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 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.

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.
I don't necessarily disagree on that, but absolutely not a single word of it supports the "base-10 matters a lot!!!" contention I was writing about.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

“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)
What parts of these, exactly, do you cite as supporting your contention? I mean, it doesn't superficially appear that you've read them, because they're not immediately pertinent.
 

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).
I think there are two different scenarios:

If someone is seriously attempting to create a game they expect to distribute and have people outside their group play, then they are unlikely to release a satisfactory product without a reasonable amount of actual experience across the number of games. Certainly, a wide range of experience will be very helpful.

On the other hand if someone is designing because they enjoy it, and their group is having fun with it, then they should do whatever they want. I see a lot of people out there who very seriously try to claim that people should not be modifying their games or, if they do, they should gain lots of experience first, must play RAW first, etc.

Too many people in the community act like introducing a bad house rule is the end of the world. However, at the end of the day, the worst thing that can happen is that a given hack doesn't work, at which point you adjust and move on, and it's really not a big deal.

I am utterly opposed to the idea that there is something wrong with "young people" jumping right into making up their own rules. In fact, while you're young and have less refined tastes is absolutely the right time to start doing that. 'A broken mess of "SO COOL" but in actually it's horribly unbalanced wild west games where little makes sense' can be an absolute blast to play, and I have no idea why anyone would try and claim that someone having fun with such an abomination is doing it wrong.

Having played some B/X Stonehell with me, as well as HeroQuest and having access to D&D Essentials, my 11-year-old nephew made a really impressive deathmatch dungeon boardgame. I can see a lot of problems with it, but he's come up with some pretty impressive ideas as well (he is using fixed damage and a damage reduction defence die, which was a really interesting idea he came up with himself). I had fun playing it, he and his siblings have had fun with it, he enjoyed making it, and he's learning what works and what doesn't. It's all win and he absolutely should not have played more and waited before making the game.

I will absolutely be encouraging him to continue being creative like that, rather than trying to convince him to only play games RAW until he reaches some arbitrary level of suitable skill and experience.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top