It’s one thing to write for RPGs and another to write RPG rules. And one of those differences is playtesting.
How can you playtest much of this material when you’re producing that amount per day? You can’t. While some of the 2,000 words a day may be setting material that is mostly color rather than actual rules, some will be rules for add-ons to games, or game rules themselves.
Admittedly, sometimes I wrote without testing, back in the 70s and 80s when I was writing a lot for the RPG magazines. But because I wasn’t trying to produce vast amounts of material, I could playtest much of what I wrote in actual play. A reason why I don’t write RPG rules add-ons/changes now is that I use playtest time for my board games, not RPGs.
We playtest to help avoid the kinds of changes that we (designers) deem undesirable. We may encounter wildly different playing styles, preferences far different from our own, when we playtest rules. A big mistake of novice game designers is assuming that everyone likes the same things the designer does. One person’s feast is another person’s garbage.
If you’ve ever GMed the same (non-storytelling) adventure for different groups, you know the vast difference there can be from one group to another.
Until recently, films were rarely tested with audiences before release, but now it's become easier to alter a completed film, especially with digital editing. The filmmakers make a film with several endings, or try different things in other parts of the film, then they'll test it with audiences to see what the audience likes or doesn't like. I think it's also common now for novelists to ask a small group of people to read their books before submission. Yet the consumer cannot change the work, it must be changed by the creator.
Contrast this with games. Games are intended to change as the player(s) experience them. A game that always went the same way would not be popular at all. People expect games to go differently each time they play. (Contrast with puzzles, which often are the same when successfully solved.)
There are now some modern artworks that are intended to change with input from the consumer. In other words, where the consumer, the user, participates, but this is a relatively recent development.
Game designers have much less control over their work, so the designer playtests the game to try to gain a form of control over how it is used by the players. And that control ensures that the constraints they've established in the game do work ... or don't result in dynamics that are undesirable.
We now have many video games that are released only partly completed so they can be modified and expanded afterward. Even the electronic version of my boardgame Britannia is going through Early Access on STEAM. Further, some massive multi-player online games (MMOs) and other online games are intended to be changed over time in the light of play. There's no pretense on launch that they won't change.
Revision, as opposed to playtesting, is changing things based on actual experience. If you don’t playtest with others, then that experience must be your experience only. It's what you do when you're solo testing a game that you've created—more than normal revision, but less than full playtesting. Playtesting is collecting experiences of others, then revising your game. I don't play in playtests of my own games because I want to see other people's experiences, I don’t want my experiences to influence the testers’.
I revise “Worlds of Design” columns a lot, but the “playtesting” comes from my wife (not a gamer these days) reading them [Ed Note: …and his editor!].
You can try to be like a typical creator of manual art and make a game without reference to how others experience it, but for games that can result in a poor product.
Your Turn: What playtesting experiences have you had where something needed to be drastically changed?
That’s Fast!
There are role-playing game writers who can churn out over 2,000 words a day. That’s three “Worlds of Design” columns a day, including editing and finishing. I have never had anything like that kind of facility, not even when I use voice recognition rather than type! The average novel is 90,000 to 100,000 words long; my book about game design (Game Design: How to Create Video and Tabletop Games, Start to Finish) is 100,000 words; the (Protestant) Bible’s New Testament is 181,000+ words. So 2,000 words a day amounts to a book every two months or so.How can you playtest much of this material when you’re producing that amount per day? You can’t. While some of the 2,000 words a day may be setting material that is mostly color rather than actual rules, some will be rules for add-ons to games, or game rules themselves.
Admittedly, sometimes I wrote without testing, back in the 70s and 80s when I was writing a lot for the RPG magazines. But because I wasn’t trying to produce vast amounts of material, I could playtest much of what I wrote in actual play. A reason why I don’t write RPG rules add-ons/changes now is that I use playtest time for my board games, not RPGs.
Why Playtest?
Games are active, not passive, unlike many other individual arts such as painting or sculpture. Interaction with passive arts is minimal, and rarely enables the viewer to change the art. Good games change (are different) every time they are played, changed by the players to a greater or lesser extent.We playtest to help avoid the kinds of changes that we (designers) deem undesirable. We may encounter wildly different playing styles, preferences far different from our own, when we playtest rules. A big mistake of novice game designers is assuming that everyone likes the same things the designer does. One person’s feast is another person’s garbage.
If you’ve ever GMed the same (non-storytelling) adventure for different groups, you know the vast difference there can be from one group to another.
Playtesting and Other Media
In any individual art where someone or occasionally a group of people creates a work, they could decide to test it with an audience for acceptance to see what the audience thought, but most such works, music, sculpture, paintings, plays, novels, and so forth are not tested. This may be partly tradition, but in some cases it's because it's too difficult to change the work. For example, sculptures are hard to change.Until recently, films were rarely tested with audiences before release, but now it's become easier to alter a completed film, especially with digital editing. The filmmakers make a film with several endings, or try different things in other parts of the film, then they'll test it with audiences to see what the audience likes or doesn't like. I think it's also common now for novelists to ask a small group of people to read their books before submission. Yet the consumer cannot change the work, it must be changed by the creator.
Contrast this with games. Games are intended to change as the player(s) experience them. A game that always went the same way would not be popular at all. People expect games to go differently each time they play. (Contrast with puzzles, which often are the same when successfully solved.)
There are now some modern artworks that are intended to change with input from the consumer. In other words, where the consumer, the user, participates, but this is a relatively recent development.
Game designers have much less control over their work, so the designer playtests the game to try to gain a form of control over how it is used by the players. And that control ensures that the constraints they've established in the game do work ... or don't result in dynamics that are undesirable.
We now have many video games that are released only partly completed so they can be modified and expanded afterward. Even the electronic version of my boardgame Britannia is going through Early Access on STEAM. Further, some massive multi-player online games (MMOs) and other online games are intended to be changed over time in the light of play. There's no pretense on launch that they won't change.
Playtesting vs. Revision
Playtesting is different from revision. Most authors revise their work, though I know of a single exception. Isaac Asimov was a famous author of over 300 books, some fiction but most of them fact. His most well-known works are the science-fiction Foundation series. On a dare he once wrote a short story and sold it without revision—but he was Isaac Asimov. Anybody publishing an anthology or magazine would be happy to include an Isaac Asimov story even if it wasn’t good.Revision, as opposed to playtesting, is changing things based on actual experience. If you don’t playtest with others, then that experience must be your experience only. It's what you do when you're solo testing a game that you've created—more than normal revision, but less than full playtesting. Playtesting is collecting experiences of others, then revising your game. I don't play in playtests of my own games because I want to see other people's experiences, I don’t want my experiences to influence the testers’.
I revise “Worlds of Design” columns a lot, but the “playtesting” comes from my wife (not a gamer these days) reading them [Ed Note: …and his editor!].
You can try to be like a typical creator of manual art and make a game without reference to how others experience it, but for games that can result in a poor product.
Your Turn: What playtesting experiences have you had where something needed to be drastically changed?
Last edited by a moderator:
