What is the Point of Game Design Forum?

Welcome!

I have been designing games - typically tabletop war games and grand strategy games (Axis and Allies, etc.) since about seven years old. I have notebook after notebook filled with designs and scattered to the four corners of my home, so when I come up with a new rule set and want to incorporate something from a past work-in-progress it takes a cross between Sherlock Holmes and American Pickers to find it. The Game Design Forum is intended to be my design notebook moving forward with the intent that a) I will be able to find my notes and b) the comments will provide feedback, insights, and suggestions for the rules as my - creative? - process moves forward.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Blast of War: Movement

In typical wargames there is no player input outside of the movement phase and no chance within the movement phase - you move your pieces a predetermined amount and the positioning of those pieces then dictates the probability of success in resulting combat. I believe I've mentioned this earlier, but I'll say it again: that's not a bad thing! In fact, it matches very closely to the commander's point of view of battles throughout history - they have maps in front of them, send out orders to units to hold, maneuver, or attack, try to understand the disposition and intent of the enemy forces, and wait for updates about units in combat. But I don't like it for a skirmish game, or any game that isn't attempting to be a military simulation really. I want player involvement throughout the game, a game caulk full of meaningful decisions that players can agonize over. In Blast of War players have a choice with each movement action - allow units to walk at a set pace,...
Read more

Blast of War: Victory Conditions

One of my design goals for Blast of War is to avoid allowing total victory, the total elimination of your opponent, to be the most common method of victory. Assuming all goes well the "will" mechanic I am using will provide a manipulable upper bound to game length that will encourage players to attempt to achieve objective that provide victory points at the end of the game. My current problem is how to create those objectives in a way that rewards intelligent play, can create an organic narrative to the battles - even pick-up games, and makes total victory a risky strategy. As this blog is more a design notebook for me and less intended for general viewing (which is good, as I'd be very disappointed with the number of visitors otherwise) I'm going to discuss the types of victory conditions I've seen in tabletop games then roll over to rambling about ideas that might help meet my design goals for BoW. Narrative Scenarios I am a huge fan of narrative scenarios...
Read more

QUAD - Four Stat Operational Level Rules

As a kid who grew up playing Battle Masters, Star Fleet Battles and SPI/Avalon Hill hex map games I learned to appreciate the value of hexes to simplify movement and terrain rules. Have you ever heard someone argue line-of-sight rules in a game using a hex map? I thought not - nor will you run into "front of base" vs. "center of base" measuring silliness. Now that my nephews are playing and loving Battle Masters I've been toying with improving the game by, you know, having the players need to make decisions! With that in mind here is a simple set of rules I cooked up - remember it is intended as a gateway game that still includes player decisions. QUAD Setup Units have four stats - Quality, Unit Speed (I admit this one is a naming stretch), Attack, and Defense. Each player requires a deck of regular playing cards and a few D6. Players begin by identifying each unit with a number card (10's represent my heavy cavalry, etc.) and taking 3 of that card a...
Read more