Common Pitfalls in Game Design

The reason you might not have seen your new idea out in the wild is that it’s not actually that great, not because you are the first to think of it. However, that is not to say you won’t be the first person to really crack it.
puzzle-693870_1280.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

To help you on your games design journey, here are the common pitfalls in the journey you might like to be aware of. I have fallen for all of these in some way at some point. These are specific design choices or approaches that often lead to challenges or suboptimal outcomes.

The D12 Dice Trap​

There is an ocean of games that use D10 dice pools and all manner of D20 games. D6s are ubiquitous and while games like D&D use all the dice, the poor D12 tends to be rolled very rarely. Most designers notice this and seek to redress the balance by deciding to make a game system driven by only D12s. No one else is using this much maligned dice, making your new system unique.

Now I have nothing against the D12, it’s a great dice. But part of the problem here is the starting point. Trying to make a game specifically to use a certain dice is not a good idea. Use the dice that works best for the system you want to use instead. There is also the matter of marketability. Any gamer will have a crop of D10s and D20s, and any non-gamer will have a pile of D6s. Making a game based on D12s means a trip to the dice shop for most people (which is expensive but not all bad…).

The main reason the D12 tends to get left out as a core dice is the range though. Humans think mostly in base 10, so dealing in 5, 10 and 20 is more natural for most people. When it comes to difficulty numbers any dice with fewer than 10 sides might not give you enough variety, hence why many low sided dice systems use multiples of said dice. So for your “roll 1 dice to resolve an action” system we tend to come back to D10s and D20s.

So, if you are going to use a D12, use it to do something other dice can’t do. Just as with the Imperial versus Metric measurements, values of 12 can divide in half without going to fractions one more time. For a d12 that means 12, 6, 3 instead or 10, 5, 2.5. That gives you four distinct sections for any D12 roll (0-3, 4-6, 7-9, 10-12). However, a D20 can also break down to 4 sections (1-5, 6-10, 11-15, 16-20, another reason they are popular) so you’ll need to create something that divides rather than just uses stages ideally.

Respecting the Tarot​

Many of us get into Tarot at some stage as plenty of geeks run with the alternative crowd. I’m an occasional Tarot collector myself so I get the attraction. Tarot has been used as a storytelling aid for many years and it works very well for this. You have four numbered suits and 22 numbered trump cards making them cry out to be used as a gaming tool. This is doubly so when the suits and trumps divide the same numerical results into different sections.

The problems with Tarot cards are twofold. Firstly, Tarot decks have significant spiritual meaning to some, both those who practice its use and those who are unfamiliar with it. This means that there is more likelihood people playing the game will be seen as “playing with dangerous occult forces,” to say nothing of just trying to get hold of a pack to play the game.

The other issue comes from those who do know Tarot. The cards have meanings that have been passed down over centuries and just grabbing them as a “say what you see” narrative tool or a random number generator can sound very disrespectful. While the meanings are often vague and complex, if you don’t know them better than the tiny booklet that came with your first deck, you will stand out as an amateur. So, you should know how the cards are used if you are going to use them. This is no bad thing as the meanings have stood the test of time and using them properly will give you better narrative options.

Having said all that, these last few years has seen several games driven by Tarot cards. Many are journaling games, which is very close to the Tarot storytelling that’s been going on for years. The joy of crowdfunding has also allowed such games to be delivered with a deck created for the game (although 78 images from an artist is expensive so count that into your budget). There are also several gaming companies that have made even standalone Tarot decks. However, most of these games use the pictures and meanings as narrative prompts rather than the numbers as a game mechanic. Tarot, when used respectfully and with some forethought, can make for a great game mechanic -- just be aware of the pitfalls.

Magical Narrative

If you tire of rules systems you can go too far in the other direction and let the narrative decide the whole system. Go completely diceless! Let players do anything they can imagine! Their very words define success and failure! On the face of it, that sounds like the purest form of role playing.

The problem here is that rules are not actually a burden, they are an assistant. Rules give you structure not to control or limit but to build upon. If you want a totally narrative game (and that’s fine) you actually have more work to do, not less, than a more rules heavy game.

Firstly you need to figure out how your narrative will guide the story so everyone can take part, not just the loudest player. If the words people use will become the keys to success and failure, you need to define which words, how they do this, and how the players will be able to know which ones. A lot of this can be figured out by just letting them do as they will. Most story games do this by setting up a situation and letting that give the players the parameters their characters work with.

The second problem is explaining how you do it. It is not enough for a game designer to just say “and then you just tell a story”. It’s not actually that easy to randomly tell a story for most people. They need some help, some prompts and guidelines. The rules usually do this by telling them what actions their character can do and how good they are at them. Narrative games are much harder to do this with.

Despite role playing being among the most imaginative and creative people, not everyone is able to just jump into a game or pull narrative out of a hat at a moment’s notice. When we made the Doctor Who game I remember talking to people at conventions who would ask “So what characters can you play?” to which my answer would be “Anything you like across all of time and space!” For me that’s a selling point, you can play literally anything or base a character on anyone in the series across 60 years. But for many people that was just a scary option with no direction to help them out. The same applies to rules and system. So whatever your game is like, write examples, for everything, a lot.

Your Turn: What common issues have you seen in game design or tackled yourself ... only to discover it in another game?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Andrew Peregrine

Andrew Peregrine

The second is that I designed a game based on PbtA Hunger Games - and was very happy with it until I started to ask myself who I'd even try to playtest it with. You see to be true to genre it had player elimination and wanted a dozen players. Maybe at a convention? That one's still on my Google drive but utterly un-playtested for that reason.
Good news !
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The main reason the D12 tends to get left out as a core dice is the range though. Humans think mostly in base 10, so dealing in 5, 10 and 20 is more natural for most people. When it comes to difficulty numbers any dice with fewer than 10 sides might not give you enough variety, hence why many low sided dice systems use multiples of said dice. So for your “roll 1 dice to resolve an action” system we tend to come back to D10s and D20s.
The One Ring RPG uses d12s as the main dice rolled. They essentially change it into a d10 with two specials.
11 is the Sauron rune (not good) and 12 the Gandalf rune (very good). If you have the custom dice printed that way, it's a nice way of making a 1-10 result with a bit of variety. I have found it works well -- and agrees with your rule that if you are going to use unusual dice, so something special with them.

The second problem is explaining how you do it. It is not enough for a game designer to just say “and then you just tell a story”. It’s not actually that easy to randomly tell a story for most people. They need some help, some prompts and guidelines. The rules usually do this by telling them what actions their character can do and how good they are at them. Narrative games are much harder to do this with.

Yes, definitely. I wanted to have freeform magic in my 1888 Fate game, so I wanted to allow people to create any aspect and have that be true. E.g. "I can become a fog", or "I have superspeed". But there are two issues here. First is the one you suggest, which is that a blank sheet is hard to work with. The second is that if there is a strong freeform power, people want to use it for everything, and it often seems reasonable ("I use my superspeed to flip over the cards and see them, so I can win at poker easily"). So my solution was to take a freeform narrative ability and give it two options:
  • For no cost, you can use it tied to a particular skill which you define up front
  • For a completely freeform use, it costs you some limited resource (e.g. a Fate point)
Thus the "I can become fog user" tied his freeform ability to sneaking around, and can do that easily. But when he wanted to flow into someone's throat and choke them, that needed a Fate point. This solves the second problem I had, but it also helps with the "blank sheet" problem. There are a fixed set of skills, so people started thinking about which skill they wanted it applied to, and that helped focus their creativity.
 

The biggest issue I've seen is when someone wants to design a game, but has only played a handful of games, or even one. I'd say I've seen dozens of people come in saying how their game is unique because it doesn't have classes and levels and is entirely skill-based. Or that it uses 2d6 rather than a D20. Or, I suppose you get the idea.

The first step in being a game designer is: play lots of different games.
This is very true with a lot of things.

I've met young people who've started playing their first ever RPG (D&D 5e) and right away they're making up their own rules, monsters and magic items... Which is FINE but... At the very least I suggested that they scan the Dungeon Master's Guide to see how the designers suggest we do this kind of thing.. or even better at least try the game RAW for the first time.

But nope. They gotta create and that's how we end up with a broken mess of "SO COOL" but in actually it's horribly unbalanced wild west games where little makes sense.

Great example: treasure and magic items! I can't tell you how many times we've gotten an item that was basically breaking the game ("this sword gives you +10 Strength and makes you fly!!" or finding an item in a chest that has less actual value and purpose than the lock itself (a plain warhammer inside a metal chest with a very difficult, magically trapped lock).
 

The reason you might not have seen your new idea out in the wild is that it’s not actually that great, not because you are the first to think of it. However, that is not to say you won’t be the first person to really crack it.​
In making Solis People of the Sun, what has made it unique are the real star maps, there have been other, though they are often of an older catalog, or I found not as usable. I do feel you are right about a lot of things such as mechanics, the old standards are the way they are because of ease of use, once the novelty of a more interesting mechanic wears off, generally it just doesn't feel as easy.
 

A recent example my group picked up is Wildsea -- a delightfully creative setting in an imaginative world. It's like Waterworld/Pirates of the Caribbean, except that the ocean is impossibly tall trees on a all-forest world, and the ships sail using massive conveyor treads or chainsaws or spider-like limbs or what-have-you. The problem we have with it is that unlike Waterworld, there is no central plot around a girl with a MacGuffin map tattoo or an irredeemable enemy ship/captain or dryland to achieve. Instead there's an endless sea (of treetops) -- with a few landmarks/port cities, some vague territorial boundaries, maybe a few resource-rich spots worth capitalizing upon, and few real goals except survive. Even the economy is nebulous. So if you are trading 20 giant wolf-spider pelt specimen units for someone else's 30 wroth-iron dreadnought scrap-fragments, that's good or bad because... you think you might need scrap more than specimens (for now)? Of course an imaginative group can rise to the occasion and decide the spider-pelts the 'ferocious' flag no one has a special ability tied to that, but wroth-iron has the 'haunted' flag and you have an Augur character that can boost their foresight ability with nails crafted from them and that will lead you to a plot line about searching for the Ghost Tree of Kwizzlewig which... etc. etc. etc.... but again that's something that works for imaginative groups with any system.

This can be easy to overlook with your own system, as you likely have ideas for what characters will be doing. Likewise any group where the players and DM can just start a plot with anything. But for the rest, man is it helpful to have both ideas of what you might be doing in this game, but straight forward avenues to do it and quantify success in doing it.
Wildsea, in my opinion, is a very good example of game design. It is designed around the idea of a very flavourful world that is created to be player led. We don't need all the lore around the cactus people, for example, because the player of the cactus person defines the lore themselves through play. This is intentional. Not all games are for all players, so it's important that designers have a clear idea of the intention of their game and stick to it. Wildsea does this in spades. Player led, minimum GM prep.
 

Wildsea, in my opinion, is a very good example of game design. It is designed around the idea of a very flavourful world that is created to be player led. We don't need all the lore around the cactus people, for example, because the player of the cactus person defines the lore themselves through play. This is intentional. Not all games are for all players, so it's important that designers have a clear idea of the intention of their game and stick to it. Wildsea does this in spades. Player led, minimum GM prep.
If you enjoy the game, I am glad. We certainly enjoy many aspects of it. I don't think this response really addresses or even recognizes the point I made, so I don't know how else to engage with it.
 

If you enjoy the game, I am glad. We certainly enjoy many aspects of it. I don't think this response really addresses or even recognizes the point I made, so I don't know how else to engage with it.
My point is Wildsea is aiming specifically at a particular playstyle and its processes are geared for that style. The ideas you mentioned that would improve the game do not fall under the Wildsea design mandate. They are great for other games, of course. Game designers should know what the purpose of their game is, so it's easier to kill their babies that do not match up.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top