Some Hopefully Non-Patronising Game Design Tips

[Adam]

A collection of tips and suggestions on how to write good games, mechanics, units et cetera. I'll start the ball rolling with a few things I've picked up that are probably worth sharing.

The Priority Order
This is the most important thing I've learnt and it goes like this. When writing game mechanics, these are your priorities, from most to least important. Yes, speed and tactics are tied; they're often linked, actually. Simple, quick core rules often give you more leeway for interesting unit special rules.
1) Fun - If it's not enjoyable, it's not a proper game, no matter how slick the rest of it is.
2) Speed - Flowing, quick mechanics mean you spend less time table-searching and dice-pumping and more time playing. Also means your game's more practically playable.
2) Tactics - they REALLY enhance a game. Tip: it seems that, in most cases, tactics are made more by the unit/army rules than the core rules. Partial exceptions: Battlefleet Gothic, Wraithsight (when I write it).
3) Cinematic Awesomeness - Put in awesome stuff. Make sure your game and its background are composed of things you find cool/evocative/interesting, and only of things you find cool/evocative/interesting. Otherwise it won't be half as fun to read or play, just like a novel. See also Rule Of Cool.
4) Fluff minutiae - Maybe Xizoran Ninjas don't normally carry smoke grenades. Maybe Generic Space Marine Faction #74 are supposed to be able to take on 100 normal men and win unscathed. If it would make them more useful/balanced/viable in game, then that tiny piece of fluff can be rewritten without anyone really caring.

Factions
When you're inventing faction rules, come up with a theme and playstyle first. Make this as unique (from the other factions) and interesting as possible, then fill out the actual rules. For example, here's how I'll be representing the 40K factions when I (somewhere down the line) do an Infinite Frontier 40K mod.

Watch and Learn
Play as many different other games as you can, download the rulebooks online if they're free, read websites and magazine articles, etc. The more variety you see, the better. Reading different game rulebooks, even without playing the system itself, can really open your eyes to new mechanics and styles and so on - although it's never really a substitute for playing! The latest Duel of Steel rewrite (at this time of writing) contains a massive improvement in the quality of the rules, which is entirely inspired by reading the 5th edition 40K rulebook (not perfect, but a giant step up from its predecessor) and Warmachine.

Those'll do for now... I'll post up more when I think of them. Feel free to contribute your own

[Adam]

Rip Yourself Off
Don't be afraid of the mechanics from one of your games being similar to those from another. The sometime-coming update for Duel of Steel includes hit and damage rolls identical to Infinite Frontier's (although the damage is of course dealt with differently; it's not DoS if it doesn't have two different damage grids), movement rules mostly the same as IF's, and so on. It's an improvement, so it doesn't matter.

Simplicity
Simplicity > realism in game design. If you have to cut down on the way the game rules represent realism, but gain a significant improvement in playing time, tactics or fun, then it's definitely worth it. There are always better ways of doing something - as anyone who's done any programming will know. A game will always feel more fun if it plays quickly, too - it gets the players more involved and ups the adrenalin factor.

[Peter]

May 22, 2009 8:03:03 GMT -5 Adam said:

Rip Yourself Off
Don't be afraid of the mechanics from one of your games being similar to those from another. The sometime-coming update for Duel of Steel includes hit and damage rolls identical to Infinite Frontier's (although the damage is of course dealt with differently; it's not DoS if it doesn't have two different damage grids), movement rules mostly the same as IF's, and so on. It's an improvement, so it doesn't matter.

QFT. I honestly have nothing to add to this one.

Simplicity
Simplicity > realism in game design. If you have to cut down on the way the game rules represent realism, but gain a significant improvement in playing time, tactics or fun, then it's definitely worth it. There are always better ways of doing something - as anyone who's done any programming will know. A game will always feel more fun if it plays quickly, too - it gets the players more involved and ups the adrenalin factor.

This one may be a little easier to dispute. It depends very much on what type of game you are playing. For most TMGs, you're right - we are playing these games primarily to have fun, and we aren't usually too concerned about concepts such as narrative. D&D 4th edition was built on the same principle.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that that's the only target audience though. There is a reason why people still use graphs in historical wargaming, there is a reason why people play GURPS, and taken to an extreme, there is a reason why someone decided to drill several holes in his head and make a game called FATAL.

There is also a reason why every TMG ever made by GW in its entire history has a campaigns section, and why there are GW games where the intended play style is to link all of your games together into a campaign (Mordheim, Necromunda, Gorkamorka, Inquisitor, even Blood Bowl).

The first few editions of Warhammer even read like role-playing games.

[Adam]

May 22, 2009 10:37:57 GMT -5 Peter said:

This one may be a little easier to dispute. It depends very much on what type of game you are playing. For most TMGs, you're right - we are playing these games primarily to have fun, and we aren't usually too concerned about concepts such as narrative. D&D 4th edition was built on the same principle.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that that's the only target audience though. There is a reason why people still use graphs in historical wargaming, there is a reason why people play GURPS, and taken to an extreme, there is a reason why someone decided to drill several holes in his head and make a game called FATAL.

There is also a reason why every TMG ever made by GW in its entire history has a campaigns section, and why there are GW games where the intended play style is to link all of your games together into a campaign (Mordheim, Necromunda, Gorkamorka, Inquisitor, even Blood Bowl).

The first few editions of Warhammer even read like role-playing games.

I am aware of this. We're talking exclusively TMGs here - if you're writing an RPG, then by all means, go wild on the detail/storyline/plot/pacing/etc and worry about the game mechanics later, because that's what RPGs run on. This is meant to be about the sort of games you can sit down with an opponent, play, and win or lose at. I also find that good tactical systems generate their own mini-narratives - in Warmachine, each particular game is usually pretty unique, and every player has all sorts of stories about interesting victories or losses.