Category: Playtest

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

[Powerpress]

I was really happy with this playtest.  While, it did expose that the game is ridiculously unbalanced, it also provided some great ways to fix those problems.

The main issue seemed to be that the Developer was able to consistently build a lot of locations all while depriving the Conservator of the ability to do anything.  So yeah… unbalanced.

So how do I fix those problems?  My first inclination was to just try rebalancing all of the current cards for both players.  However, as Rob and I discussed the game I realized that the way to make it better lies within making sure the flavor of each role is accentuated.

So how do I accomplish that?  To me, that answer seems pretty easy.  The Developer will continue to focus on getting a lot of money and using it to build a ton of expensive locations based on their business ventures.  The Developer’s action cards revolve around gaining money and screwing over the Conservator.  The earning money cards are great but I now believe that some of the take that cards need to be changed.  They need to not focus on bankrupting the Conservator but instead creatively slowing them down.  Allowing for the Conservator to at least have a chance to bounce back.

As for the Conservator, they need with their locations to be able to place in a larger variety of places and also to be able to cheaply restrict the Developer via actions that represent real world things.  Protestors chaining themselves to trees or using legislation to stop locations from being built.

Finally, in the general rules, I need to more accurately scale location prices based on where you can build.  I did this originally by making locations that can be built anywhere cost the most.  Now I need to continue that backwards down to locations that can be built on only one area and making those very discounted.

So listeners, what did you think of the episode and of the notes here?  Leave a comment and let me know!

– Jason

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Damsels Playtest

First of all, this has been written with the assumption that you already listened to the actual play recording of our playtest of Damsels in Distress.  If you haven’t listened, I think you’ll appreciate it more if you do.

Second, I apologize for the technical problem that cut the recording off early.  I’m glad we managed to get the whole game in there, and that’s valuable.  But I’m worried that the most helpful piece of the experience for our audience was lost when my laptop died.  That’s what I get for trying to repurpose my Dad’s discarded, beat-up 2002 Toshiba Satellite(tm).  What we lost was the critical analysis of the game, where the three of us talked about what was good, what was bad, and different ways the game could improve.  So let’s break a few of those down.

The Good:

I still think the core concept and mechanics of the game are good.  The concept – strong men saving helpless girls from certain doom – is familiar.  I’d estimate it’s pretty much the core feature of 90% of the fiction that exists in our world.  It’s easy for people to understand, which is a helpful thing since this is my first game.  But that could also be sexist.  And I’m aware of that.  Which is why the game is also trying to make fun of that classic format.  The artwork will go a long way toward making that work.

The main mechanics of the game are, I think, pretty solid.  While the Dangers are randomly put out, the player has complete control over what he does.  At the same time the choices become increasingly limited as the game moves forward.  But there are no surprises.  The player chooses his own fate as he goes.  The real challenge becomes managing the other players as much as the Dangers.  I find that exciting.

The Bad:

Above all else, the game was too short.  In the three player game, it ended before things got really tricky.  A week later I played a four player game, and that was even worse.  The game ended after only 3 rounds.  It hadn’t even begun to get tricky.  The game will only be good when the Heroes have to make difficult choices about who to save and who to let die, and that can’t happen if the game ends too soon.

Whoever goes first seems to have an advantage in points.  So far that has always been the case in every game I’ve played.  Now, I think technically that’s just dumb luck, with high point Damsels being put out in the beginning every time.  But luck or not, it doesn’t change the fact that it’s happened every time.  So I need to stay aware of it.  I have a couple ideas of how to even that out.

Improvements:

More cards.  I’ve already re-vamped the entire deck from the ground up, expanding it from 72 cards to 100.  My worry is whether that’s enough.  If that’s only going to take a 4-player game from 3 rounds to 5, that’s still not good enough.  But I’m going from 25 Damsel cards up to 40, so hopefully that’s a big enough jump to make a difference.

Death Trigger order.  My original thought was that all Damsels who die, do so at the same time.  But that confused everyone else.  The last thing I want is for the game to be confusing.  I think I’ve come up with an answer that not only solves that problem, but also can add some strategy to the game, and partially addresses the issue with Player 1 winning more often.  I won’t know for sure until we do more testing.

These, of course, are just a few highlights of what we learned after the playtest.  But the one thing that I haven’t addressed yet is the most important question of all:  Is it fun?

My answer is this:  Almost, but not yet.  I think it can be and will be.  But I’m not sure yet.  I’ve got a lot more balancing to do.  I’ve got a lot more playtesting to do.  I’ve got a lot more talking to players to do.  I NEED MORE FEEDBACK!!!

So here’s where I’m asking for help.  I’m going to be bringing the newest revision of Damsels in Distress with me to Gencon.  I’ve ordered a complete deck from Superior POD.  I’ll have it on me at all times.  If you’re at Gencon, contact me on Twitter ( @poorly_designed ) and let me know you want to play.  We’ll meet up and give it a shot.  That’s what Building the Game is all about.  Building a game in public, shared with the community.  We don’t want to do this FOR you.  We want to do this WITH you.