs are dead. However, we’re down to the warrior and cleric. Before long, the cleric bites it and with no one to heal him, the fighter is doomed. The party wipes out. All because one character, the Paladin, died first.

What we’ve just witnessed is a Party Death Spiral. In MMORPGs, as soon as one of or two of the party members die in an encounter, the rest are sure to follow. Tabletop RPGs that have strict niche protection and defined roles for characters can risk the same fate. As soon as a group’s Meat Shield, Damage Dealer, or Healer goes down, the party is at severe risk.

So how does one avoid creating a Death Spiral? Well, the easiest way is to make sure that losing an exchange does not affect the character’s ability to avoid further losses or inflict a loss on his opponent. Hit Points are an excellent example of how to avoid a Death Spiral. Yeah the character gets closer to death, but his Atk and AC are not affected. You can also make losing an exchange in a contest not dependant in whether or not the character succeeds at the action. My own Holmes and Watson does this. As far as Party Death Spirals go, one can avoid designing these by making sure that characters are diverse. I personally don’t think niche protection is all it’s cracked up to be. So, don’t be afraid to drop it in your game. Having a lot of overlapping abilities will help insure a party’s survival even if one or two go down in combat.

Anyhow, the main point of this essay was to just get out there what a Death Spiral is. If anyone needs further clarification, feel free to post :)

Peace,

-Troy

What are the 'Alt. 3' ?

Heya,

The Alt. 3 (or Alternative 3) are a set of RPG Design questions that are complimentary to the Big Three. The first person I ever saw use them was Jared A. Sorenson, so I’ll credit him with inventing them until told otherwise. I am fairly certain that he and others have employed them at various seminars at gaming conventions (such as VeriCon) to test the systems of new game designers. The Alt. 3 focus on one very central aspect of a game: “What is your game about?” and then probe that more deeply and more deeply. I’ve actually seen two versions used. Here is the first:

1. What is your game about?

2. How is your game about that?

3. How does your game enforce/reinforce what it’s about?


The second runs something like this:


1. What is your game about?

2. How? How is your game about that?

3. What behaviors does your game reward/punish?


As a design exercise, I prefer the former over the latter. It continuously pounds away at the central idea of the game. That’s important. One must look at “What your game is about” in as many lights as possible to truly know exactly what sorts of play and experiences you are wanting as the designer.

The Alt. 3 do not replace the Big Three or the Power 19. Instead, all three sets of questions should be used together as you design your game. Complete a Big Three answer list. Complete a Power 19 Answer list. And then complete an Alt. 3 answer list. Once you have all that done, then you can go back and examine what you have written and know that you have created your own outlines and tools for making a solid RPG.

I can’t stress enough the importance of continually asking questions of yourself. Use as many tools as you can to examine your game from as many angles as you can. Doing that won’t ever replace good old fashion playtesting, proofreading, and feedback, but it sure will cut down on extraneous design elements and wasted space. And that, in and of itself, will make your game better.

Peace,

-Troy

What is the Iron Game Chef?

Heya,

One of the best ways to learn about game design is to actually do it. If you've been looking for an excuse or just needed some inspiration, here's some on a silver platter. The Iron Game Chef is a contest where many game designers are given a list of "ingredients" that they must use as game components. They are also given a theme they have to follow in some way. They basically have just over a week to get it done. Whoa, what can you design is just a week, you may ask? Well, these are just alpha stage designs. No one is expecting a polished product here.

Origonally, I believe the contest was started by Mike Holmes, but the torch has been passed to Andy Kitkowski who is doing a great job with it. Here is a link to the Game Chef Main Site and a link to the Discussion Boards.

If you are new to design, this is an excellent way to get your feet wet. Go in with the idea that this is a learning process and a great chance to get some feedback on your design style. I heartily encourage everyone to participate.

Peace,

-Troy

A Call for Playtesters

Heya,

I have finished the “final” drafts of the playtest versions for all three of my up coming games: Cutthroat, Hierarchy, and Stadoff! If you are interested in playing them and then filing a report on how the session went, reply to this thread or send an email to my email address: legacyboss @ hotmail . com. It would be a great help to me and something I would be very thankful for. :)

Peace,

-Troy

Socratic Design Anthology # 1

Heya,

As I look down my page here at the links on the right, I’m seeing some really important articles vanish from the front page. Stuff like The Big Three and Power 19 should be kept, IMO, front and center. So here’s my solution. Every quarter, I’ll be making an Anthology of Articles. This one will cover, December, January, and February. I’ll link all the ones I feel were important to the mission of Socratic Design in one single article. This way, anyone new to the site will be able to catch up with those who have been reading it from the beginning. Heh, I kinda wish more blogs would do this. Anyway, the order I will put them in will be the order I think they should be read, not necessarily the order in which I wrote them. Feedback, as always, is welcome.

Anthology #1

What is ‘Diaspora’ ? (mainly for the Universal Disclaimer)
What are ‘The Big Three’ ?
What are ‘The Power 19’ ? pt. 1
What are ‘The Power 19’ ? pt. 2
What is ‘Chargen’ ?
What is Situation?
Is Play its own Reward?
What Should I Expect from my First Design?
What if my Game turns out Crappy?

Appendix: 1

Why Design an RPG?
What is a Traditional RPG?
What is a ‘Heartbreaker’ ?
So What are We Looking For?

The Appendix is more personal opinion stuff on my part than design tools. I don’t consider them to be a true part of the Anthology, but are important to me none-the-less. If you have any questions about any of the articles, feel free to post about them here. I’m always happy to field questions and lend a hand :)

Peace,

-Troy

So what are we looking for?

Heya,

This is the fourth and final in a series of shorter articles that will hopefully bring newer designers up to speed on the kinds of expectations I have for this blog and those who help in the Design forum on the Forge have for new games.

In the initial question, when I say “we” I mean “me.” Others can speak for themselves. These last few articles are really intended to get out there what I’d like to see here at Socratic Design and on other game design forums like those at the Forge, RPGnet, and Story Games. I’m not going to be very long winded about it (I hope), because it’s pretty simple.

I have four things I’m really looking for when it comes to deciding how interested I’m going to be in someone’s design:

1. The game is based off the idea that the author is trying to maximize some kind of fun he is already having.
2. The game breaks with Tradition in some way, shape or form.
3. A game where the designer is determined to avoid the publishing aspect of the Heartbreaker.
4. A game that will be finished in one form or another.

So what do I mean by these? First, if someone is designing a game “just cause”, “to participate in the community” or “for fun/an exercise” then it’s really a waste of my time and frankly anyone else’s. No offense. There are a certain number of minutes a day I (or anyone else) can devote to reading, reviewing, and offering advice on a game design. Personally, I would want to use those minutes to help someone who is serious about designing a game that he will use to enhance his fun and the fun of those he games with. I want the time I put in to helping someone to matter to more than just one other person.

Second, hey Traditional Games can be fun, but they’re well…Traditional. I’ve seen them before. What really sparks my interest is something new and different. Okay, you want to make a Fantasy RPG. How’s it going to be different from most of what I’ve seen before? Got a vampyre game? Sweet! What’s new? If you want to design a Traditional Game to get some experience in game design as David Chunn said, that’s fine. You want to really get my (and no doubt others’) interest sparked? Do something that’s out of the ordinary with your game. And I’m not saying you have to abandon every aspect of a Traditional RPG. Far from it. Even doing one thing in a wild and new way is righteous. I just want to encourage folks to expand their ideas beyond what’s been termed “regular” in the broader RPG community.

Three, if you’re planning on sinking thousands of dollars into a game that makes the same offering as say DnD, Vampire, or Rifts then I’m probably not going to help you. In fact I’ll hope that you get discouraged and scrap the design. Talking about three tiered marketing plans, building a network of games stores and distributors, and ignoring the internet/pdf market are big red flags for me. If you are an independent designer, then sinking gobs of money into trying to get your game “out there” into the public is a very risky endeavor- one that I’d advise avoiding in the early part of your production and publication. The last three questions of the Power 19 will tell me a lot about your plans for the future of your game. Consider them carefully.

Last, I hate helping people who just flame out two months later. No doubt in my mind they had a gem of an idea, but gave up anyway. That sucks. I hate it for them because I know if they could have just finished it, they could have added a verse to the chorus of games indie designers are producing. Heck, I probably would have bought a copy. So please, if you start a game, work to finish it. I’m always available to help.

Speaking of being available, let me establish this right now. If you would like some feedback from me on your design, feel free to post a reply to any article on this blog. I don’t care if it’s off topic or not. The main mission of Socratic Design is to help newer designers get started and get finished. So I’ll drop whatever I’m doing to lend a hand. Now I’d *prefer* to talk about your game on your blog (if you have one) or on a forum like the Forge or RPGnet. So including a link to such a place would be helpful. But if none of that is a possibility, this is an open space for feedback and response. Consider the welcome mat dusted off and the door wide open :-)

In closing, I hope that nothing I’ve said here sounds harsh. But if it does, think about it in this way. I’m truly after people who want to design and publish an RPG. I’m serious about it, and I want them to be serious too. We’re all in this fight to publish together, and I want to be the most effective resource I can for you. Meeting those four requirements above will help me be that.

Peace,

-Troy

What is a 'Fantasy Heartbreaker' ?

Heya,

This is the third in a series of shorter articles that will hopefully bring newer designers up to speed on the kinds of expectations I have for this blog and those who help in the Design forum on the Forge have for new games.

As if Traditional Games wasn’t a controversial enough topic, I thought I’d talk about Heartbreaker games next. ;-D In case you haven’t read it yet, please check out the Universal Disclaimer explained here in This Article.

Talking about Heartbreakers can be a very touchy subject, but I feel it is very appropriate to bring it up here at Socratic Design. I mentioned them slightly back here when I talked about how people misuse the term in a mean-spirited way. I’ll cover that slightly again here, but it’s probably good background reading for this article. For additional reading, I highly recommend reading Ron Edward’s articles Fantasy Heartbreakers and More Fantasy Heartbreakers. I’ll give him the credit of coining the terms originally, but it was never his intent that the term would become a hammer to insult and hurt fledgling designers.

The first part of my article, I’m going to split into two parts. First, what is a Heartbreaker not?
- It’s not an illegitimate design
- It’s not a game unworthy of publication
- It’s not a sign of stupidity
- It’s not a sign of uncreative designing

A natural follow-up question would then be, “Well, what are Fantasy Heartbreakers?”
- They try to fix another game
- They are sometimes a gold mine for game ideas
- They are one Entry Point to game design
- They often try to capture a “feeling” of some kind
- They tend to follow the pattern of a Traditional Game
- They are often really fun to play
- They are rarely long lived

It is that last point I’d like to talk about in more detail. By its very nature, a Heartbreaker is like another game (IE, that’s a part of its definition). Some have taken that to be an insult, but it’s not really. That’s just an observation of what a Heartbreaker is. As a result of being like another game already in print, the Heartbreaker is in competition with the game it emulates for attention (not talking about sales here). Heartbreaker or not, a fantasy RPG will immediately be compared to DnD, Runequest, Palladium, or Rolemaster. A horror game will be measured against Call of Cthullu or Vampire. Sometimes those comparisons will lead to the conclusion that the game is not like those. Such is the case with games like The Burning Wheel, The Riddle of Steel, and Sorcerer. Sometimes those comparisons lead one to see redundancy.

Redundancy is one of the most potent enemies of game design. Reasons are many. First, gamers are sometimes lazy. The effort it takes from them to learn a new system that invokes a lot of the same experiences and sensations of play isn’t worth it to them. They’ll just stick with whatever they’re playing right now. Second, some gamers are very territorial. They see any game that is similar to their pet game as a threat. Any challenge to their view of the way games ought to be they take as a personal attack. See just about any Palladium thread on RPGnet. Third, creativity and originality are qualities of any kind of writing that are held in high regard. Something that’s new and unique tends to be something that draws interest. “Newness” appeals to a certain type of gamer who finds pleasure in trying something completely different from all his other play experiences.

Unfortunately, a Heartbreaker game appeals to none of these groups. Those stuck in a rut or protecting their rut won’t be willing to try something new. Those who only try something new won’t see enough reason to go for a Heartbreaker. Therefore, before a Heartbreaker even gets released, there is already a hostile environment waiting to receive it, bash it, and reject it. Before long, a designer will get discouraged and the updates to his website will falter and soon the game will pass into the annals of John H. Kim’s RPG history file.

But emulation of another game is only one aspect of a Heartbreaker and by itself, really doesn’t a Heartbreaker make. There is a second, more vital ingredient that will tag a game a Heartbreaker. So where does the real Heartbreak come from? It comes not so much in the design, but in the publication.

All too frequently (see the examples in Ron’s essay and in my own life), the Heartbreakers that make it past the design phase into publication are done so at a high cost to the designer(s). They look into printing (traditional or POD), compare prices, and find the best cost per book ratio they can. Unfortunately, that is usually in the hundreds or thousands of copies which is often way beyond their ability to sell. They’ll say, “Wow! Loot at the deal we’ll get if we order 2,000 books!” Those books will end up just sitting in a storage facility somewhere collecting dust as the reality of things sets in.

That reality being an indie publisher would absolutely kill to sell 1,000 copies of a book a year, let alone 2,000. That reality being distributors are impossible to deal with, pay little and pay late. That reality being there just aren’t ravenous RPG fans out there dying for the yet another fantasy/sci-fi/superhero/vampire game.

The real Heartbreak is that these good designers end up sinking a ton of money into a project they dearly love and put a lot of honest work into only to find out they bought into a lie. That lie being game stores want their product, distributors serve their customers not their own bottom line, and everyone can have the same success John Wick did with Orkworld.

It is far better to start with a small print run of like 200 books rather than one ten times that size. Or even better, IMHO, is to start by selling the game on pdf through places like RPGNow and DriveThru RPG. See what the initial reaction there is to the game and then use that money to help fund hard copies and point out areas that need revision.

So, should we avoid designing Heartbreakers? In a way I’d say yeah. I know the temptation is there. I feel it all the time. If it’s your first game and you don’t plan on spending much if any money on it, then hey it’s totally cool. Count me in to give you feedback on your design. But my own sincerest advice is to direct your creative energies in another direction. Go for something more original and new. Then come back later and examine a Heartbreaker type design.

It’s possible that someone reading this believes I’m a cynic. That I believe only certain kinds of games deserve to be published and RPGs that don’t follow my prescription are doomed to failure. Nothing could be further from the truth. I will defend every person’s right to publish whatever game their want. I have walked in the Heartbreaker’s shoes, and I have great empathy for them.

My purpose, in this article, is to warn my fellow designers about the pittraps of making a Heartbreaker. It’s a hard, hard road to walk. And I wouldn’t want anyone to have to live with the sort of guilt I’ve had to deal with.

Peace,

-Troy

What is the 'Fun Now Manifesto' ?

Heya,

Bankuei over on his blog posted something very interesting. He calls it “The Fun Now Manifesto.” Have a read:

1. Not everyone likes the same thing
2. Play with people you like
3. Play with rules you like
4. Everyone is a player
5. Talking is good
6. Trust, not fear or power
7. It's a game, not a marriage
8. Fun stuff at least every 10 minutes
9. Fix problems, don't endure them

Now, it refers mostly to play. It gives good guidelines for selecting your fellow players, what you’ll play together, and how you’ll play. So what does it have to do with design? Well, there’s some important stuff designers can take from this.

#1: “Not everyone likes the same thing” this tells us that no matter how hard we try, we won’t please everyone. So don’t try. Target an audience with your game. You’re an indie game, not a mega-corp like WotC or Wizkidz. Realize that there will be people who don’t like your game, and that’s okay. Design it for the people who will like your game.

#3: “Play with rules you like” I could just as easily say, “Design with rules you like.” Don’t add in junk just because you think other people will not buy your game if you don’t have it. Design a game you’d like to play with rules you’d like to play with. Chances are very good that others have tatstes very similar to yours. Those are the people you’re after. Adding equipment lists, falling damage tables, setting ficiton, or whatever else to your game to make it “more marketable” will end up making it less so.

#4: “Everyone is a player” this includes a GM. For designers, it means if you’re going to have a GM, make the game fun for him too. Give him explicit instructions and then the tools to help him carry out those instructions. Very few games incorperate explicit GM rewards. Why is that? Come up with ways for the GM to earn extra currency/influence/whatever in your game. Don’t leave him out of your design.

#6: “Trust, not fear or power” Don’t fear spreading power out among all the participants. And don’t fear letting all the players have a say in each other’s characters. Also, don’t include horrific punishments in your game for charactes and/or players who “don’t play the way you want them to.” If they’re looking for a good time, they’ll stay pretty close to the rules you’ve written. If they’re looking to ruin everyone’s fun, there’s not a thing you, as the designer, can do about it anyway. Trust the playes to play your game.

#8: “Fun stuff at least every 10 minutes” Every ten minutes, especially if a group is very sociable, may be a high goal, but never-the-less, your game should provide avenues for action, engagement, and resolution often and in a powerful way. Rules for travel time, equations for fuel tank capacity, or encumberance tables often bog down play. If during playtesting they get in the way of getting to what the game is really about, then drop them. No one’s gonna miss them.

#9: “Fix problems, don't endure them” playtest, playtest, playtest! And then revise. Don’t leave unsolved issues in your game just because you saw them in another game. Don’t ignore a problem that you think players won’t run into very often. And lastly, don’t give up. Your game is good. It has potential. Don’t settle for a half-assed project. A designer can’t be afraid to change things that need changing no matter how long they’ve been in the design or how dear that broken little mechanic is to their heart. If it causes problems, it should probably go.

Peace,

-Troy

PS: I really want to thank you, Chris, for coming up with this, and I hope you don't mind me expaning on it here.

What is a Traditional Game?

This is the second in a series of shorter articles that will hopefully bring newer designers up to speed on the kinds of expectations I have for this blog and those who help in the Design forum on the Forge have for new games.

For the purposes of this website (reread that) this is how I’ll define a “Traditional Game.”

First, a Traditional Game has a GM. The GM is imbued with the power to control everything but the PCs. He is also the one who will come up with the overall campaign (aka plot) for the game and the one who is the final arbiter of all disagreements. Players play one and only one character and maintain an Actor Stance as much as possible. Actor Stance is basically playing “in character” where the player cannot affect anything in the Setting except what his own character could normally affect. All of the character’s actions are done in accordance with character knowledge and ability. Player knowledge and player motivation are put aside and considered “out of the game.” Traditional Games employ a Task Resolution system where difficulties and opposition are set by GM fiat with minimal guidance from the game’s text.

They may or may not have such things as levels, classes, races, equipment lists, spell lists, combat subsystems, skills, stats, etc. These are not what make a game a Traditional Game. So don’t confuse them with what I wrote in the paragraph above. They are all elements of game design. Their presence or absence has nothing to do with a game’s traditional-ness or its cutting edge-ness.

These traditional games hale back all the way to basic DnD and progress right through World of Darkness today. The thing that traditional games tend to do is empower the GM and suppress the players. They encourage, sometimes implicitly sometimes explicitly, the idea that the GM is the one who creates the story, the characters just add their voice and color. They propagate the ideal that the GM is the guy who gets to finally decide when a campaign is “done” and who gets what rewards and how much (XP allotments is a fine example of a GM-only duty). Additionally, they engrain the idea that if some ability or action the player wants his character to do isn’t covered in the character sheet, the players must just narrate what happens or not even bother to attempt it. For instance, debating, romance, and negotiation are things that are commonly left up to “roleplaying” and rarely supported by mechanics. Lastly, these games give GMs next to nothing when it comes to tools for creating a Setting, addressing player motives, or altering the Situation to fit the individuality of all the characters. It’s supposed to be done “on the fly” or in some grandiose “world builders guide book” sort of way. Neither of which are consistently effective or useful. Sooner or later both methods will break down.

Obviously, not all games are Traditional Games. There are many good games that break this mold. Sorcerer, The Shadows of Yesterday, Dogs in the Vineyard, The Burning Wheel, Polaris, Breaking the Ice, Dust Devils, Prime Time Adventures, Inspectres, Multiverser, My Life with Master, and Universalis are all excellent examples of such games. They are more on the cutting edge of things.

For the purpose of this post, I’m not going to make any value judgment on Traditional Games. Whether they are good or not, whether they are harmful or not to gamers is something for another discussion. The main thing I want to do with this post is establish what they are and invite feedback that will help me construct a more accurate definition.

[EDIT]: Big thanks to Bankuei, John Kim, and Fang for helping me refine my list of traits a 'Traditional Game' tends to have. That list follows here:

-GM imbued with ultimate authority
-GM charged with creating entire plot and setting for the game
-Players play one and only one character
-Players encouraged to stay in 'Actor Stance'
-Task Resolution System
-Difficulties set by GM fiat
-GM receives minimal guidance or tools from text to cary out his duties
-Character Advancement tied to increasing statistical values
-Character Death
-Dice used as the sole randomizer for play
-Assumption of long term play
-Player/Character goals not mechanically supported in plot/setting creation
[END EDIT]

Peace,

-Troy

Why Design an RPG?

This is the first in a series of shorter articles that will hopefully bring newer designers up to speed on the kinds of expectations I have for this blog and those who help in the Design forum on the Forge have for new games.

Why design an RPG?

I’ve had this question put to me a couple times about game designers. “Why design an RPG? There’s plenty out there, make do with those.” Is that a valid point? It’s true that there are hundreds of RPGs out there. They’ve been around now for over three decades. Countless supplements, small press runs, and core rule books have hit the stands. Isn’t there one out there that will work for us?

The answer is “Yes, there are plenty of games out there that will work for us.” But we’re not satisfied with a game that will just “work.” No, we’re looking for a game that will maximize our fun. We’re out to find a game that will take what we like, enhance it, and make it better. We’re looking for an RPG that can surpass what’s out there and push our enjoyment to a degree no previously published game can. That’s why we design. We know there’s MORE out there. We know that the current rules systems leave plenty to be desired. To think that any of or all of them will suit everyone’s tastes is an absurd notion to designers. That’s why we design. We want to suck the marrow out of our enjoyment, nut just reheat the leftovers.

Especially in today’s culture where you can go to a Starbucks and see thirty kinds of coffee or to McDonalds and order one of twenty different burgers. Variety is a good thing. Choice is a good thing. Having a game that fits your style better than any other game is a great thing! This is our rallying cry.

The reason we design is because we want to maximize our fun with RPGs, and we truly believe that others will be able to maximize their fun with our games. That is the purpose of the design forums on the Forge and RPGnet and the purpose of this and many other blogs.

Peace,

-Troy

A Good Example

Heya,

I've dealt with the Power 19 lately mainly by talking about them. That's all well and good, but just talk is not always the best way to learn. It's like being in a lecture hall and never having a lab practical. I am the type of person who learns well from examples, so I thought I'd provide you guys with one here:

http://mightyatom.blogspot.com/2006/02/19-questions-stranger-things.html

Look how thorough John is in answering each question. Note also that he doesn't spend rhemes of text explaining each nuance. He states his answer and his rationale for each each answer. If you want to see how a good set of answers to the Power 19 might look, read his.

Peace,

-Troy

What if my Game Turns out Crappy?

Should we make crappy games?

Yes! And I say yes because we really don’t have much of a choice. What??? You may ask. Well, I’m going to be blunt with you guys because A) sugar coating won’t do you any good, and B) I care about you enough to tell the truth: Your first game is gonna be crappy. More than likely, your second and third game will be too.

Your first try won’t turn out like you had hoped. Trust me. I learned this from painful, PAINFUL experience. But you know what, I wouldn’t trade that experience for anything. Looking back on my first foray into game publishing, I realize how much I learned. It was awesome. We got to talk face to face with the product developer of a huge corporation (well, huge in the gaming industry anyway), we got to learn how to use PageMaker, we built a website, we had our own GenCon booth, we dealt with over-stock, distributors, and all kinds of wacky stuff.

None of the original members who worked on Ember Twilight are happy with it now. And we sunk a ton of money on it. But now that I’m working on Cutthroat, Hierarchy, and Standoff, I realize just how much those experiences meant to me and how much they will help me get these games out the door. So why am I telling you this? Because I want to encourage you and warn you at the same time.

Encouragement: Don’t wait for your game to be “perfect.” It won’t be. Get it complete, play test it, then publish it. There is no need to obsess for years over your design. Hit it hard, get it finished, and then get it out there. See what happens, and learn from your experience. There really isn’t any better way to learn how to write and publish an RPG than to do it. You’ll get your nose bloody for sure, but that’s okay. It will make you tougher the next time. Don't lose out on an opportunity to get this experience because you don't think your game is"worthy" to be published. 'Cause it is.

Warning: Don’t sink a ton of money in your first design. Let it grow at its own pace. Selling your game through online companies like RPGNow, Drivethru RPG, or Lulu is a great way to start. Thinking you’re going to succeed with a “multi-tiered marketing and distribution strategy…” is the road to heartache. Start small and let the games you design grow at their own pace.

Go back and notice that I said “games” with an “s” at the end. Once your first design is done, start your second. You’ll be surprised how much easier the process is and how you’ll see where you have already learned and improved.

So let us see your crap! Publish your game with no fear. Then design another.

Peace,

-Troy

What are the 'Power 19' ? pt 2

Prerequisite: read Power 19 part 1.

Okay, so you’ve answered the Power 19. Now what? Excellent question and one I am now ready to explore. First, let’s look at some threads on the Forge that are actively using the Power 19.

Smithy’s Game
Darren’s Game
Jaoa’s Game

If you look through each of the initial posts in these threads, they all have one thing in common: They don’t ask for specific feedback! The “Power 19” is a design tool. It can lead discussion, but that discussion needs to be focused. And the author of the thread (whether on the Forge or at RPGnet) needs to highlight which portions of the Power 19 he wants feedback and scrutiny on. Just expecting people to read your answers and infer from that what needs help is an expectation that will be disappointed every time. But to better understand how to do this, it’s best to understand what it is that the Power 19 actually do. Look at the first question:

“What is your game about?”: That’s the concept of your game. It’s not asking for ANY mechanical details of your game. It’s not wanting details about the resolution system, strength stats, XPs, and all that jazz. It wants to know what the concept of your game is. So, this question really speaks to what is the first part of game design- the concept stage. Check out the next two:

“What do the characters do/What do the players do?” These questions ask about what playing the game is like. Still no mechanics, just what playing looks like. Once you have a concept of what your game will be about, it’s good to have a concept of what experience the players will have while engaging your design. These questions are really the second step of game design. 1st is concept, 2nd is activities.

Questions 4 and 5 (see Power 19 pt. 1) address two major components of an RPG- Character and Setting. I put Setting first, but order isn’t important. Different people work in different ways. The important thing is that the Setting fits the Characters and the Characters fit in the Setting. Don’t make a detective game set in Victorian London where all the characters are kung-fu masters. That seems kind of obvious, but I’ve seen plenty of designs meant to be about inter-character relationships and how they grow that spent tons of time detailing with how characters can break things and kill people (IE Combat). If what the game is about and the Setting you’re making for it aren’t going to provide the characters an opportunity to use an ability (say combat or magic or kung-fu) then don’t make that a part of your Chargen. A game does NOT have to have characters capable of fighting or using magic or being diplomatic to be fun. The Characters and Setting should both point back to your answer in #1.

Questions 6-9 ask you to elaborate on questions 2 and 3. You know what the characters and players will be doing. You know where they’ll be doing it (Setting) and you know how they’ll get there (Chargen). So now it’s time to go to the next step. That Step: Rewards and Engagement. Rewards are a key facet of game design. I could probably write a whole ‘nother article (and probably should) on Rewards/Reinforcement. Briefly, Rewards are the fuel that powers the rest of your design. It’s that carrot and sometimes it’s that stick that leads the participants to advance the game. In DnD, it’s XP. In Dogs in the Vineyard it’s Fallout. In Cutthroat it’s Status Modifiers. Rewards are the part of the game that makes the players want to continue playing. Read this article for more details.

Engagement is a bit trickier. At least for me it is. This is the part of the game that holds the player’s attention between Rewards. Often, that is narration and setting up conflicts. In DnD, it’s combat. Rolling the dice and fighting orcs is way fun, especially when you can use your kewl powerz. In Cutthroat, it’s the Raids. In Dogs, it’s exploring the Town. This part of game design definitely takes playtesting and requires a lot of thought.

Okay, after you’ve got how you make characters, play characters, and explore the setting of your game, it’s time to start getting down to the nuts and bolts. Resolution is on the docket for questions 10 and 11. There’s a million ways to do it, so if you’re looking for the right or best way here, you’re going to be disappointed. What those questions really want are two things: a brief explanation of the dice (or card or narration) mechanic of your game and how that enhances your answer to #1. Yes, the Resolution system of your game should tie directly back to What your Game is About. Look at what Vincent said Dogs was about: “…It's about the problems small towns face, it's about sex and lying, and most of all it's about violence. What use is violence? What justifies violence? What are its consequences?” That last bit is the important part: Consequences. In DitV, your character will change- a lot. That’s the point. Check out the Resolution system: roll, if you win you get what you wanted, if you lose your character CHANGES! The dice rolling itself stresses what the game is about.

I’m not saying your game has to do it the same way. For instance, a good Resolution system for a Western game may involve Poker rules. A game where the number 8 is a significant number in Setting’s cosmology might have d8’s be the only dice rolled in the game. A game built on social standing, may give characters at different levels different sized dice to roll. Whatever you decide on, make sure that your Resolution system reminds players immediately what game is about.

Questions 12 and 13 deal with character advancement. You are really starting to build your game at this point. You’ve got the foundational elements: Concept and Play Behaviors. You have the initial bricks laid: Chargen, Setting, and Rewards. You have the process of resolving conflicts, tension, and tasks: Resolution. Now it’s time to add the top floors the players will go through as they play. This is Advancement.

One of the most common errors made when designing Character Advancement in games is that people tie it directly to numerical increases. Advancement means simply that characters change. It may be that they get closer to their Destiny. It may be that they gain a new relationship. It could be that they move up or down a social ladder. It doesn’t have to mean they get a higher score in the Combat skills. Which brings me to the second most common misconception about Character Advancement: “Characters must always get better at what they do.” That’s a bunch of crap. In games like DnD, Rolemaster, Vampire, and all the games based off them, yeah that’s what we see. But in games like Cutthroat and DitV, we see characters moving up and down in their proficiency all the time. Break loose of the bonds of tradition in your design. Don’t settle for the way things have always been done. Challenge the players. Make the game tough and memorable. And characters don’t always have to advance on a steady, upward scale.

The last four questions (16-19) deal with production and marketing of your game. They ask you to focus on what the best parts are, enhance/magnify them, and then set realistic goals for yourself. Just producing a free game on PDF is a fine production goal. Full-on book printing is good too, but be prepared to have to fight to get your game out there. Talk to Vincent, Ron, and Nate Peteresen. They know their stuff. Oh and check out This Thread for further info.

Okay, so looking back through this article about the Power 19, what can we learn about them? Holy crap! It’s the initial design process! Or at least it is for me. It starts out at the concept stage and draws you through the process of designing all the major parts of an RPG and ends in production. It’s not a checklist, it’s a chain of events. You complete the first question. Then go to the second. Using that info, you go to their third. Using the info from 1, 2, and 3, you answer #4. And so on. You compile each of the previous answers to answer the next question. None of them, NONE, exist in a vacuum. They are all inter-dependant.

So what do we do with them now? Answering them is the first part, but when you post your answers about your game, ask for specific feedback on specific parts of your game. Don’t just throw them out there and expect people to pick up on it. No. It’s your job to tell the readers of your post what you want out of that thread. They can’t read your mind. The Power 19 is a great tool, but it’s useless if it just sits there.

So are the Power 19 the end of it? Heh, no they are just the beginning. There’s at least that many questions again if not more that one has to answer for his or her design. Maybe I’ll write some more up some time. But for now, let’s talk about these. Is there any part that is unclear? Is it still uncertain what they were meant to do?

Peace,

-Troy

How do I Appeal to Youth?

Heya,

Normally I don’t repost something that another person has written on their blog. First, I don’t want to steal their thunder or piggyback on their bandwagon. They deserve all the credit for what they created. Second, usually what I find is very interesting and useful to me, but not all that useful for the goals of this website. However, every now and then I’ll come across something that hits me right in the face and makes me go, “New designers NEED to know this!” I have just had such a cases.

Over on his blog “Deep in the Game” Chris makes an excellent post regarding how RPGs should appeal to youth, specifically young people of color in America. But I actually think that what he says appeals across race and across gender. Here are brief tenets he wrote on this:

1. Games should deal with things familiar to the players.

2. Games should acknowledge the power fantasies of youth.

3. Quicker to play, quicker to action

4. Your role [as the designer] in this [is to fade into the background so the kids can express themsevles in their play].

Don’t just read my summary here. Go read his Article and learn from it yourself. He is dead on when it comes to what younger people are looking for not just in games but all forms of expression and entertainment. If it’s not relevant to their life, feh, they won’t care about it. If it’s not something they make their own and express their individuality with, then they’ll take two looks and forget about it.

I’m not saying that you as the designer don’t have something important to say. Not at all. But the way you say your Important Thing will be different from the way a kid in Detroit will say it, which will be different from the way a kid in Birmingham will say it, which will be different from the way a kid in San Diego will say it.

“Pride goes before a fall and a haughty spirit precedes destruction” is a universal truth and something that can be seen in every culture in the world. But the way it plays itself out in each culture is wildly different. That’s important to keep in mind when you design.

So what is all this stuff above boil down to? KNOW YOUR AUDIENCE. That’s the first rule of writing. Know who you’re targeting with your game and know who you may potentially target. You won’t ever write a game that will appeal to everyone. If that idea is in your head, the sooner you get it out the better. There is no such thing as a Universal RPG! Use your target audience to your advantage and design a game that will appeal to them and empower them to express their own thoughts, ideas, dreams, and goals.

Chris closes with this: If you want to know why hiphop has taken such a hold on people, it's because it's a form of self expression that kids can do at the lunch table, on the bus, anywhere they go, and it automatically conforms to whatever they want to make of it. A freestyle cipher is identical to an improvised game, in terms of expression, input, and even stories at times. For [my gaming group], rhyming and roleplaying were not much different.

Brilliant.

Peace,

-Troy

What are the 'Power 19' ? pt 1

What are the ‘Power 19’ ?

Somewhere along the way between writing Cutthroat and writing Hierarchy, I hit on something. I had been working on my own design philosophy (a different thing from theory) when I really got hooked on The Big Three. But the more and more I explored those three questions, I realized they just didn’t go far enough. There’s a LOT more to a game than just what it’s about, what the characters do, and what the players do. What about the Setting? What about Rewards? What about the Color and Character Advancement? These things are only tacitly spoken of in The Big Three.

So what I set out to do was expand on them. I got some great advice from guys like Ralph Maza, Mike Holmes (who is an excellent resource for designers), Vincent Baker, and Tim Kleinert (of Mountain Witch fame). What I came up with was 9 “Power Questions” designers should ask themselves before and during their design process. However, the more I thought about it, the more I realized those 9 were still not what I wanted. The 9 became 16, and then the 16 became 19. These 19 became the Power 19 and are what I use to guide my work. I have directly applied them to both Hierarchy and Standoff! And I definitely plan on using them in future designs.

This is the first of two posts I plan on making about the Power 19. This one basically introduces where they came from and what they are. The second post will go into more detail about them. And just for review, make sure you check out the Universal Disclaimer before reading these.

1.) What is your game about?**

2.) What do the characters do?**

3.) What do the players (including the GM if there is one) do?**

4.) How does your setting (or lack thereof) reinforce what your game is about?

5.) How does the Character Creation of your game reinforce what your game is about?

6.) What types of behaviors/styles of play does your game reward (and punish if necessary)?

7.) How are behaviors and styles of play rewarded or punished in your game?

8.) How are the responsibilities of narration and credibility divided in your game?

9.) What does your game do to command the players' attention, engagement, and participation? (i.e. What does the game do to make them care?)

10.) What are the resolution mechanics of your game like?

11.) How do the resolution mechanics reinforce what your game is about?

12.) Do characters in your game advance? If so, how?

13.) How does the character advancement (or lack thereof) reinforce what your game is about?

14.) What sort of product or effect do you want your game to produce in or for the players?

15.) What areas of your game receive extra attention and color? Why?

16.) Which part of your game are you most excited about or interested in? Why?

17.) Where does your game take the players that other games can’t, don’t, or won’t?

18.) What are your publishing goals for your game?

19.) Who is your target audience?

It is my sincerest hope that new designers find this list of questions and use them to help guide and review their designs. I know that my skills greatly improved after implementing this method. Now let it be said that the ‘Power 19’ is only one out of many methods of design. This one happens to suit my style, but it may not be for everyone. I will say this, though: It is better to have some method of design than to have none. Aimlessly prodding at a design with no clear focus on how you plan on addressing the various aspects of an RPG will, in all likelihood, lead to incoherence. It’s better to have some kind of plan to follow rather than just guessing.

If you are in the middle of a design, I encourage you to take this list and see how many you can answer. At the very least it will confirm what you are wanting to achieve and at the very most it will show you where you need to concentrate your efforts. I truly hope that this post and the follow up to it will be helpful to anyone who reads it.

Peace,

-Troy

**Denotes key question that should be answered/discussed first and foremost when designing a RPG.

Personal Update

Heya,

An old friend of mine back from the Ember Twilight days wrote me an email. It was great to hear from him after about 6 months of not getting a word. He asked me how my new games were coming, so I told him about how I’m revising and playtesting and whatnot. While I was writing the reply, I figured it would be a good time to share with you guys how things are coming along.

-Cutthroat has had its second revision and a second playtest has been scheduled.

-Hierarchy has just had its first revision completed and a plan for playtesting is being formulated.

-Standoff! is now in the process of being revised which actually won’t take all that long.

-Preliminary covers for all three games have been designed and submitted.

All three should (crosses fingers for luck) be done in the next three to four months. I’m settled into married life now and this semester’s classes are easy to teach. So all is well in Socraticland. The next thing I really have to do is get my corporate website up. But I’ve already made some good contacts to make that happen. Expect movement on that in a couple weeks.

Peace,

-Troy