A couple days ago I posted about my current situation with Mad Scientist: The Game (obligitory link to the past here.) You may recall that I was a bit disappointed with the state of things with regard to artwork.

Well, I received an email from someone who has been quietly following my progress. His name is Daniel Davis and he’s an artist who loves monsters. Unfortunately he’s a way too swamped with projects of his own to do the artwork for the game. But he did offer some very kind words of encouragement that made me feel a lot better about how the game is coming along.

 I really want to thank him for giving me an emotional boost. And since I can’t do much more than reply with my thanks (someone tell my Mom I remembered my manners and already did) and publicly thank him here as well, I’m posting the links to his work, Twitter page, and newsletter subscription. He’s got a love of all things monster, so do me a favor and go check out his monstrorous creations, maybe follow him on Twitter, or sign up for his newsletter.

Help me thank him for encouraging me.

Daniel Davis
http://www.steamcrow.com/
http://www.monstercommute.com/

http://www.twitter.com/steamcrow
http://www.flickr.com/photos/secret-creatures/

Sign up for his Secret newsletter:
http://list-manage.com/subscribe.phtml?id=b9a0edf27f

Thanks again Daniel.

Tags: Card Game, Game Design, Mad Scientist, Thanks

Yes, yes, I know. The title’s a bit redundant. But that’s how I feel. At least with language I’m allowing myself to use here it is. The artwork for Mad Scientist: The Game hasn’t been coming through in a timely matter. Truth be told I haven’t heard a peep from my new artist since she had her kid. I understand the desire to spend time with your newborn. Heck, I questioned if she would have the time – gave her some gentle reminders – never once pushed her for an update. But I still haven’t heard anything from her. And that’s what’s monumentally annoying me.

So I’m hereby cutting my current artist loose… that makes 2 artists I’ve gone through on this project. I completely understand the situation each artist is in, and don’t begrudge them their decisions that led to them leaving the project, but I’m still beginning to wonder if the issue really lies in me or what I’m asking. At the moment I’m not really sure what I’m doing wrong here, but that’s the update on the current state of this project. Namely we’re no further along than the last update.

I’m seriously considering asking my son to mock up some artwork for the game; just enough to get a feel for what the thing looks like with SOMETHING other than text. I know he’d be more than willing, and can draw a pretty cool robot too. Unfortunately his skill at the other monsters might leave a bit to be desired. Then again, maybe I’ll do just that… unless another artist comes along.

Consider this a third call for artists. Interested parties should contact me.

Tags: Card Game, Game Design, Mad Scientist

When I’m thinking about something, I’m the kind of guy who likes to get to the initial, true heart of a matter. I’ll spend hours peeling back layer after layer looking for the real core reason for something. For better or worse, first causes are important to me. So when, a couple days ago, Mediocre Tales posted about D&D being a state of mind, the post kicked off a small inkling about role playing games, and just games in general, in the back of my mind. That small seed of an idea has grown over the course of a few ponderings.

Seeds:
The inkling started with my thinking about role playing games and how gameplay within them is typically referenced. The choice of words we use to describe a game or a game situation are key. Here’s a few examples you might overhear someone say when talking about a RPG:

• We explored the tomb.
• I found a great magic item.
• I had a great opportunity to explore my character.
• We discovered the villain was only a sock puppet to the real BBE.
• We uncovered an ancient cult bent on returning the Old Ones to their former glory.

Patterns and signs:
See the pattern? Explored, Found, Discovered, Uncovered… It’s all making sense now. There’s a more basic, deeper reason we play games; and it’s been in our collective (sub) conscious long enough that we’ve been speaking words to its effect so often that they’ve lost their impact. I’m here to restore that reason to its proper place – namely at the position of first causes.

Everyone loves a Mystery:
Mysteries are fascinating things. We love them because they’re unknown to us. We love them because they contain the possibility to surprise. They may not actually surprise, but the mere fact that they might is powerful enough to keep us engaged. We love a good plot twist, an unexpected action, an ending we didn’t anticipate. That’s a powerful hook… somewhere deep in our makeup is a desire to be surprised. We’re entertained by surprise and devote lots of time and energy to weaving mystery into our entertainment activities.

Let’s play pretend:
I watch my son as he plays with the plastic figures he calls his toys and it’s fascinating to me that the he never begins playing make believe with a plan laid out on how the game will progress. Each moment the dinosaur could suddenly gain super powers, or maybe the smallest bug surprises all the other bugs by becoming invincible. His simple character development may be crude, but he’s exploring how his character interacts with the game environment no less than any gamer or actor. These ideas weren’t in his initial concept of play, they were added later; his game evolved. One might say he is exploring the gamespace he’s created where the ending is a mystery that unfolds before him as he plays… I’d be in that camp.

Roll!:
Why do we use random number generators in games? Ever wonder that? Why have dice or shuffle the cards face down or spin a spinner at all? Most players will tell you it’s because it makes the game more interesting. That’s a powerful statement and another clue to our first cause: It turns out that randomization leads to interest. But why?

At their core the dice (or other random factor generators) are agents of chaos. They can’t be trusted to perform at any moment. Until their result is discovered, their result is a mystery. You might say that the dice are what seperates a game from a book. Turn to the end of any book and the result is the same no matter how many times you read it. Even those Choose Your Path books end the same if you make the same choices. By adding the agents of chaos we find the ending to be different (either greatly or subtlely) every time. The ending is a discovery and the play is the exploration of the path to the end.

Why we play:
So in the end we play because we enjoy a mystery and every game is a mystery containing numerous small mysteries. Games are a process of exploration on our way to discovery. And that’s why we play the game. Because it’s all about exploring and discovery.

Mysteries are waiting; Go explore! Go discover! Go Play!

Tags: advice, Board Game, Card Game, computer game, game, Musings, rpg

So this evening as we prepared for bedtime… if you have kids I’ll hazard that you know the drill; brush your teeth, wash your face, get your ‘jammies on, etc. Usually followed by cries of, “I’m not tired.” and the ever-popular stall tactic, “I’m thirsty!”… my son informs me he’s made a new game and wants to test it out.

Now for the record, his games up to now have been little more than the beginnings of rpg’s, perhaps even more like the crude, proto-larp everyone knows “The Let’s Pretend Game” where we each take a roll and pretend we’re that. Usually one of us is a tiger or lion and the other (I’ll let you guess who) gets to be a dinosaur of some flavor. But tonight he really surprised me by taking a game he knows and twisting it into something just different enough to be at the least a unique variation and possibly a whole different game… and this time the game was both fun and surprising.

Take the game of Memory (or Concentration if you prefer) and add a single die. Any die will do. We used a standard 6-sided for our game. The rules of the game are not changed, just the number of cards a player is allowed to turn over on their turn. According to my son, the game is played thusly: You roll the die on your turn. You get to turn over that number of cards and if you get a match you get to roll again.

When questioned on what happens if you roll a one, he informed me that you only get to turn over one card. I challenged him on that since it meant that you cannot make a match but can possibly study a single card. He agreed and informed me that was the way it should be. An interesting change from his usual fare since the question didn’t create a new rule or create a change of all the rules.

That’s it, a simple new variation on a classic favorite which can turn into a surprising game.

Surprising how, you ask? Like this: At the end of the game, only 2 cards (and therefore one match) were left on the table. It was my turn and based on the situation it was obvious I would win should I roll any number (or nearly any number.) Yep, you guessed it. I rolled a one and had to pass the die to my son. He gloated for a moment, grinned in anticipation of his impending success and promptly rolled a one. Laughing about his luck, he passed the die to his sister and she promptly cleared the cards from the table. We laughed about how it all turned out… in my opinion a perfect ending to any game.

Congratulations to my son for taking something he knew and twisting it just a touch into something else that’s both fun and surprising. He’s asleep now but I’ll have to ask him tomorrow what he calls his game. And for the record, kudos to my son for completing the development of a game before me. Looks like the bar has been raised. I better get my act together.

Tags: Card Game, Concentration, game, Game Design, larp, Memory, rules

Back in May, I pondered the inclusion of a RAMPAGE! card; a special type of Duel card for Mad Scientist: The Game.

I’m guessing that the true genesis of the idea has a grain from the 1986 arcade game by Bally Midway. For those who remember it fondly, here’s some image candy to bring back those glorious memories of wasted time and quarters.

For those who don’t know anything about it, here’s the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rampage_(arcade_game)

The idea behind the Duel cards is this: Drawing a Duel card signifies the ability to let your Monster challenge another Mad Scientist’s creation. Duels are resolved by each Mad Scientist rolling a die, adding the resultant number to the number of Monster Part cards in their Monster. The Mad Scientist who has the highest score wins the duel and gets to take a card from the losing player’s Monster. If no valid card can be exchanged, the losing Scientist must put a card of the winning Scientist’s choosing back in the Laboratory. Ties indicate that neither Scientist wins or looses.

Initially I considered allowing the player who draws the card the option of selecting his or her opponent. However, after thinking of the possible outcomes of a choice, I realized that in many cases the choice of who to duel would almost always be a player with less cards. So back to the drawing board I went.

In time I stumbled upon a solution: Each dueling addition would contain Duel cards in sets. Each card signifies the possibility of dueling, but doesn’t necessarialy indicate that a duel immediately takes place.  The method of determining an opponent would be handled by random chance. If I’m the first player to draw a Duel card, I place it in front of me on the table and play resumes. At this point when another Mad Scientist draws a Duel card, we will duel. Once a duel completes, or if I draw the second Duel card before another Scientist does so, the two Duel cards are returned to the Event Deck and it is shuffled.

I like the way this works out as it eliminates the possibility of a poor game experience brought on by being picked upon by removing opponent choice from the game. Remember, this is a kid’s game. If you want a game where you get to pick on someone, consider looking into another game I’m developing called  I Shoot Randy.

However, this left me with a concern about how to implement Rampage cards. The idea I had brewing was for the draw of a Rampage card from the Event Deck would indicate that all Scientists Duel. Fun and chaotic, but perhaps a bit too chaotic and unmanageable.

Yesterday I think I finally worked out the mechanics to make the Rampage cards playable… basically I’d follow the pattern of the Monster Mixup and Monster Mashup cards and create Rampage Left and Rampage Right cards. Much like the swapping of Monster Parts in the Mixup and Mashup cards, Rampage actions would basically indicate that the Mad Scientist who draws the Rampage card would duel each Scientist at the table by moving to either the left or right as indicated. All other dueling rules would apply. That’s the general idea. Time to do some prototyping and playtesting.

Tags: arcade game, Card Game, Game Design, Mad Scientist

And who would have guessed the identity of said artist?

She’s on the record for not finding the card game as interesting as my target audience, namely my college gaming buddies and players like them.
She’s expressed serious concerns on the viability of making any sales of the game.
She’s even gone so far as to claim outright that she won’t play the game.

None-the-less, I’m happy to announce that my lovely wife has taken it upon herself to make the stick figure graphics for the card game.

Out of the blue she showed me a scrap of paper with some figures she’d doodled… and they were just what I wanted. With my direction on a few very minor changes, she’s already created a few mockups of some cards and I’m overjoyed with the results. What’s more, considering my track record with other artists, I don’t ever have to wonder if she’s gotten anything done on the project since I pretty much know what her schedule looks like and how busy she is.

The weekend looks like a good opportunity to break out the card table and make a go at balancing the decks. So stay tuned, in the list of game’s I’m currently creating, I Shoot Randy might just be completed first… who knew?

Tags: Card Game, Game Design, I Shoot Randy

For Father’s Day, my family went to the waterpark for some swimming fun. While my kids had the most fun, I actually left with an idea brewing in my head for a new game. Now I know at least two people will be reading this post and immediately thinking, “ANOTHER game? How about you get one finished before you add something else to your plate!”

Fair enough, but I’ll counter with:

• I’m waiting on artwork for Mad Scientist: The Game so I can’t really do anything more there.
• I’m balancing the decks for I Shoot Randy and also waiting on artwork so I’m not really holding off on doing anything there.
• I’m still working out the mechanics for Pit and Pendulum (oh yea, that’s a new game idea I’m working on that requires only a standard deck of cards… Stay tuned for rules once I get the mechanics solidified)
• Politics: The Boardgame is currently on the back burner a bit while but hasn’t been forgotten.
• I have at least three other game ideas that I’m noodling about but aren’t ready to post about.

So it’s not as if adding another game idea into the mix is hampering development of any other game in my current lineup. Besides, some of these games might never come to fruition if I can’t get the mechanics both tight and fun. And what’s the harm in seeing the possibilities of a game in something and at least getting it down somewhere for discussion?

Here’s the basic premise: A card game where your job is to play cards that are pieces of a waterslide being built by everyone at the table. 

Here’s a brief rundown of how the game might be played: Each player is dealt out a hand with cards like:

• Loop
• Curve Right
• Curve Left
• Strait
• Drop
• Corkscrew
• S-Curve
• Bowl
• Y-Split
• Kersplash

Some cards will have rules on how they can be played:

• Loop cannot immediately follow another Loop
• Curve Right cannot immediately follow Curve Right
• Curve Left cannot immediately follow Curve Left
• Drop allows you to immediately play another card
• Kersplash forces eash other player to draw a card

Each card will have a point value for scoring. I’m not sure if scoring should be for what’s left in your hand once a player goes out or if each card played should add to your total score. I like the ease of the “count ‘em up after someone goes out” method, but might be forced (due to some other ideas I have on scoring) to go the other way and have scores be a running tally.

Play progresses around the table with players adding cards to the waterslide until one player goes out. If a player can’t add a card, they will draw a new card.

That’s the general idea behind Waterpark… all from going swimming with my kids. Happy Father’s Day!

Tags: Card Game, Game Design, Waterpark

I could have titled this post, “I’m so bad at art I can’t even make stick figures.” More on that below…

While waiting for artwork for Mad Scientist: The Game, I’ve been working on finding the right look and feel for I Shoot Randy.

Since I Shoot Randy should be a silly, lightweight, fast-paced game, I wanted the graphics to be somehwat silly and most definitely lightweight also. In addition, the level of graphical violence should be low; with danger eluded, rather than blatantly displayed – blood splatter and gratutious violence need not apply here. Images should be easily identified and quick to internalize. Finding the right balance was a challenge for me for a while, but I think I stumbled upon the right idea… Stick Figures.

Simple stick figures evoke the right feel for the game and make the cards look right. I quickly set to work generating prototype cards for the game and discovered that I’m so bad at art that I even struggle with simple stick figures. But technology prevails where my skills limit and here’s an example of the prototypes with which I’ve started fleshing out the game:

As you can see, the graphics are simple and to the point. The Stick Figure images I have used here were gleaned from a web search and will be replaced with homemade images so as to prevent using someone else’s protected work, but they do tend to set the tone of the game.

Each card is broken into three very simple constituent parts: a graphic,  some text, and a numeral indicating damage or healing. Note that the “I Heal” card is missing any numerals, but that’s not the typo in the prototype. The card text should actually read “I Heal back to 20 Life” since the intent of the card is to put whoever is playing Randy back at starting health.

Next step for I Shoot Randy will be to set up some decks and play a number of rounds against myself to get the right balance of lethality… looks like that new card table is going to be getting some serious use.

Tags: Card Game, Game Design, I Shoot Randy

Game Development is a strange process not unlike discovery and hypothesis testing via the scientific method. At times in my game development process I’ve found myself coming upon the answer to an issue fully-formed and complete. In essence, it’s not as if the answer has been created by me, rather it’s as if the answer was waiting for me (or anyone else) to stumble upon it. What happens is the classic recreation of Archimedes’ Eureka moment.

Eureka is an exclamation used as an interjection to celebrate a discovery. It comes from the Ancient Greek - Heureka meaning approximately “I have found it”.

This exclamation is most famously attributed to the ancient Greek scholar Archimedes; he reportedly proclaimed “Eureka!” when he stepped into a bath and noticed that the water level rose — he suddenly understood that the volume of water displaced must be equal to the volume of the part of his body he had submerged. This meant that the volume of irregular objects could be calculated with precision, a previously intractable problem. He is said to have been so eager to share his realisation that he leapt out of his bathtub and ran through the streets of Syracuse naked. – Wikipedia

Take for example the Card game I’m developing Mad Scientist: The Game. While some of the cards have evolved naturally from decisions I’ve made, a significant number popped into my head fully formed – complete with a vision of the artwork and everything. In an almost Disegno like method, a la Michelangelo’s David wherein the sculpture lies within the block awaiting coaxing from the artist to emerge, it’s as if the game and its component parts lay in wait for discovery from “out there.” In fact, all the card anf board games I’ve been working on have come to me out of the blue as if my mind suddenly tripped over them in my mental wanderings and musings.

There’s something intriguing in considering that games, game concepts and game mechanics, not unlike all scientific discoveries, all lie in wait somewhere in the Universe, just biding their time until one of us parts the veil and uncovers them.

Does that sound a bit too hard to swallow? Maybe a bit too “out there” for your taste? Take a small exercise and block off part of an afternoon to sit down and design a game from scratch. Odds are you’ll fail. Not because you’re incapable of designing a game, but most games can’t be “forced into creation” like that… they must be discovered; usually first by the subconscious and then given the allowance to have their presence bubble into the conscious mind.

Humor me for a moment and consider that almost all games are, at their core, a means of having fun with math. And we’re not talking about difficult math in most cases. For example, a standard playing card deck generates multiple games from the simple application of probability and statistics of sets of four series of thirteens; enough randomization to create a variance, but not a significantlt difficult one to master.

Math at that level is well known, well explored territory with little new to create. But perhaps the game (or game mechanic) is, at it’s core, a means of discovery within that small set of mathematics. Perhaps that’s why elegant games appeal to us so much. Elegant games have simple rules that harmonize with the theme of a game. At their core such games feel somehow complete. Most of these games, when they initially are brought to our attention leave a small piece of our conscious screaming, “This is so simple… why didn’t I create this?”

But perhaps the emphasis shouldn’t be on the I in the question, but to change the word create to discover and place the proper emphasis there. I contend what our conscious mind is interpreting is a cry from our subsconsious, “Why didn’t I discover this?”

Or, “Eureka!”

Perhaps God does play dice with the Universe.
Maybe that’s the whole point.
Maybe we’re supposed to play more too.

I think it’s your turn.

Tags: Board Game, Card Game, creation, discovery, Game Design, Musings