Game Design is a challenging thing to pull off well. One of the reasons is that so many people ask
and expect for a game to do so many things.
The hardest job of the designer is to decide what they want to
accentuate and highlight in their game, and what they wish to ignore or
abstract away. To make it even harder,
different consumers will have different ideas about where the focus of a game
should be as well. As a designer, you
have to stay true to your vision of what you want to emphasize.
Once you have a clear vision of what you wish to
emphasize you use this as a guide to what rules and mechanics for resolution
you want in your game. Ideally, a game
should have a “Core Mechanic” that acts as the default setting for you
game. For example, if you look at
Force-on-Force the default mechanic is to roll a dice using the fireteams Troop
Quality looking for a 4+ to be successful.
The vast majority of times this test will tell you if you succeed or
fail in the majority of situations. In
Warhammer 40K it is to subtract your stat from 7 to determine your target
number on a dice roll. For Frostgave it
is to roll a d20 and add your characteristic to the result with higher numbers
being better. You get the idea.
In a few of my reviews, you will see me reference “If
This/Then That” types of rules. This
type of rule states that in situation X you do Resolution Y typically in
variance from the standard mechanic. For
example, in a Horse and Musket game when shooting at a unit from a Line
formation you roll 4+, but cavalry is 5+, and artillery is 6+. Typically, I see this types of rules as being
a negative as anytime you diverge from the standard “Core mechanic” you have
created a potential failure point in your rules. A failure point is any point where a player
may misinterpret or not use the mechanic correctly due to deviance from the
“Core Mechanics”. If a player does not
remember or apply the rule then it is pointless to include it.
I typically find "If This/Then That" in three types of
game situations. I call them:
1. This one time at band camp…..
2. It would be cool if….
3. There is no other way…
This One Time at
Band Camp
This type of situation arises mostly in historical
games. History is an amazing thing, and
there are all sorts of weird and amazing things that happen. Sometimes, as a designer you can fall into a
trap of trying to represent everything that happened in the period even if it
was not the norm.
For example, Baron Von Munchausen’s men once jumped from
a cliff and landed on goose feather mattresses in the siege of Krakow and
stormed the cannon and broke the siege (I have no idea if this happened). This was the only time where this activity
was ever recorded. However, since it was
such a celebrated event designers try to make sure all of their rules for the
period have a rule for jumping from castle walls and landing on goose feather
mattresses.
It Would Be Cool
If…
This one is much more common. Basically, the designer really wants to
represent something that they think would be cool to do. Therefore, they make a convoluted rule that
breaks their normal “Core Mechanics” in order to make it happen.
An example could be as simple as making rules for a model
being able to intimidate another model in the game. Typically, the game has an opposed stat test,
but in this situation the designer has a simple pass fail dice roll for the
intimidating model to pass. This
breaking of the Core Mechanic is what makes this an “If This/Then That” type of
situation.
There is no other
way…
I would like to be charitable and say this is the most
common type of “If This/Then That” mechanics… but I can not say that. I find this most often happening in
historical games as they try to struggle with how to represent actual
historical events into their “Core Mechanics” this can be very challenging. With Fantasy and Sci-Fi you can bend the
rules of the universe a bit to fit your game setting. That is a luxury that does not exist in
Historical games.
The most common “If This/Then That” I see in historical
deals with different types of units engaging with artillery via shooting or
melee. There are all sorts of
distinctions about when the artillery is limbered vs not limbered, travelling
in the mud, a field piece vs and infantry gun, etc. Frequently, these rules then have to give
various modifiers or situational rules for engaging between more traditional units
and artillery.
| I got this great image from here: https://boardgamegeek.com/blog/2018/reinventing-tactical-wargames-game-design-blog-war |
Blah! I am not
smart enough to keep track of all of that so I need “Core Mechanics” to
follow.
Final Thoughts
As a designer, it is best to try to avoid “If This/Then That”
style rules. They are inelegant and add
needless complexity to your rulesets.
Instead, try to work within your “core mechanics” to create the effects
your game needs. This will help your
game be easier to play, reduce barriers for entry, and reduce complexity. It is a mark of solid design when you avoid “If
This/Than That” and can contain your rules within the “Core Mechanics” as much
as possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment