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

Do you have those issues with STA as well, or just other Star Trek RPGs? I feel STA sims Star Trek pretty well, in all senses of Sim. I mean, your default balancing is literally the one they use.
It's the least-worst one imho, that's for sure (I had to check which one it was - it's the recent-ish Modiphus one, right? I do have the 2017 version and lot of sourcebooks thanks to Humble Bundle). I guess if the others wrecked on the rocks, it merely punctures the hull and has to evacuate a few decks but ultimately survives lol. That's also probably where I got that idea re: balancing too.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

If you're going to use a phrase like "insanely successful" (not my phrase, mind), it should mean something. If it has to do with sales (as I believe was implied), I think it's obvious D&D blows every other RPG out of the water, for better or worse. If we're taking D&D out of the equation, then what does "insanely successful" mean? That's what I'm curious about.
Not just sales numbers, but player-base numbers. Look at any of the data provided by online gaming sites* (roll20, Foundry, etc.) and D&D - more specifically, D&D 5e - is often a higher percentage than everything else put together.

* - while it would be nice to have data from in-person play as well, that's pretty hard to come by in any sort of reliable form.
 

Not just sales numbers, but player-base numbers. Look at any of the data provided by online gaming sites* (roll20, Foundry, etc.) and D&D - more specifically, D&D 5e - is often a higher percentage than everything else put together.

* - while it would be nice to have data from in-person play as well, that's pretty hard to come by in any sort of reliable form.
Great! So what counts as "insanely successful" if we don't count D&D? Just the games @Ruin Explorer mentioned (if in fact they do)? Others?
 

Not just sales numbers, but player-base numbers. Look at any of the data provided by online gaming sites* (roll20, Foundry, etc.) and D&D - more specifically, D&D 5e - is often a higher percentage than everything else put together.

* - while it would be nice to have data from in-person play as well, that's pretty hard to come by in any sort of reliable form.
Yeah and the fact that some games, you wouldn't even want a VTT for them complicates matters further. Like, I can't imagine using a "rules-working" VTT for any PtbA or BitD game, or Spire or Heart or something, the value you'd gain compared to the effort required to make a VTT that isn't Owlbear Rodeo-level simple work just isn't commensurate with the effort.

But of definitely agree, D&D is generally more popular than all other games together among the sort of people using "rules-working" VTTs (i.e. probably most people using largely non-narrative rules-medium games who are reasonably tech savvy).
 

Great! So what counts as "insanely successful" if we don't count D&D? Just the games @Ruin Explorer mentioned (if in fact they do)? Others?
D&D 5E would count. We don't count out D&D, we say that D&D, especially 5E, was insanely successful, but on the terms of "Being the best-known game in the industry, backed up by a massive corporation". Even then, 5E - insanely successful. Not solely due to WotC's efforts, to be clear, but that's fine - other factors help other games too!

Shadowdark - looking pretty wildly successful for the context of what it is, for example, maybe even insanely. A small-press game outta kinda nowhere with OSR/NSR rules, that has absolutely exploded.

PtbA - Ultra-indie rules-light narrative game (which historically, had been pretty unpopular and limited) spawned basically infinite games built off it, many of them themselves extremely impressively and shockingly popular for indie games backed by nothing (ranging from the zine-y to very high production values), and frankly permanently changed the industry. Huge games today like DH are clearly significantly influenced by it. Insanely successful - no-one expected that.

AD&D 2E - Uhhhhhh not insanely successful given it essentially sank TSR (well, that and Dragon Dice and other questionable choices). Also like, it sold hundreds of thousands of copies of the core books over decade, IIRC, not even millions (correct me if I am wrong figures-knowers), despite having by far the most general awareness and most money spent on it and so on.

D&D 4E - Probably actually underperformed despite selling more than any other RPG on the market at the time (yes including Pathfinder, people much smarter and more knowledgeable than me have been back and forth over the specifics, and as it turns out, 4E did do better, just not much as better as WotC would like).
 

AD&D 2E - Uhhhhhh not insanely successful given it essentially sank TSR (well, that and Dragon Dice and other questionable choices). Also like, it sold hundreds of thousands of copies of the core books over decade, IIRC, not even millions (correct me if I am wrong figures-knowers), despite having by far the most general awareness and most money spent on it and so on.

D&D overall has been such a monumental, record-setting hit that to even imply that any particular edition wasn't a hit seems off. Literally tens of millions of copies of the various core books have been sold, and continue to sell. It's like saying that Avengers: Age of Ultron was a flop because it only made $1.4 billion while Endgame made $2.8 billion. To this day nothing compares to D&D in terms of commercial and cultural success in the TTRPG space. Even Pathfinder has only sold a few hundred thousand core book copies compared to orders of magnitude more than that sold of D&D's core books over the same period.
 

1) Skill system doesn't cover all the tasks someone can purpose to do, leading to squinting as to what skill should cover what.
2) Skill system conversely doesn't cleanly divide tasks so that there is lots of overlap, leading to either arguments over the skill to use or some skills being much more valuable than others because they take up such a large percentage of possible propositions.
3) The rules set doesn't reward imagining being in the game universe but instead rewards talking about playing the game.
4) The rules set is breakable in a way that runs contrary to the intentions of the game play, for example, making key aspects of the gameplay irrelevant because its easy to make a character with attributes that let them ignore that aspect of the game.
5) The skill system has too many skills making being competent too hard.
6) The game strongly assumes what the game is about even though the setting itself does not make that same assumption leading to situations where the players reasonable and plausible in game choices are invalid because the game says you shouldn't play that way.
7) The rules set punishes a player for creating a character in an intuitive fashion usually because it is point buy or effectively so and underprices Johnny One Shots. I'd almost go as far as to say, "The game is point buy" since most of such games invariably have arbitrary prices for character features that in no way relate to the actual value obtained in game.

Probably some of the worst designed games I've encountered are RIFTS, GURPS, and Vampire: The Masquerade. Ironically, all were successful though for different reasons.
 

Facts not in evidence.

Without a source for this claim, I don't think you can rely on it, especially many human cultures used a base-12 system for thousands and thousands of years. I don't think most people "think in base 10" to that degree at all, nor that it impacts what dice work for them even if they do.
“The Role of Fingers in Early Mathematical Development” (Soylu, 2018)

“Fingers as a Tool for Counting – Naturally Fixed or Culturally Flexible?” (Bender & Beller, 2011)

“Grounding the Symbols for Place Value: Evidence From…” (Multiple, 2017)
 

There actually is anthropologic research-backed evidence to corroborate the belief that humans do think in base 10 for good reason, and it surrounds our ... fingers and toes! Most of us don't, in fact, have 12 fingers and 12 toes.
How we count on our fingers is however cultural (I'm reminded of the ordering three beers scene in Inglorious Basterds) and base 12 societies realise we have either twelve bones or twelve joints in the fingers of one hand - and we can use the thumb to track where we are.
 

I don't think they do though in any way that matters to this. I don't they think in a base at all for "small" math (which certainly includes up to 20), and I don't think that, without at least some attempt at science here, we can make claim as extreme as "d20s and d10s just make more sense to people!", which is the claim here.
The thing is what "small math" is and what numbers people use in games are both person specific. There are people for whom 11+12 is starting to push out of small math (and anything over 10 is). And there are people who work out probabilities in decimals.
Frankly if this was true, like to the point it impacted dice choices, d6s would be unpopular, as would d8s, whereas I don't think that's the case at all. If anything d6s are generally more popular than d10s.
d6 is a special case because it's the dice non-gamers have. I'd put d10 as third most popular - and that because D&D uses d20s. For that matter I suspect off we separate d10 from d% using 2d10 one's third and the other's fourth.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top