Happiness in Progress

the knitting continues at a satisfying pace -


not too slow (as to make me infuriated) and not too fast (as to cause mistakes or ruin the fun of creating stuff)


I can really SEE an scarf developing out of this yarn.

It's stretchy! 

I never in a million years thought ruffles would make me happy.

FoW Mission Design. If You Want Something Done Right...

Hey folks, SinSynn here.

For the longest time, I've been aching to try my hand at mission design for Flames of War. I honestly believe that every mission in the rulebook, with the exception of Free-for-All, is awful.
Here's why:

- Forced reserves.
Oh dear Lord what an awful idea. Ten of the eleven 'standard' missions force one or both players to put 'more than half' of their armies in reserve. A roll of 5up is required to get units in reserves onto the table, and some missions don't allow even that to occur until turn three.
Ugh. Just....ugh.
The most pronounced effect this has on the game is known as Front-Loading, where the 'more than half' of one's army will consist of cheap, virtually useless units, simply because that half will see little to no action. Maybe they won't even arrive at all, since Defenders can be overwhelmed prior to receiving them. Whoops- I couldn't roll a 5up. I lose. Sure...that seems fair. Boy, that was fun!

*Opponent wins on turn four? NOT IMPRESSED*

[Spin-Off Central] What Constitutes a Game?

I was going to review Hive, an abstract chess-like game that has been reviewed very favorably by lots of people I like.

The game looks cool and appeals to me due to the two player nature. It's portable and seems straightforward enough, and doesn't have any math or random elements- all of these were plusses in my book. 

So I busted it open and discovered that to ME; it's not a game. It's a problem that needs solving. It didn't have "rules", it told me what I could do with certain pieces. There weren't any examples of "how to play". It confused the crap out of me. I decided I was not smart enough for the game and put it away.

(I will be totally fair and let you know I will give it another try before completely writing it off.)

What's the difference between a game and a problem? To ME, the difference is games have rules. Especially with board games, there are clear sequences and operational things to do, with an end goal in mind.

Hive does things differently. It tells you "here are how things work", and then asks you - "how would you make X happen?".

Based on this specific understanding, at the moment, I don't consider Hive a game. I consider it a puzzle. I don't mind that, but it wasn't what I was expecting.

While I was thinking this little idea over, I came across this post and the conversation it generated. I was very taken by the comments made between Sandwyrm and CaulynDarr. Here's the part I found most compelling:

CaulynnDarr: Games on the other hand are math, cognition, and memory problems, with art supporting the implementation.

You can have great process and great products at the same time. Usually great process is the difference between having 1 great product and several great products. Process is often that thing at the end that sends the whole project back to square one if it needs it.

Actually McDonnell-Douglas had the better design, but got out lobbied by Boing and bought out. Though all three designs would be in the same shape now, due to the conflicting requirements.

 

sandwyrm   23 hours ago in reply to CaulynDarr

Don't be silly. Games are not about math or the technical stuff. They're about the experience. The interactions. Making the interactions of a game interesting and rewarding is just as much of an art as any film or video game. The technical stuff has to support an artistic vision, as Star Wars taught us so long ago. As Apple teaches us now. As Blizzard, id, and Valve prove every day.

Good processes require consistency and predicability. But creativity is never consistent or predictable. So you have to optimize on one or the other. You cannot have both together. Or both end up mediocre at best.

I know these guys were talking specifically about miniatures games- table top war games with figure soldiers and dice and whatnot. But the comment put me in mind of something Porky asked me a while ago:

What is a game?

I think I discovered that anything I will consider a game (at least a board game) has to have operational structure- who does what when; that's essential to me. I think that my tastes have shown that I want a combination of math and/or logic problems ALONG WITH the experience and the interactions for almost any OTHER kind of game.

What about you? What do you consider essential components to be considered a game? What turns you totally off? If you understand either answer, why are those your answers? I'd love to hear.

[RPG][Wonderland] Creating Opposition

I have finally decided on a system to use for Wonderland. I'm going with Risus.

After considering about 6 systems (including Savage Worlds and Mutants & Masterminds) and talking to TheDude about running something I can't "sell", I decided to do what I wanted and worked best for my game idea, and stop trying to do what I "should".

The map has been made (although it needs serious cleaning up) and the setting(s) are defined fairly well, with a lot of room to breathe and change if the soon-to-be players mess things up, confuse me, or otherwise X+1 me.

The next thing I am working on is the "opposition"- the things the players will face in the environment, and decide motivations, mannerisms and so forth for them. Because as much as this game is ultimately intended to be a "players vs. the world" sort of idea, there will be things to Deal With.

Most of what the players face will be much like themselves, but maybe with different beliefs, reasons for doing things, or understandings of the fundamental rules of the world. At some point there will be conflict; or at least I expect so given this is a game and there is an underlying want to "kill orks for beer money" in many gamers I know.

Coming up with those beliefs, values and reasons is a lot harder than coming up with "what they look like". GM's, what is your take on making opposing forces?

How do you make them, what do you consider important, all those things- please share!

Interview for HOP- Porky

I wrote a series of articles about designing better games for House of Paincakes over the past 2 months or so. While I was working on the process and developing material for the series, I conducted a good number of interviews with various people across the internet, as well as some real life folks.

I've saved this interview for last. It was the most fun, the most challenging, and the most though provoking. I don't really consider myself much of an intellectual, so plunging these depths caused me to do a lot of intense thinking, spreading out past my normal limits, and enjoying the conversation with a brilliant mind. I find Porky to be an artist of the highest caliber; using words and stretching boundaries for all who listen.

When you look at a game, is art a factor in buying it? If so, how much of a deciding element is the art?

I'm definitely drawn to new things by the art, but I'm more interested in heavily stylised pieces than big pictorial scenes. I want texture and mood much more, even without action and even in shades of grey, and maybe better like that, for how soft black and white can be and how much contrast it can have. There doesn't need to be much art either because the people I hang out with are very happy to imagine and improvise, do things their own way - there should be just enough to prompt and trigger, set off trains of thought, but then cleverly chosen words can do that too.

Interview for HOP-TheDude

I wrote a series of articles about designing better games for House of Paincakes over the past 2 months or so. While I was working on the process and developing material for the series, I conducted a good number of interviews with various people across the internet, as well as some real life folks.

This interview just sort of "happened to me". I was actually enjoying a nice conversation with my spouse when the topic drifted to gaming; so why not throw the interview into the conversation while I was at it?

It's always fun talking to him about games. He's a smart guy and listens to OTHER PEOPLE pretty well. And he looks great in a tie.

The picture really doesn't convey how great this looks in person. 

[RPG] Randomizers

Most RPGs have some element of randomization to determine outcomes and abilities- a die roll, a card draw, rock, paper, scissors- something. Most of these elements are fairly well delineated as solely for things the player does (or wants to do).

Examples include:Want to rob a bank? Roll me an intimidation and/or firearms. Want to jump across the chasm between two tall buildings? Roll me athletics or leaping.Want to go first? Draw a card and tell me the number and suit. And so on, depending on what system you're using and what feel you're going for.

Some of the randomizers are more random than others- a D20 is automatically more random than a 6. If you use suits of cards to determine whether something works, you're effectively using a D4- sufficiently less random than a D10.

Some of the more "random" options pull down the curve some by giving ranges where success or failure is possible. The D20 system is a good example- you "win" when you roll OVER a certain number, rather than being limited to a specific number (eg: you need to roll over a 15; not you must roll a 20). Other systems allow "cheating" by use of chips, points, pushing, cards etc.

What if you don't want cheating to be an option but use a system that allows it? Do you just ignore the rules that exist for fudging things a little? 

Other questions I'm considering are - what if an ability ONLY activates on a "16" (and not higher or lower)? How effective or complex might a system where abilities were strictly determined by a preset randomizing table, without any real wiggle room? What if you're looking for a truly "random" possibility? How would you accomplish that?

And then, how do you do it without interfering in the mood too much?