One of the things I really enjoy doing is finding the flaws in professional game designs. I do this only out of spite. It has no actual value. Seriously, though, any game designer worthy of the title has some problems with the games out there. If you didn’t, why bother writing your own games in the first place?
When I read a new game system I like to identify all the things I like about it and all the things I don’t like about it. Out of these ‘flaws’ I like to determine which are of minor concern and which ones really tick me off. When I have the flaws that really tick me off I try to scrutinize them in minute detail and then explain rationally to myself why I don’t like them. When I started out designing games, I always used to have a whole host of things I didn’t like about the game systems out there. Lack of balance among classes, one best class, one worst class, messed up races, ability scores too high, too many rules getting in the way, lack of simplicity in the character sheet, too few skills, etc. However, it’s not of much use when you can say something is bad, but have no ideas about fixing it or why you don’t like it. Over time I managed to develop reasons why I thought things didn’t work and potential ways of fixing them. Putting those ‘fixes’ into action was a large part of some of the early games I designed. One of the interesting things you learn when you get further along in the process is that those ‘fixes’ for the flaws in games aren’t quite as easy to make as you might have thought. To begin with, it might seem like the simple solution is, “Get rid of it” or, “Don’t do that.” When you actually create a game which does this, you usually wind up finding out why the game designers before you had to put it in, or what you lose when you take it out. For example: creating a game that’s simpler seems simple. It should be one of those things that’s a no-brainer and so easy to implement that a five-year-old could do it. In practice, it’s a heck of a lot harder than it may have seemed when you were finding the flaws in other game designs. The balance between simplicity and complexity in a system’s rules is one of the trickiest parts of game design. Players want those crucial details to play the game they love. If you gloss over or skip something they deem important, they’ll instantly lose faith in your game. On the other hand, including absolutely every rule imaginable is a sure recipe for confusion and disaster.
Only when we try to fix the flaws do we end up seeing them more clearly. Some things we may have viewed as mistakes could be crucial components to the whole crux of the type of games we love. Until we make the attempt to fix them, we’ll never know. When you design a remedy to something which seems obvious, you learn something about game design not many others know. It’s almost like you gain insight into the workings of the minds of those who created the games before you. You think you know why something doesn’t work, and then you discover how much worse the problem can get when you try to remove it like a surgeon. Only after you’ve tried to fix all the flaws and experienced what happens will you know more about the true problems. It becomes a much trickier fix. You now know why the easy solutions don’t work and you might even realize that some of the parts you thought were so obviously flawed are actually part of the charm of the game.
With this new information, you are now armed with the deadly weapon of knowledge. You can use this new knowledge to repeat the mistakes of the past, or try something even more daring and outrageous. It will be hard to make the big fixes, now you know how complex and tricky they actually are, but if you succeed, you’ll have created something totally new. Some things, you may discover, are better left the same. Originally, there were many things I thought were obvious ‘flaws’ and figured I’d never do. After years of trial and error, I’ve actually come to see that some of the things I hated the worst are actually the most crucial and fun elements of the games I enjoy. It’s a really funny feeling. Also, the process has allowed me to discover new ‘flaws’. Some of the things I loved best about RPGs and thought were the greatest additions to the game are actually the things I now find as causing the most harm to some of the modern systems. In some cases it’s almost a total reversal. I wanted to increase A and remove B completely only to find out that B is crucial to a good game and A seems great but is actually wrecking all the rest of the alphabet out of sight.
For instance, I once thought that levels were unbalanced and wrecked RPGs. I also figured that the skills system introduced in 3rd edition was about the coolest thing around. As a result, I designed an RPG with no levels, but with a whole whack of skills. At the time, it seemed like the obvious thing to do. Also, because there were obviously so many rules cluttering up modern game systems which were irrelevant, I intentionally left out most of the rules in an RPG. I figured everyone would be smart enough to remember basic stuff and otherwise would be creative enough to make it up themselves. I know another game designer who’s still in the ‘make it simple’ stage and wants to create a super lean RPG.
It wasn’t very long before I discovered that players like gaining levels and the skills system I was using was actually wrecking all the combat subsystems and making the whole game a pain in the butt. Not only that, but people were asking some very basic questions about the game which the rules didn’t answer. How far can I move? How much can I carry? What’s my strength? It appeared as if all the extra ‘rules’ I chucked in the trash bin without a second thought weren’t quite as useless as I’d first supposed.
Like any good game designer, I first figured everyone in the world was crazy. Then I knuckled down and got to work rewriting the system. I still think a game with no levels would be cool. I still think a simpler game system would be nice. I still like an element of the skill system I used, but on the whole it lost that shine of promise when I discovered just how much havoc in caused without adding much to the fun of the game. The difference is, I’m a lot more hesitant to cut out whole sections of RPGs. I understand a little better why some things work the way they do. While I’d still love to design a simpler RPG, I now know it’s not just a matter of cutting all the rules out and throwing them in the garbage. Sometimes a lot of good rules can make a simpler game than one without rules. It seems like it would cut into the imagination of a game, but I think that creative rules can actually add more to a game than they take away from it. I also know that cutting down and simplifying is a lot harder than it seems at first glance. Shaving off mere pages can be a feat of wit and skill whereas before I figured I could toss 150 pages with no harm done.
Now the tricky part is when you know what doesn’t work, but you know why it was done that way and you have to figure out a way to do it better. Most of the time, the obvious solution doesn’t quite pan out how you’d want it to. This requires a more skilled and in-depth solution. However, how much fun would it be if all of game design was easy? The great thing is, every time you attempt a solution and fail you learn more about the problem. You might discover it’s not a problem at all, but a boon. You might discover another problem. You might discover that it’s still a problem, but not in the way you originally thought. Whatever the outcome, you’re making progress. You now know more than you did before and can make an even better attempt at creating a solution.
Also, whenever you attempt to solve the problems you see in many different RPGs you learn more about yourself as a game designer and game player. You learn about what you enjoy and what your goals are. With luck, you’ll also learn where other players’ tastes lie whether the same as yours, similar, or quite different. Sometimes you might even discover that you actually love something you thought you hated. That’s a pretty cool discovery along with the opposite when you find out something you loved is actually really bad for your games. From a game design standpoint, levels really play havoc with the rules of a game. From the perspective of a player, I love to gain power. I still think a game without levels would be really cool, but I know now that it’s a lot trickier to do than what I once thought.
So, get out there, find flaws, fix them, and then discover the real flaws and solutions.
When I read a new game system I like to identify all the things I like about it and all the things I don’t like about it. Out of these ‘flaws’ I like to determine which are of minor concern and which ones really tick me off. When I have the flaws that really tick me off I try to scrutinize them in minute detail and then explain rationally to myself why I don’t like them. When I started out designing games, I always used to have a whole host of things I didn’t like about the game systems out there. Lack of balance among classes, one best class, one worst class, messed up races, ability scores too high, too many rules getting in the way, lack of simplicity in the character sheet, too few skills, etc. However, it’s not of much use when you can say something is bad, but have no ideas about fixing it or why you don’t like it. Over time I managed to develop reasons why I thought things didn’t work and potential ways of fixing them. Putting those ‘fixes’ into action was a large part of some of the early games I designed. One of the interesting things you learn when you get further along in the process is that those ‘fixes’ for the flaws in games aren’t quite as easy to make as you might have thought. To begin with, it might seem like the simple solution is, “Get rid of it” or, “Don’t do that.” When you actually create a game which does this, you usually wind up finding out why the game designers before you had to put it in, or what you lose when you take it out. For example: creating a game that’s simpler seems simple. It should be one of those things that’s a no-brainer and so easy to implement that a five-year-old could do it. In practice, it’s a heck of a lot harder than it may have seemed when you were finding the flaws in other game designs. The balance between simplicity and complexity in a system’s rules is one of the trickiest parts of game design. Players want those crucial details to play the game they love. If you gloss over or skip something they deem important, they’ll instantly lose faith in your game. On the other hand, including absolutely every rule imaginable is a sure recipe for confusion and disaster.
Only when we try to fix the flaws do we end up seeing them more clearly. Some things we may have viewed as mistakes could be crucial components to the whole crux of the type of games we love. Until we make the attempt to fix them, we’ll never know. When you design a remedy to something which seems obvious, you learn something about game design not many others know. It’s almost like you gain insight into the workings of the minds of those who created the games before you. You think you know why something doesn’t work, and then you discover how much worse the problem can get when you try to remove it like a surgeon. Only after you’ve tried to fix all the flaws and experienced what happens will you know more about the true problems. It becomes a much trickier fix. You now know why the easy solutions don’t work and you might even realize that some of the parts you thought were so obviously flawed are actually part of the charm of the game.
With this new information, you are now armed with the deadly weapon of knowledge. You can use this new knowledge to repeat the mistakes of the past, or try something even more daring and outrageous. It will be hard to make the big fixes, now you know how complex and tricky they actually are, but if you succeed, you’ll have created something totally new. Some things, you may discover, are better left the same. Originally, there were many things I thought were obvious ‘flaws’ and figured I’d never do. After years of trial and error, I’ve actually come to see that some of the things I hated the worst are actually the most crucial and fun elements of the games I enjoy. It’s a really funny feeling. Also, the process has allowed me to discover new ‘flaws’. Some of the things I loved best about RPGs and thought were the greatest additions to the game are actually the things I now find as causing the most harm to some of the modern systems. In some cases it’s almost a total reversal. I wanted to increase A and remove B completely only to find out that B is crucial to a good game and A seems great but is actually wrecking all the rest of the alphabet out of sight.
For instance, I once thought that levels were unbalanced and wrecked RPGs. I also figured that the skills system introduced in 3rd edition was about the coolest thing around. As a result, I designed an RPG with no levels, but with a whole whack of skills. At the time, it seemed like the obvious thing to do. Also, because there were obviously so many rules cluttering up modern game systems which were irrelevant, I intentionally left out most of the rules in an RPG. I figured everyone would be smart enough to remember basic stuff and otherwise would be creative enough to make it up themselves. I know another game designer who’s still in the ‘make it simple’ stage and wants to create a super lean RPG.
It wasn’t very long before I discovered that players like gaining levels and the skills system I was using was actually wrecking all the combat subsystems and making the whole game a pain in the butt. Not only that, but people were asking some very basic questions about the game which the rules didn’t answer. How far can I move? How much can I carry? What’s my strength? It appeared as if all the extra ‘rules’ I chucked in the trash bin without a second thought weren’t quite as useless as I’d first supposed.
Like any good game designer, I first figured everyone in the world was crazy. Then I knuckled down and got to work rewriting the system. I still think a game with no levels would be cool. I still think a simpler game system would be nice. I still like an element of the skill system I used, but on the whole it lost that shine of promise when I discovered just how much havoc in caused without adding much to the fun of the game. The difference is, I’m a lot more hesitant to cut out whole sections of RPGs. I understand a little better why some things work the way they do. While I’d still love to design a simpler RPG, I now know it’s not just a matter of cutting all the rules out and throwing them in the garbage. Sometimes a lot of good rules can make a simpler game than one without rules. It seems like it would cut into the imagination of a game, but I think that creative rules can actually add more to a game than they take away from it. I also know that cutting down and simplifying is a lot harder than it seems at first glance. Shaving off mere pages can be a feat of wit and skill whereas before I figured I could toss 150 pages with no harm done.
Now the tricky part is when you know what doesn’t work, but you know why it was done that way and you have to figure out a way to do it better. Most of the time, the obvious solution doesn’t quite pan out how you’d want it to. This requires a more skilled and in-depth solution. However, how much fun would it be if all of game design was easy? The great thing is, every time you attempt a solution and fail you learn more about the problem. You might discover it’s not a problem at all, but a boon. You might discover another problem. You might discover that it’s still a problem, but not in the way you originally thought. Whatever the outcome, you’re making progress. You now know more than you did before and can make an even better attempt at creating a solution.
Also, whenever you attempt to solve the problems you see in many different RPGs you learn more about yourself as a game designer and game player. You learn about what you enjoy and what your goals are. With luck, you’ll also learn where other players’ tastes lie whether the same as yours, similar, or quite different. Sometimes you might even discover that you actually love something you thought you hated. That’s a pretty cool discovery along with the opposite when you find out something you loved is actually really bad for your games. From a game design standpoint, levels really play havoc with the rules of a game. From the perspective of a player, I love to gain power. I still think a game without levels would be really cool, but I know now that it’s a lot trickier to do than what I once thought.
So, get out there, find flaws, fix them, and then discover the real flaws and solutions.
