Summing up the results of 2015 according to MirF (and network battles around them) revealed a clear desktop favorite among readers. The game Pandemic: Legacy honestly earned the audience award - since the autumn release, its popularity does not even think of falling. The situation is amazing. The game is really good, but not new at all. Two of its components - the "engine" of the original "Pandemic" and the mechanics of Legacy - were successfully used separately, but did not have such success.

If you look into the recent past, you can find a lot of non-shot games that, after a successful redesign, easily climbed to the top of the desktop Olympus. Vanished into oblivion Vinci and the world famous Smallworld. Two attempts to repeat the success of "Puerto Rico": Race for the Galaxy and San Juan. The first spawned a whole line of games, the second was limited to a modest addition of 40 cards. Netrunner liked the "techies" back in 1996, but only sixteen years later, through the efforts of another publisher, received a strong gaming community. These games are different, but they share a winding path to success. Faded design, a mistake in marketing, the wrong target audience... Not all mistakes of developers and publishers relate to game mechanics. Everything is known in comparison: putting a hit of sales and its ideological progenitor side by side, we immediately see the difference between an excellent and just a good game.

We will try to follow the miraculous transformations and understand why the developers gave not the best-selling games a second chance and how they managed to make a masterpiece, just blowing dust off the box on the far shelf.

Pandemic: Legacy and Risk: Legacy

The original Pandemic made quite a splash in 2008, selling huge copies and winning numerous awards, including a Spiel des Jahres nomination and a Golden Geek Award in the family games category. It was an excellent cooperative of the European school, but the first line of the world ranking did not obey him. Experienced players got tired of saving the world from diseases, because, in addition to the roles of the characters, only the location of the epidemic cards in the deck influenced the course of the game. Expansions fixed the situation, but seven years later the base game found it difficult to regain the same attention.

The mechanics of Legacy before Pandemic managed to prove itself in one of the new versions of Risk. The updated game included stickers that changed the rules. Even before the first game, players decided which regions to mark with coins, and later they founded cities, added mercenaries to the game, and introduced new faction properties. A full story cycle (with opening of all or almost all envelopes with stickers) was completed in 15–17 games. The players positively met the innovations and came up with their own rules to keep playing interesting. The basic rules of "Risk" also underwent changes that only benefited the game. Although completing missions instead of taking over the world appeared in the previous version, with the new mechanics, this innovation has finally been fully implemented.

Why did Pandemic open up Legacy mechanics to board gamers? "Risk" for most geeks is "like Monopoly, only about war", a game, not noteworthy. Stickers revived the "pandemic" even more - the pursuit of a cure began to resemble an action-packed series. There are more envelopes in Pandemic: Legacy. The game tracks the progress of the campaign: if the players start losing too often, it gets easier, if they win, it gets harder. In Risk, stickers also affected the balance, but there was still the possibility of making a mistake and helping not oneself, but the opponent, and then suffering a dozen games in a row.

Smallworld and Vinci

A textbook example: the game that gave birth to the mechanics garnered stingy critical praise and was quickly forgotten. Vinci is a typical "euro" in the corresponding historical setting. At the same time, the rules that made Smallworld incredibly popular were present here almost in full. Map of Europe, albeit barely recognizable, seas-mountains-pastures-forests. Randomly generated properties like Astronomers and Slavers. The slow advance of empires works the same way: two counters by default and one for each obstacle. Even the brilliant idea of ​​"extinction" appeared in Vinci.

The reworking of abstract European wars into fantasy wars was handled by Philip Keyart, the author of the original game. The changes he made were mostly cosmetic. There was a die and the possibility of the last conquest in the course of "little blood". From the properties stood out in a separate category of race, which, by the way, significantly improved the balance. There are a few new features, but most have migrated from Vinci. The aforementioned Astronomers became Mariners and the Slavers became Orcs. There were cards for different number players - previously the game scaled with additional creature tokens.

Let's be honest, the Vinci reissue didn't stick in our memory because of the new rules. Say thanks to the Days of Wonder publishing house and its artists. Faceless chips turned into Amazons and wizards, every little thing, from a pet dragon to a hobbit hole, received a colorful embodiment in cardboard. The game has become not only more beautiful, but also much more convenient - thanks to the organizer in the box. It's considered good form for board gamers to value the mechanics of the game first, but mechanics alone are not enough. Smallworld showed how we really love good design and quality printing.

Race for the Galaxy and San Juan

Additions to German games are not released so often - publishers prefer to release new games from famous authors. Only the most reliable brands are exploited: Carcassonne, Colonizers, Alhambra. The success of "Puerto Rico" prompted Ravensburger to publish another game about merchants and governors. Contrary to custom, on the box they wrote not Puerto Rico: The Card Game, but San Juan, in honor of the capital of "almost the 51st state." The game was warmly received, but two years later it disappeared into the shadows of Race for the Galaxy (“Fight for the galaxy”). Tom Lehmann's economic strategy could have been another "San Juan", but it preferred deep space. Even after nine years, add-ons continue to be released to it, and the spin-off Roll for the Galaxy has come close to its progenitor in the rating of the site boardgamegeek.com.

San Juan is much easier than Race for the Galaxy. The roles migrated from Puerto Rico unchanged, except that now all actions are paid not with money, but with cards from the hand. The Mayor and the Gold Miner replenish the hand, the Builder erects buildings, the Merchant and the Producer allow you to collect all the same cards in large quantities, which is somewhat longer, but generally more reliable. A good family game, it's hard to get confused. Whether it's Race for the Galaxy! It seems impossible to find a more difficult game for a beginner. Incomprehensible icons, non-intuitive phases of the game, complex mechanics of production chains… How did geeks like this game in general?

Illumination comes after the second or third game in the "Struggle for the Galaxy". Card "Puerto Rico" and should be difficult! The San Juan, having lost colonists, victory points and ships, lost a lot. Made up for another game. Judge for yourself: victory points are back in Race for the Galaxy, and they provide an opportunity for an alternative victory when no one has yet set 12 cards. Cards are divided into two types: worlds and improvements, each placed in its own phase and supporting different styles games. It became possible to trade both for cards and for victory points, a “military” strategy was added to the “peaceful” strategy, which allows you to quickly capture expensive worlds. The 2-player option, with the ability to duplicate phases, takes planning to the next level. This is probably why Race for the Galaxy remains the most popular game on boardgamearena.com.

Netrunner CCG and Android: Netrunner LCG

The nineties are the time of the CCI, senseless and merciless. Everything became the topic for new boosters: from World War II to Xena, the Warrior Princess. Most of the games of that time did not reach us, and we do not feel sorry for them. At first glance, it is strange that such a fate fell to Netrunner. While every other game tried to copy Magic: The Gathering and sent hordes of creatures to attack summoners and each other, Netrunner allowed a hacker to steal cards from the corporation's deck by breaking through firewalls. By the way, the corporation played all the cards face down! However, after the base release, only two expansions and a few promo cards came out for the game, and it sunk into oblivion. It's the publisher's fault. Supporting MTG required resources, and it seemed irrational to spend them on another similar project. If Netrunner had fallen into other hands, things could have been different. In the end, it did. Wizards of the Coast was bought by Hasbro and Netrunner licensed to Fantasy Flight Games. The game was resurrected in 2012, in the format of a live card game, that is, with pre-known sets of cards in boxes. Such a policy attracted the attention of those who did not want to get involved in wasteful collecting, and the new Netrunner, along with the Game of Thrones LCG, became one of the publisher's flagships.

As with Vinci and Smallworld, the rules of the new game and the old game were almost the same. The FFG team only slightly reworked the tournament rules and introduced seven playable factions, as well as rules for "multicolor". At the same time, the ideas of the original Netrunner were borrowed gradually: “double” events (two actions per activation) appeared in Android: Netrunner only for the second cycle of additions. Big sales were promoted by a complete set starter set- among all the card games from FFG, it turned out to be the most replayable.

* * *

The success of the game in sales and its popularity depends on many things. To storm the BoardGameGeek top and all kinds of awards, a game designer, artist and marketer should prepare together. Of the three criteria - mechanics, design, hitting the target audience - an excellent game must be ahead of the closest competitors in two and be at least average in the third. Exploding kittens can rack up a mind-boggling amount on Kickstarter, but they can't count on a second run of the same size.

Give "bad" mechanics a second chance. If you don't like Dominion, try Star Empires or Rune Age. Can't stand Mafia? Spy's Find and Avalon will redefine the concept of stealth role-playing games. Have you tried Dungeons & Dragons and don't want to hear more about RPGs? Get to know Dungeon World. Games don't always turn out great the first time. After all, the first cars were slower than horses.

These are sketches, which are further transformed into recommended tags and entries in the Tesera glossary. This time we are talking about the mechanics of board games.

On BGG, mechanics (or mechanism) is understood as a part of the rules of the game, covering one general or specific (functional) aspect of it.

For reference (because in the future I will use the above definition and describe the mechanics derived on BGG):

In my understanding, the basic mechanics (or just mechanics) is a bunch of a minimum number of interconnected game elements, which can be a separate game. Mechanisms are simply the interaction of game elements. For example, taking a card from the top of the deck is a mechanism that by itself cannot become a separate game. But in conjunction with the “show the card to the opponent” mechanism, maybe, and then this bundle turns into the basic mechanics, well, let's say, draw & reveal. We shuffle a deck of playing cards, take a card from the top of the deck with an opponent and show each other (we open ourselves). Whoever has the highest card wins. Simple and casual, but already a game. Let's clarify the definition: a mechanism is several interconnected game elements with an input and an output. The player's action is required at the input, and the result of the action at the output.

Those mechanics that I consider necessary to add, like tags, I will highlight in bold text.

In question are mechanics (or even non-mechanics) such as:

• Gesticulation(Acting). Players use body language and facial expressions to communicate with other players. Like in charades or Activity.
• line drawing(line drawing). Answers the question of what players do during the game - draw lines.
• Memory(Memory).
• Rock Paper Scissors(Rock Paper Scissors). The principle of rock, paper and scissors is used in board games to determine the outcome of an event. Rock beats scissors, scissors beats paper, and paper beats rock.
• Singing(Singing). Answers the question of what the players do during the game - they sing.
• writing(Storytelling). Answers the question of what players do during the game - they compose a story.
• Role-playing game(Role playing). Some board games have borrowed some elements of role-playing games; for example, character control; or encourage players to make up stories.
• pattern building and pattern recognition. If anyone can tell me what it is, I'll be glad. (:

game conflict

Let's repeat the types of game conflict. It sets who is "friends" with whom during the game, and who wins or loses with the player.

competitive. A game in which each player plays for himself and only one of them is declared the winner. Since such games are much more common than others, there is no need to highlight them with a tag.

Unions. In the alliance game, temporary alliances arise; in such a game it is important, "against whom to be friends." Unions can be freely defined or dictated by rules. Usually, they arise in order to prevent the leader from winning or someone to take a significant lead in points or otherwise approach victory. A separate tag is not required, as diplomacy is usually required to win such games, which is noted on the "skill" card that is important for achieving victory.

Partnerships. In a game with partnerships, players are divided according to the rules (game mechanisms) into several opposing teams, but as a result, only one of the players wins. A vivid example of such a game is “Pest” (the game lasts 3 rounds; each round one of the gnomes turns out to be an honest miner, and someone turns out to be a saboteur, and the task of the first is to dig to the gold mine, and the second is to prevent the first from doing it; by only one of the parties to the conflict receives victory points, and at the end of the game only one player wins, the one with the most points).

Cooperative. A game in which all players play together against the game and either all together win or all together lose. Vivid examples of cooperative games: Ghost Stories and Arkham Horror.

Single. Almost any cooperative game can be played alone. In addition, there is a special category of games that only supports single player mode. Such games can be distinguished by the allowed number of players, so it makes no sense to single them out with a tag.

semi-cooperative. A game in which one of the players plays against all the others, and either he or they win. Vivid examples: Fury of Dracula, Descent: Journeys in the Dark, DOOM: The Board Game. From a technical point of view, such games are closer to team games, but in terms of gameplay they are closer to cooperative ones. The corresponding tag is required, since there is not always a player who is ready to play on the side of the game against comrades.

Co-op with a traitor. A game in which all the players act as if together and either win or lose together, but in fact among them there are one or more "traitors" who secretly undermine the success of the players - they win when the game wins. Vivid examples: Battlestar Galactica and Shadows over Camelot.

Command. A game in preparation for which the players are divided into teams, and according to the results of the game, only one of them wins.

The playing field and the nature of movement on it

The tags included in this section allow you to characterize the playing field and/or describe the nature of the movement of game pieces on it.

Moving along routes(Point-to-Point Movement). The playing field consists of nodes (points) connected by routes, and movement between points is allowed only if there is a route between them. A prime example is Pandemic. The peculiarity is that the points of the playing field can be connected in any way.

Moving around the regions(Area Movement). The playing field consists of areas of different sizes, and movements are allowed only between adjacent (adjacent) areas. A striking example: Small World, Diplomacy. The peculiarity is that the number of adjacent areas changes from area to area, and the playing field looks like a patch woven from uneven and unequal pieces.

Moving around the cells(Grid movement). The playing field consists of "cells" of the same size and shape (including hexes - hexagons), and movements are allowed only between adjacent (adjacent) cells. Usually there are no other restrictions on movement, although, as in the case of Memoir "44, some cells may be inaccessible due to belonging to a certain type of terrain. The peculiarity is that all cells border the same number of other cells, and the playing field looks like a tile of three, four-, etc.-gons Vivid examples: chess, Memoir "44.

Hexes and chips(Hex-and-Counter). Clarification of movement in cells, where hexagons act as cells (that is, movement from a cell is possible in six directions, not four), and chips are cardboard tokens with insignia and parameters applied to them. Most often used when talking about wargames. As a tag, still in question.

Free movement(Freeform Movement). The playing field is represented by any flat surface, and the movements are carried out according to the patterns specified by the rules. Vivid examples: Wings of War, Warhammer 40k.

Modular field(Modular Board). In games with a modular field, it is formed before or during the game from tiles (cardboard fragments - can be either the same or different shapes) or maps. The field can be "collected" according to the scenario described in the rules or randomly. The term can also be applied to games with fixed fields, on which overlays are laid out that change the properties of its parts (for example, as in Memoir "44"). And also to games that include several playing fields that appear on the table as the game progresses. .

Availability of game actions and their area of ​​influence

Action Points(Action Point Allowance System). The player has a limited number of action points each turn (round or other period of game time). He can spend them on actions, choosing from those available and paying prices in points until the points run out. A prime example is Pandemic, where the player has 4 action points that can be split between movement, flying, a special action, and a special ability.

Attack and/or move. A special case of the action points system. The standard set of actions available for a turn (usually this means activating a certain player chip) is as follows: attack and move, move and attack, attack twice (or more effectively), move twice (further). Often this basic list is extended with special actions. Notable examples are Dungeons & Dragons Miniatures, Dust Tactics, and DOOM: The Board Game.

Event and/or action cards(Campaign/Battle Card Driven). The game actions available to the player are dictated by the cards in his hand. Playing a card allows you to manipulate the game elements in some way; the cards themselves are only an "inciting element". Such a system is commonly used in wargames.

Simultaneous selection of actions(Simultaneous Action Selection). All players secretly and simultaneously choose their actions for the current round (or other period of game time). These plans are then simultaneously revealed and executed according to the rules. Vivid examples: "The Struggle for the Galaxy", "Wings of War", "The Great Patriotic. Summer 1941.

Variable phase composition(Variable Phase Order). In games with such mechanics, there is no clear composition of the turn: any current turn can go differently than the previous or next one, and players can influence which game actions are performed and when. Games with a variable composition of phases include any games with a choice of actions and / or the absence of a list of mandatory game actions that also specifies their order. Vivid examples: Puerto Rico, Fight for the Galaxy.

Area activation(Area-Impulse). A round in area activation games consists of alternating turns between players, in each of which the player activates only one group of his pieces. Usually, each such group is activated only once per round. A group consists of chips located in the same area of ​​the playing field. Areas are parts of different shapes that make up the playing field; serve to determine the availability of an attack or movement from one area to another (usually, such actions are allowed between adjacent - adjacent - to each other areas of the playing field).

Unit activation. A round in games with unit activation consists of alternating turns between the players, in each of which the player activates only one of his units (a piece or a group of pieces). Chips are combined into units before the game and have common game parameters.

miscellanea

victory points. In games with victory points, victory is awarded to the player with the most points.

Victory Conditions. In games with victory conditions, victory is awarded to the player who fulfills them. The winning conditions can be either the same for everyone or different.

secret goals. The goals of each player are known only to him. More often, they are distributed randomly. They can be victory goals or simply tasks for which the player will receive additional points.

Scenarios. The game takes place according to the scenarios prescribed by the authors (in which, at a minimum, the goals and starting conditions for the players are indicated).

Dice rolls. Dice roll games are games in which dice are used as a generator of random numbers (events or outcomes). The values ​​rolled on the dice can set the actions available to the player for the course of action, the result of some game action, etc.

Bag tokens(Chit-Pull System). In games with this mechanics, tokens containing game information are used, which are placed in some container and, if necessary, are taken out one or more, dictating the results of any game events. This is another way to randomly select the result of game actions, the answer to the question, what happened. Prominent examples: Wings of War (damage tokens), Arkham Horror (monster tokens).

In real time. In games taking place in real time, there are no intervals of playing time (rounds, phases, moves, etc.) and the sequence of actions of players (they act simultaneously). Typically, such games have end-of-game conditions, such as a time limit (hourglass).

Card selection(Card Drafting). Card Pick Games are games in which a player draws cards from a common pool for immediate in-game gain or to place them in their hand or another personal zone. Vivid examples: Ticket to Ride. Games in which cards are simply drawn from a common deck are not card selection games.

Trade(Trading). In trading games, players can exchange game items with each other. A vivid example: "Colonialists".

Bribe game(Trick-taking). The mechanism of bribes is used in card games. Players take turns laying out a card from their hand on the table; a group of these cards is called a trick. According to the rules of the game, one of the players takes the bribe for himself. A common goal in trickplay games is to take as many (or a set number) of tricks as possible. Usually the cards are taken by the player who played the most senior card. Usually there is a restriction: the player must play a card in the suit already played on the table.

Vote(Voting). In voting games, the outcome of some game events is decided by voting. Whom to give to be eaten by zombies? Who should be appointed governor? To credit the player with the successful passage of the room? Etc. Standard voting is carried out by cards or tokens, each of which sets a certain outcome. Each player places one token/card on the table, then they are revealed at the same time. Tokens / cards of which outcome is laid out more, that one becomes the result.

Player Retirement(Player Elimination). The rules of some games imply the elimination of the player before the end of the game when certain conditions occur. Today, this approach is used extremely rarely, but it does occur. Vivid examples: "Mafia", Bang!.

Building circuits/networks(Route/Network Building). Games with such mechanics encourage players to place game elements on the field in such a way that they form a chain or network. A prime example is Ticket to Ride, where this mechanic answers the question “why?”, since chaining is a victory point task.

Combination set(Set Collection). Set-combination games encourage players to collect sets of game elements of certain types and in certain combinations.

Tiles placement(Tile Placement). The mechanic encourages players to place tiles on the board in a way that benefits them (including victory points); instead of tiles, cards, tokens, chips, etc. are also used. A prime example is Carcassonne. Some abstract games also use this mechanic.

Accommodation of workers(Worker Placement). The mechanics encourages players to distribute a limited number of chips (so-called "workers") among the game "cells"; cells allow you to perform certain game actions or gain a game advantage; usually, each cell can contain chips of only one of the players (but exceptions are possible); is a special case of the "bet" mechanics.

Building a deck while playing(Deckbuilding). Used in card games. Players have the same starting decks at the beginning of the game, during the game they acquire additional cards from the general fund. Cards get into the hand only from their personal deck, from where they are played to perform game actions, including acquiring new cards for the deck from the general fund. The cards played go into the player's personal discard pile, and when the player's deck runs out, his discard pile is shuffled to form his new deck. Vivid examples: Dominion, Thunderstone, Ascension.

Area control(Area Control / Area Influence). Area control games reward a player who has a numerical superiority in an area (for example, in chips). Can be thought of as a sub-category of the Auction and Bidding mechanic where players can raise their "bids" by placing additional warrior or meeple tokens in an area of ​​the game board. Vivid examples: El Grande, Condottiere, Carcassonne.

ZoRDoK: This is Area Majority. Control is when only one player can occupy the cell area. Control through a larger number is already a majority, as in Tikal.

Area fencing(Area Enclosure). In fencing games, players place and move their pieces around the field with the goal of surrounding (or filling) them as much as possible. most playing field. Vivid examples: Go, Blokus.

Players' personal options(Variable Player Powers). Scientifically called "asymmetry". It is expressed in different starting conditions for the players, in different sets of actions available to them, or in different conditions victory.

Secret placement(Secret Unit Deployment). Secret placement games are games with hidden information, when only the player who controls the game elements knows everything about them. This mechanic is often used in wargames to implement the "fog of war". An alternative to the tag name is Hidden Information.

Roll the die and move the chip or Throw and move(Roll and Move). In games with these mechanics, players roll the die(s) and shuffle the game elements according to the value(s) rolled. A prime example is Monopoly.

Pick up and deliver(Pick-up and Deliver). In games with this mechanics, it is required to pick up game elements (symbolizing objects or goods) from some locations of the playing field and deliver them to other locations of the playing field. The arrangement of these game elements can be predetermined or random. Successful delivery brings a game benefit to the player, such as money. In most cases, the rules of the game or other mechanics dictate where exactly the game elements need to be delivered. In Railroad Tycoons, players connect cities with railroads to transport cubes of goods from one city to another - a city of a certain color needs goods of the same color, and if the player delivers them, he receives the money necessary for further development.

Share(Stock Holding). In games with such mechanics, players acquire, hold and sell their shares in companies, goods, and even states for the benefit of the game. For example, in Acquire, players acquire shares in companies in order to profit from their growth, and in Imperial - shares in states, which allows not only to receive cash dividends during the game and victory points at the end, but also to influence the actions of the state, having in disposal of the largest share.

Rates(betting/wagering). Games with such mechanics encourage players to bet on certain outcomes of game events. Betting is part of the game. The most striking example is poker. But there are other types of bets, for example, answering the question of who will receive a reward if a certain horse wins the race. Answer: the one who bet the most on it.

ZoRDoK: I would combine auction and bidding. Too little difference.

Exchange(Commodity Speculation). In games with such mechanics, players put in-game money on various goods in the hope that they will become more valuable as the game progresses. Often the prices of goods change during the game, and players buy and sell them in order to play on the difference in rates and make a profit from transactions. This mechanic is a special case of the Betting mechanic.

Card hand management(Hand management). This mechanic has nothing to do with games of skill or coordination. Games with this mechanics are games in which players gain in-game benefits by playing cards in a certain sequence or in certain groups. The optimal sequences and groups may change depending on the situation on the playing field, as well as the cards played by the opponents. Card Hand Management Means Retrieve the greatest benefit from the cards that I managed to take in my hand. In addition, cards can have multiple game assignments. This mechanic often answers the question "What can I do this turn?". Answer: "It depends on what kind of cards I have in my hand." Maybe it makes sense to add such mechanics as "Resource Management". And write down "Managing the Hand of Cards" as a special case of it.

Auction / bidding(Auction/Bidding). Games with such mechanics encourage players to make bets (play money, resources, etc.) to improve their playing position. The auction is held by turns of the players; on his turn, the player can raise the bid, exceeding the previous one (or withdraw from the auction; sometimes the auction is held for a certain number of rounds). The winner (the only player left in the auction, or the player who made the highest bid, for example, in a secret auction, when all bids are closed) gets the object of the auction. Auction/bidding allows players to donate resources to gain a game advantage or avoid a game penalty. Usually the player with the highest stake is the only one who benefits (or avoids a penalty).

Development and publication on the example of the project "Fury of the Elves".

To bookmarks

Combat mechanics

So, we figured out the main characteristics of board games (NI) and started developing the game. From the very beginning, I created the combat mechanics, tested it and realized that it works great, and then I started to "clothe" the project to everyone else.

Combat alignment

The battle is built on laying out cards in an unusual way - a cross. On each of them, in addition to the characteristics of the character, there are directions of his attacks and initiative. As a result, the cards go in turn, and you choose in which direction they will attack. There has never been anything like this in NI, so we turned out to be pioneers.

At first glance, there is an element of randomness in the system. We decided to add action mechanics, and then increased the player's influence on the outcome of the battle (as practice has shown, for some this was not enough).

The picture shows the transformation of the card from prototype to release. The leftmost card shows that at first the combat was somewhat different, it has large indicators of values. Wound tokens were supposed to be used, but they were abandoned.

Actions

Actions are nothing out of the ordinary. Each card has its own action that you can play from your hand. Therefore, you have to choose which cards will fight and which will remain in the hand "on support". This is a difficult choice: the stronger the card, the cooler its action. You will have to constantly balance and remember: if at the end of your turn you run out of cards in your hand, then it will be easier for other players to capture your lands.

Map

The territory map is a field that is symmetrical for all players. Opponents start in equal conditions. The map has castles, lands and towers. Losing the castle, you are out of the game. The amount of lands is the amount of your mana within which you can apply your actions that have a certain cost. The number of towers captured affects how many cards you draw each turn.

Field for four players

Hand

"Hand-building" mechanic: The player has a limit of five cards. Even if he draws ten cards each turn, he only has to keep five. As a result, each turn the player completes the “hand”, changing and discarding unnecessary cards.

The mechanics are very insidious. At first glance, it seems very simple, but in the game it behaves differently: the restriction forces you to quickly adjust your "hand" to different tasks. You also have to remember which cards have already come out of the deck, and which ones are left.

Combinations and goals

Combinations. In each of the four game decks, we have included several combinations of actions that players will have to find (or come up with their own). Sometimes they, to the surprise of the player, work completely by accident. There are combinations both within each deck and between decks. This turned out to be a completely non-obvious chip for beginners.

Capture targets. There are several of them, and they are all secret. At the beginning, you get one goal and follow it. You can follow it very explicitly, but then other players will understand what you are striving for and begin to interfere with you ahead of time. Therefore, it makes sense to deceive other players and make false moves so as not to attract undue attention to yourself.

replay value

Achieving replay value is a separate task. As practice shows and many geeks believe, any board game with more or less complex rules is used four or five times, after which it is exchanged or put on a shelf. So think: the total time of the game can not exceed 12 hours, and you have to pay money, like for a disc with The Witcher 3 for PS4, in which you can immerse yourself for 120 hours. The ratio of playing time to cost in board games is on a completely different level. As a result, our game has four sides of the conflict, four different goals and two scenarios, which leads to a good number of attempts. With the new rules, we have expanded the number of scenarios, and also introduced the player alliance mode - "two for two".

Game time is about 40 minutes for two experienced players, so if you are playing our game for the first time, then get ready to spend a couple of hours. At the same time, we recommend starting with two players, why this is so - I will explain below. Three or four people can sit at the table for up to two hours, but experienced players lay out this "solitaire" in 40 minutes.

We wanted to make a game with very simple and clear rules, fast and dynamic. However, stating this has created wrong expectations among people. Almost all players expected to see a beautifully designed filler.

Now let's sit down, leave the cards and disperse. Rules in four pages - well, what could be difficult here?

However, everything turned out to be completely different. The game is strategic, and she does not forgive such an attitude towards herself. People who approached our game this way and played for the first time sit in a slight bewilderment - they don’t know their cards, they don’t see combinations, they get the feeling that the game plays itself, and everything depends only on chance. Fortunately, this is absolutely not the case. Therefore, I recommend starting the game by studying the decks and their actions. This way you will understand (at least intuitively) which cards you need in the first session, and which ones suit your type of game.

The game turned out to be more difficult than we presented it. Play together, threesome - slowly and thoughtfully. "Running" with four for the first time, even if you are hardened boarders, I do not recommend it to anyone. This is a PRO mode for players who have already understood the rules perfectly.

For prototyping, I used the Visio package and a black and white printer. You will also need scissors and a lot of free time.

About testing

It's time for tests! NI testing depends on many factors and can take a long time. The better the rules are worked out, the less problems you will have after the start. This is not a CI in which you can improve the balance with a patch: messing up with the rules or components, you risk immediately denigrating your already unknown name. Just imagine that you received the game from print, and one card has the wrong text that destroys the mechanics in the bud, or allows one faction to dominate over another.

What to do? Send this card to people by mail? Stick a notification on your site? Yes, of course, those who are interested in the game will buy and download such updates, but casual buyers will simply put the game on the shelf. Therefore, everything here is the same as with games for old consoles: there should be no bugs, and if they are, then they are not critical.

Beginning of the game

Board game bugs

Mechanical bug. No matter how much you test, but someone will test the game better than you, or just accidentally discover a hole in the rules, taking advantage of which will bring suffering to other players, but most often to yourself. This bug can only be cured by publishing updated rules on the site, as well as sending news to numerous NI publics. It is clear that the lotion is so-so, but, alas, there is no other way.

If your game survives to the second edition, then you will simply print new rules, where you will fix all these holes. You won’t believe it, but there are NIs in the world that cannot be played according to the rules that come with the kit (usually both developers and negligent localizers are to blame for this), so players often come up with and post alternative “home rules” - their own versions of the rules .

visual bug- also not uncommon. Did you insert the wrong picture somewhere during layout or chose the wrong color? All this leads to the fact that one card out of 150 may be in error. If this is a subtle bug, then it's okay, but if it's very noticeable, it's better to get rid of it. Visual bugs also include crooked printing. Sometimes printing presses lose their settings, and then the color of some cards will be half a tone different from others. Again, this is not critical, but aesthetes can (and will!) find fault.

Also, the difference in color can be bad for the game, which has an emphasis on deduction and covert actions. Initially "marked" cards in the bud can ruin the whole game, giving out hints and knocking people down at the same time.

Cutting bugs- a real problem. All cardboard components will be cut with curly knives. Knives become dull over time, which leads to the fact that they literally do not cut cardboard, but tear it. Such cards then do not look very presentable. Therefore, it is a good idea to ask the printer to send knives for sharpening if they have already been in operation.

The cutting can also be curved, in which case the image will "walk" on the surface of the card. If we are talking about one or two millimeters, then this is not scary, but if the knife went through the image itself, this is an obvious marriage. You cannot put such a card in a box.

I'm going to open the curtain of the kitchen a little here. All knives in Russia, if you look, are made by one company, and it is located in Novosibirsk. The more complex components you have, the more punching dies you need. The cost of one can range from seven to 15 thousand rubles. In our game, we used 3 stamps - for the box, for the tokens and for the cards. Then the printing house can give you these stamps, or maybe keep them, in the hope that you will return to them again.

About public tests

With whom and how to test the game? It is clear that at first you will check it with your friends and buddies. It is very good if among them there are both experienced players and not. In this case, you will receive good feedback from different people.

There is also a good option- wear NI to clubs or to Igrocon to present it there. So you slowly but surely show everyone your game. Special mention deserves "Granikon" - an event in St. Petersburg. This is a conference where you can exhibit your game and show it to other NI developers and publishers alike. If they like the game, consider that the publishing deal is in your pocket.

GRANY is a guild of board game developers. This is quite good on VKontakte, where you can post your game and get feedback from quite friendly professionals. I personally have a good attitude towards these guys, but I never got to cross paths with them. But after the release of the game, I quickly found many of them and made acquaintances.

About publishers

So, there are developers whose games are released by publishers, and then there are indies like me who do everything themselves. I call such "samurai" - from the word "himself". An important question: “Bring the game to a publisher or release it yourself?”

There are already quite a lot of NI publishers in Russia. Pieces 10 will definitely be typed. They differ mainly only in the presence of wide networks for the sale of NI. Well, those who are “older” have better machines in the printing house (although not necessarily). I will not name any names in this article so as not to offend anyone.

So what are you "selling" to a publisher, and on what terms? In the CI environment there is a "design document" - big file, which describes the rules of the game and all materials. In NI, this is called the "PNP" version - Print & Play, print and play. You send the publisher a draft of the game, which he will print on the printer and play, and then decide whether to take it or not.

If you like the game, you will be offered standard conditions - from 3 to 10% of the wholesale price for one box. 10% is given only for a fully prepared game for printing! And they will pay you immediately for the entire circulation.

Let's count more specifically. Let's say your game will cost 500 rubles in wholesale. The first print run is usually trial, and never large - a thousand boxes. We multiply 50 rubles by a thousand boxes - great, you got your 50 thousand rubles, and your game will be released in another six months or a year.

Accordingly, if the cost of development with all the art was higher, you are in deep red. As you already understand, in terms of time-money ratio, this is not a business at all. For several months, your game will be considered by the publisher, they may delay the contract and not give the go-ahead - such cases have already happened.

Another important question: Do publishers steal great games? Yes, friends, they steal, but very rarely and very carefully. You still can’t do anything, since the mechanics of the game cannot be protected by copyright law. Therefore, if you sent your game and you were refused, and a year later you meet it, but with changed rules - do not be surprised. Can the publisher change the rules of the game for which you have already entered into an agreement with him? Perhaps there are such examples. One publisher released a game that was, to put it mildly, unplayable. The author of the game then wrote:

Sorry, but I have nothing to do with it - it's all a publisher, he decided to render the game casual. Here's my home rule - everything is hardcore, as you wanted.

Wow, thanks for being honest. The further we go, the more such examples will be. So why go to a publisher at all, you ask? If only because he has an established sales market and advertising budgets. He takes your Dzdok and makes a game out of it - hires artists, conducts additional tests, prepares for printing. It releases it, organizes the storage of thousands of boxes, and manages logistics. In general, he does all the dirty work that follows the creative impulse of the developer.

Therefore, if you do not have the money and time to engage in self-publishing, but there are a couple of ready-made Print & Play games that you play with your friends and they like it, you can try contacting publishers. But in order to earn a lot of money on creating NI, you either need to work in a publishing house as a full-time game designer, or release several NI per month, which is completely unrealistic. Making money on NI with a publisher all the time is an almost impossible task.

Yes, if your game is super-successful, you will release 50 projects, all of them will receive additional circulations, and you will sit on royalties from each box - in this case, you might save up for a one-room apartment in Butovo. But, you see, in this sentence there are too many times “if”. For tips on how to properly prepare a P&P for a publisher, see this excellent article.

Samizdat is for tough men!

Samizdat is the path for real samurai, for which you will want to do hara-kiri many times. We chose to go down this path because we didn't have a pile of cut P&P paper, but a completely print-ready game. All art was drawn by us. Although it didn't cost us a penny, it was highly priced on the market. It is unlikely that any publisher would agree to buy it entirely. We ourselves made up the rules, collected the amount needed for printing. Many told us: “Guys, let's go to Boomstarter! Collect money! Sell ​​the entire print run at once!

However, samurai (and such among our friends also turned out to be) dissuaded from crowdfunding. The money was not needed, and losing another three months for the sake of a dubious company was unprofitable. Also, we must not forget about the percentage that Boomstarter takes for itself. You will prepare a campaign for a month, it will take a month to raise funds, the same amount will be required to transfer money to your account, and only after that you will start printing, which can also be delayed.

Fundraising platforms are good because they give good advertising and allow you to study the demand for your game. They are often resorted to by large publishing houses in order to quickly shove expensive games for a specific audience and determine the size of the final circulation. How much money will you get if you follow the path of self-publishing? More about this in the third article, but below there is a little about pricing and our experience.

How long have we been making the game? Prototype month. Art drawing year. Preparation for printing took another half a month. Printing in the printing house took another month and a half. As a result, two people made the game in 1 year with a penny. Two years of downtime were associated with personal employment, and have nothing to do with the game. Almost three years went unhurried testing.

"Fichekat" or how we cast out demons

One of the most difficult tasks of a NI designer is to stop in time. When it seems that the game works great, you always want to “weigh” it with additional mechanics. “That would be more realistic! That would make more sense! That will be more difficult! The geeks will be happy!". This is where you need to stop.

As with CI, you can add many other mechanics to your game, add dice, diplomacy, co-op mode, and so on. All this is very good, of course, but the "game of making a game" must be stopped in time, otherwise you will end up with a terrible many-faced monster that even the most hardcore players cannot play. Any additional mechanics will increase the game time and require more effort from the players. So if you do simple game- be able to stop in time. For example, we immediately had an additional scenario in which people played against the game.

These are the chips that had to be laid out on each land in order to understand how many cards this or that player sends into battle. Terribly stupid mechanism with small components, which quickly showed its insignificance and was removed.

Six turns after the start, the Dragon Demon Invasion took place and the players had to defeat it. This required one paragraph in the rules - the text did not fit there, and we could no longer reduce the font. I needed one new demon card (not a problem) and six tokens of demonic corruption. The latter just did not fit on one printed sheet. Two against one - the demonic dragon has been banished and will most likely return in the expansion.

Tokens of hellish corruption that did not fit into the printed sheet

We also got rid of actions and cards that were too strong. Experienced people, having played our game, gave a number of recommendations - add, they say, plastic turrets, miniatures of heroes and artifacts. They thought it was wrong what we have for the capture ordinary earth the player gets nothing.

It is clear that we immediately rejected plastic models as expensive and difficult to implement, and drew artifacts in a couple of weeks - all 20 pieces. Conducted a dozen tests and left them - they justify their existence. Therefore, we recommend that you show your game to other NI developers and listen to their criticism, but do not follow it blindly.

The very first box prototype. Pay attention to the beautiful lodgement, which did not live up to the release. The narrow and skinny box did not stand upright and constantly fell. The field in it was supposed to be made of cardboard and be able to fold in half, but in Russia they really don’t know how to do that. Horror. On the shelf, such a box simply would not survive, in the truest sense of the word.

Was and became

Initially, we wanted to make an English version of the game. There were thoughts about Kickstarter. As a result, the logo and some words in English, and some in Russian. Many players thought that this was a localization of an unknown European game. The picture was vertical, I had to finish the "ears". The box learned to stand normally and not fall. The field began to fit entirely into the box.

Treasure evolution. You can not look at the color - my phone is "lying".

About iterations

In total, the game went through four major iterations:

1. Basic version;

2. A rule has been added about splitting neutrals into small piles of three cards, which made it possible to reduce the randomness in battle, and also made it possible to interfere with other players. Changed the balance towards simplification of the neutrals and removed the chips indicating how many cards should fight from each side in a particular location.

5. Already after the release, the rules were improved and an alternative version of the combat was made for advanced players who love tactics, rather than random showdowns.

As a result, we got a game that we actively began to prepare for printing. The preparation included writing the rules, proofreading and editing them.

There was a separate layout. Don't forget that there shouldn't be any mistakes. The layout of the components on printed sheets is handled by the printing house itself. We save all pictures in .tiff format and give them on a flash drive, since using Google Drive can be inconvenient for conservative printing houses. For printing and preparing for printing, there is an excellent

Game designer Jan Schreiber, who has worked on projects such as the Marvel Trading Card Game and Playboy: the Mansion. In the second chapter of the book, designers are introduced to the concepts of "mechanics", "dynamics", "game state" and so on.

Chemists and physicists have been working for centuries trying to determine the smallest detectable particles of matter and how these particles interact with each other. Game design is a much younger field, but designers are trying to define the smallest definable parts of a game in exactly the same way.

Each component of a game can be designed individually, and understanding what these components are and how they interact is essential to developing or analyzing a complete game. The building blocks of games, the "atoms" of game design, are what this chapter is all about.

When designing a game, many novice designers have no idea where to start. A finished game like World of Warcraft is so huge and vast that it's an impossible task to start designing a whole thing from scratch. Even in the case of a relatively simple game like Monopoly, it is not entirely clear where the design starts from: does it start with player figures, with Chance cards or United Charitable Foundation cards, with the playing field, with the rules, or with what something else? When considering the game as a collection of atoms, the process of its development becomes clearer.

As a warning, developers and scientists are picking up tons of different definitions of the word "game", and even more - options for understanding what the game is made of. The following is one way of categorizing games, but not the only one. Designers who find these discussions interesting are encouraged to expand on these definitions.

Game state and field of view

To understand games, it's helpful to first look at the whole picture. For a moment, picture in your mind a game you played recently. Consider everything that happens in the game or could change if someone takes an action or exits the pause menu. We call this picture the game state - the set of all relevant virtual information that can change during the game.

In chess, game state includes a set of pieces, their positions on the board, and precise information based on moves already made (for example, which player has the right to castle, which pawns can be captured on the aisle, whose turn it is to move).

In poker, the game state includes: each player's hand and their chips; sweat size; Whose turn is it to bet? who threw off the cards on the current hand; what cards are left in the deck and in what order, and so on. In video games, the game state can be incredibly complex in composition; v last game Madden, for example, the game state contains information about each player, about each possible action, and about each of the actions already taken during the entire game.

From the examples given, it is clear that players are not always aware of the overall state of the game as a whole. The segment of the game state that the player can see, we will define here as the field of view.

In chess, the field of view includes the entire game state, because there is no hidden information in this game. In real-time strategy (RTS) there is a fog of war, and each player has his own field of vision, which can expand with yet unexplored possessions and territories. In MMO, the player, in principle, cannot know what is happening in a good half virtual world outside of his field of vision.

Thus we came to a play space full of play area. It could be a board that a game is played on, a huge MMO, or a single level in a first-person shooter (FPS) campaign. In an alternate reality or augmented reality (ARG) game, this could be the player's city, the internet, the player's usual location, or the entire world.

Players, avatars and game particles

The playing space can be as small or large as you want, but without players, the game will not work. All games, by definition, must have players, because players are the ones who make the rules as they go.

In digital worlds, the player is often personified in the game as an avatar. In non-digital games, players are also personified, but in this case there is no single term, it varies from game to game (“symbol” or “pawn” - such words often appear in the description of the rules of the game).

In this book, we will consider something that personifies the player in the game world as an avatar. This is what players indicate their position in the field of view. In Monopoly, the avatars are a thimble, a car, a small dog. In Trivial Pursuit - pie. In chess, the king (the rest of the pieces are here to protect the king). In typical FPS, a soldier or part of a weapon on the screen. In many 3D video games, you see your avatar's back as they explore the world.

In some games, there is no avatar in the game space. Instead, the player impersonates himself. This is true for poker, Risk, and the video game Civilization Revolution. In the latter, small soldiers and artillery pieces protect the player - the ruler. Also, many RTS video games do not have avatars.

An avatar is different from what board game designers informally refer to as "game particles", which are the physical objects needed to play a game. Particles include things like property cards, the die, plastic military figures in Risk, action and mana cards, jewelry in Pretty Pretty Princess. In video games, we often refer to these game particles as "art assets" when we talk about icons, sprites, and models, and as "objects" when we talk about their representation in code.

By themselves, these particles are things whose names are probably familiar to you: NPCs, items, monsters, enemies, and so on.

The current collection of all avatars and particles (and players, if we are talking about games like Twister that are directly related to physical dexterity) is a component of the game state in the overall game space.

Mechanics

The game mechanics are what makes the game space really, really interesting. "Game mechanics" is another definition for what many commonly refer to as rules. Meanwhile, in the industry, the term "mechanics" is a commonplace. Mechanics is how something works. If you do X, then Y will happen. If X is true, then you can do Y. In Monopoly, if you were like property, then you can buy it. If you roll the highest number, you go first. These are all simple mechanics.

For game designers, game mechanics are amazingly cool things. Imagine a cook with spices or a carpenter with wooden block. The mechanics makes every game designer ask themselves the question: “What can I do with this?” A mechanic is associated with a set of possibilities. Such a creative process for many designers is presented as a game to create this very game.

In other words, mechanics are rules that affect players, avatars, game particles, game state, field of view and describe all the ways in which game state can be changed.

Mechanics are the ingredients of game design. Understanding them is essential for all game designers. In fact, you can even search BoardGameGeek.com for board games by their mechanics.

• Installation. There must always be at least one rule describing how the game starts.
• victory conditions. There must always be at least one rule describing how to win the game. Some games, like unlimited role-playing games (RPGs), do not contain victory conditions. Therefore, some designers do not consider them as games. Others believe that completing a special task is a victory because after that the player switches to the next task.
• Game progress. Who goes first and how? Turn based or real time game? If it's turn-based, does it start with a specific player and then everyone goes clockwise, or do players auction resources to fight for the right to go first each round, or some other method? If it's a real time game and two players are trying to do something at the same time, how is that allowed?
• Player actions. Sometimes referred to as "commands", some of the most important mechanics characterize what players can do and what effect these actions have on the game state.
• View field(s) definitions. The mechanic determines exactly what information the player can have at any given time. Note that some mechanics can change the field of view, as an example - the fog of war partially dissipating under certain conditions in RTS.

Some combinations of mechanics are much easier for people to learn than others. For example, in the board game Scotland Yard Mr. X wanders around London, trying to avoid capture. It appears only on every third move, and the rest of the time it remains hidden. The game is purely based on strategy. And it's not as easy for people to play it as, say, Sorry.

Dynamics

"Game dynamics" is the pattern of the game that results from the mechanics after the players have set it in motion. For example, throughout this book we refer to some of the most common dynamics, such as "race to the finish" and "claim territory." Territorial possession itself is only one type of a larger set of dynamics (and, by default, continued use of them).

The following games, among other dynamics, include the acquisition of territory:

• Civilization;
• Starcraft;
• risk;
• Axis & Allies;
• Diplomacy;

And all these games are based on the race to the end:

• Mario Kart;
• Candyland;
• The Game of Life;
• Chutes & Ladders.

While these games share a common dynamic, the mechanics used to achieve that dynamic are different from game to game.

It's worth noting that dynamics are components of a game's experience, but not all of them are defined or backed up by mechanics - for example, interactions between players that occur outside of the game state (commonly referred to as a "metagame"). Some of the examples of metagame dynamics are: negotiations between players, discussions, their associations, online chat, boastful or offensive remarks.

Tasks

And on top of all the things already described in a separate layer - game tasks. The ultimate game goal is, of course, to achieve victory. Sometimes game tasks are called "missions" or "quests".

Completing missions typically awards rewards that motivate players to crush creatures, search for treasure, equip themselves with better and better armor, and compete against their friends. In an FPS, the objective is often to kill an enemy, capture a flag, or rescue hostages. In The Age of Discovery, one of the tasks of the players is to explore new seaside lands.

Topic

Bohnanza is a game about growing beans. Super Mario Bros is a game about a plumber scouring the Mushroom Kingdom to save a princess. Katamari Damacy is a game about a prince who has to recreate the stars in the sky that were accidentally destroyed by the King of All Creation. However, all games cannot be considered from this angle; Tetris is not a game about something.

None of the above is strictly necessary for gameplay. A legend can be even a search for a lost mitten, even a kindred spirit, from the point of view of mechanics it will be the same thing. And at the same time, some motive for chasing the killer will make the game more attractive.

There are many names of the concept, the meaning of which is that the game is “about something”. It is defined as a theme, as a color, as a story or a narrative, and in many other terms. In this book, we use the term "theme" to describe an aspect of games that, while outside of the mechanics, somehow, if well chosen, makes the mechanics feel more natural.

What's First

Game state, avatars, mechanics, dynamics, theme… where does a designer start?

From the point of view of a game developer, the order can be any. Let's say you want to create a resource-gathering game. We have decided on the dynamics, now we need to choose the appropriate mechanics. What exactly should it be to achieve the dynamics of resource collection? There is also the question of the theme. What exactly will we collect, what will motivate the player to collect?

A designer can start with a theme. The theme of the board game Redneck Life is worked out to such an extent that it seems that the designer first created the theme, and only then figured out what game to fill it with.

Certain mechanics can also be used as the basis of the game. In the case of Katamari Damacy, the mechanic of rolling over an object and picking it up thus forms the basis for everything else in this game, and is probably the mechanic that was developed in the first place. It's the same with countless FPS: everything starts with the shooting mechanics, and only then something is layered on top.

Comparison of results

As an example, let's say you're designing a physical card game whose theme is car manufacturing. The desired dynamics is a race to the finish, which requires the player to build a car faster than the opponent. The mechanics that will allow this to happen are:

• Pull out a card.
• Play a card (either place it or discard it).

Game particles would be:

• Cards (each card depicts a component of a car, and in order to build a complete car, you need to collect 10 cards).

The player impersonates himself, so an avatar is not needed here.

These components by themselves have little to do with the game at this stage. All games at this stage have little to do with the game. The point is to take something basic, the base game, and then make it more interesting for the player by adding elements of strategy, randomness, adding or removing mechanics, thereby enhancing the "playability". In this case, as an illustration, we can add the following mechanics and game particles:

• Production supply system.
• Production pricing that will force players to allocate workers, parts, and the like in order to achieve the optimal production result
• A sabotage that allows one player to interfere with another player's supply chain.
• Random cards that introduce an element of luck by causing production failures, price drops, favorable press, and so on.
• Prototype game about cars. In the first iteration of the game, you need to collect 10 cards in order to build a car, however, the game is not particularly exciting so far.

Depending on the cards and the chosen strategy, this game can become very exciting. For many designers, making games isn't just about honing their skills, it's also about having fun while working.

Learn to experiment and enjoy your design and the design process. Remember that you can create a game about anything. If the process is daunting and intimidating at first, that's okay. The irony is that some gamers feel more comfortable creating levels for shooters in a digital editor than creating board games. However, these two game development environments use the same building blocks.

Take care of the design of the game - and "get hooked."

Challenges

The challenges described in this chapter are getting more and more complex; their goal is to make you feel comfortable with the non-digital game design process. In the remaining chapters, the process will build on the foundations outlined here. The proposed options will allow you to move along one of the following paths:

Challenge one - "The Way"

To develop this game, you will need to delve into the race-to-the-finish gameplay and dynamics we discussed above.

The game should allow players (between 2 and 4) to progress along a path that needs to be taken from point A to point B. The first player to reach point B wins.

As a game designer, it is up to you to define the theme, game particles, and mechanics.

Required components:

Received results:

• desktop prototype,
• or card prototype,
• or tiled prototype,
• or text written on one page detailing potential game design.

Suggested process:

• Define a theme and purpose.

Where should players go and why should they go there? Choose a topic that includes some kind of interaction between the participants in order to make the game more interesting.

• Define mechanics.

Start simple. Imagine a path from beginning to end, and this path is divided into several different sectors. It could be 100 gaps or tiles or cards that end up forming a path that players will have to “race to”. Now think about the mechanics that will propel your players along that path. The simplest way is to roll a dice (dice) Now think about how to make the game more interesting, for example, you can enter some action, thanks to which the player slows down or speeds up his opponent.

Does the narrative involve any obvious mechanics? For example, if your game is about running a relay race, then you will need a way to pass the baton (maybe a faster running speed means a greater chance of dropping the baton when passing). To add interaction between players in a foot race, you may need to adjust the theme, for example by making the runners robots with lasers that can shoot each other, which involves the introduction of shooting and dodging mechanics.

• Determine the conflict between the players.

How can a player harm another player's progress or contribute to their own progress? What are the possible compromises?

• Playtest.

Every time you add a mechanic to a game, test it. Does it make the game more interesting or boring? Does it support the core of the game? Does it work exactly as you originally envisioned?

• Create the results you get.

Options:

Try going through this process again and create a different game. This time, start with the mechanics and only after that create a suitable theme. You will notice that both of these paths will allow you to create a perfectly good game, but your thought process will be very different.

Challenge two - "This is mine!"

In this challenge, you will delve into the dynamics of territorial capture. If you haven't already noted it, this dynamic is present in the vast majority of board games being created these days. As in the previous example, this game is for 2 to 4 players. The game obviously needs to have some sort of playable territory that can be conquered. You can choose from two conditions for winning:

• The one who captures the entire territory wins.
• Either the winner is the one who, after X moves, captures more territory.

As a game designer, it is up to you to define the theme, game particles, and mechanics.

Required components:

• materials for prototyping.

Received results:

• desktop prototype,
• or card prototype,
• or tiled prototype.

Suggested process:

More specifically, what are the players trying to conquer? Swamp? Peat bog? Maybe it's a gang of wild monkeys who are going to take over the zoo at night? Remember that a theme is optional, but if it is, it helps game designers, especially new ones, to identify potential dynamics.

Continue using the same steps as in the first challenge.

Challenge three - "When I find you ..."

We've talked about two general game dynamics in this chapter - race to the finish and claim territory. However, these are only two of a whole range of possible dynamics. Another general dynamic includes the study and study of the territory around, all accessible to the review. For this exercise, focus on exploration dynamics. First, see how it's used in MMOs, adventure games, and RPGs. In some adventure games, the core of the game is the "explore every location" dynamic. See also how it's played out in board games like Clue.

You have to create a game that is played by 2-4 people. Since the game involves exploration, there needs to be some kind of space available for exploration, even if that space is not physical. You can use this dynamic in conjunction with another.

The development of the theme, mechanics, components and additional materials will depend on you.

Required components:

• materials for prototyping.

Received results:

• desktop prototype,
• or card prototype,
• or tiled prototype.

Suggested process:

• Set a topic if you wish.

What will the players explore? Anything from a parking garage to a treetop village, downtown Chicago, or a fantasy world in the sky. Think also about what the player might think of as they explore. These speakers will provide the ground for the development of the mechanics you need.

Continue with the same steps outlined in the first challenge.

Challenge Four - "Collect It"

Walking over an object in order to pick it up (collect) is a phenomenally widely used mechanic in video games, it leads to the collection (collecting) dynamic. There are, of course, other ways to collect something. Think about how picking was introduced in the games Mario, Poker, and Bejeweled. In this exercise, you will take some mechanics and make a game based on them. This is a somewhat more difficult challenge than building a game on dynamics, which involves both a beginning and an end.

You should create a game for 2-4 players where the players go through the objects and "collect" them. What players need to collect (three identical objects, one color objects, etc.) and how much to collect is up to you as a designer.

Modifying mechanics are also allowed. For example, you can force players to collect something only when they land on it, or you can use a wheelbarrow, which you must first get before you start collecting something with it. You can choose the theme, components, and symbols, if applicable. Also, if necessary, you can use additional mechanics.

It is important to pay attention to the narrative. This is where brainstorming can help. Think of this game first as a gardening game, then a gangster game, then a racing game. Each of the themes will bring new features to the game.

Required components:

• materials for prototyping.

Received results:

• desktop prototype,
• or card prototype,
• or tiled prototype.

Suggested process:

• The object of the game (the main goal) is ...

If you can't figure out how to start, one way is to start by naming a goal or task that will end the game. This will help arrange additional mechanics and dynamics for you.

For example, if the object of the game is possession the largest number points before the time runs out, this already poses two important questions for you: how do players get points and how is the game time management in the game?

The game object can be linked to a theme, in which case it will be easier for you to develop the main goal (the game object) and the narrative at the same time, or create the theme first and then the game object. For example, if you are a gangster returning from a bank robbery, then the main goal is to keep as much money for yourself as possible and be able to get away before the cops arrive.

• Identify mechanics and dynamics.

Once you have a theme and a main goal, you will most likely already have a lot of ideas for mechanics and dynamics to support the actions based on the core of the game. If nothing comes to mind, come up with a new topic and main goal - and try again.

• Playtest.

Options:

Think about another generic game mechanic - target shooting, avoiding enemies, leveling up your character. Rework this challenge using this mechanic instead of the "gather" mechanic.

Challenge for harsh designers - "War without fronts"

In games with territorial capture dynamics, especially military-themed games, territories are rarely claimed using a comical foot race. Usually the capture is through violence and death (the game part of the other player), no matter how abstract it is. As a result of this death, the prevailing player takes the territory of the other. Whoever seizes the territory wins the war. Another general dynamic - "destroy the enemy opposing you" - is used for games that do not have territories.

In this exercise, however, you will go beyond this traditional framework. Make a civil war battle simulator without territorial capture and without destroying the entire enemy force as the main game dynamics.

Divide into teams of 2-4 people. Each team must come up with the best game meeting the above criteria. For a bigger challenge, have each team choose additional mechanics or dynamics that the other team won't be allowed to use.

Required components:

• materials for prototyping.

Received results:

• desktop prototype,
• or card prototype,
• or tiled prototype.

Suggested process:

• Define a topic.

What battle will your game represent?

• Define mechanics.

Without capturing territory, does it even make sense to grant territory? Perhaps yes, perhaps not. Think about how else the player can win besides capturing the entire territory. What can be a goal other than territory? What mechanics can be used by the player to achieve this goal?

• Enter conflict between players.
• Playtest.

Every time you introduce a new mechanic, test it.

• Create the deliverables.

Options:

Instead of a civil war, choose some other conflict. The First and Second World Wars are the most obvious choice. You can also choose something else, such as a corporate war, a feud between neighbors, a competition between retail chains.

When there are so many board games, it is simply impossible to catalog them in a simple notebook. Therefore, the standard classification procedure came to the rescue. Games began to receive labels in the form of genres: abstract games, strategy games, active games, puzzles, and others. However, with all the possibility of genre diversity, the boundaries of these same genres have become so blurred that it was necessary to attribute the game to two or three categories at once. It has become much more cumbersome and inconvenient. A little later, the players came to the general opinion that the game - its core and engine - is determined by a mixture of in-game mechanics. They, in turn, were found in dozens of other games, however, in the fundamental basis of a single game, one main mechanic can be distinguished. Of course, the division of games into categories is still present, but the problem lies precisely in the fact that two games can stand in the same category, but feel completely different and, accordingly, play.

Example : city-building games (or, in the general mechanical category "theplacement") Carcassonne and the Isle of Skye. In both games, the main mechanics is laying out tiles (parts of the landscape) on the field (with the only difference being that in the Isle of Skye each player builds his own island, and in Carcassonne - a common one). This is an unshakable part of the game that defines the gameplay. Another thing is how the players get these tiles. In the Isle of Skye, the second mechanic takes responsibility - the auction, where each player puts his tiles up for sale. In Carcassonne, the tiles are drawn for free, however, along with putting them on the field, you can put your meeple token to assert control over the territory (mechanics "areacontrol"). It is impossible to say with confidence that these mechanics are secondary, because they determine the behavior and tactics of the players in the implementation of the main one - construction. However, if in these games these mechanics play a secondary role, in other games they already become leading ones.

From this point on, I will explain that board games in our country have gained wide popularity and popularity relatively recently, so most of the names of the mechanics come from English or German, and the Russian translation is either a folk or a free interpretation of the author. In any case, I will stick to our adaptation, but just in case, I will bracket the original names of mechanics and other terms.

Fun for everyone!

It is probably worth starting with those games that do not fully use the tabletop potential, but make you play yourself again and again, because they will have an active creative part of a person. Active (activity) and imagination games with a choice fall into this category. I’ll make a reservation right away that although there is no clear classification of games by complexity, it is customary to divide them into games for parties (Party game), family (family; family friendly) and hardcore (hardcore). Active games overwhelmingly belong to the first category ( party game), their task is to be presented to a large circle of people, following this - to have simple rules and bring only fun, rather than any challenge. You don't have to go for examples for a long time, because such games are always available in any gaming table club: Imaginarium, Activity, Alias, Basinga, various variations of the Mafia and many, many others. With small rules (sometimes they fit on the back of the box), these games involve the imagination, or require players to complete fun tasks. Of course, there are games with their own set of rules using many mechanics: bluffing, drafting, trading, and so on. Fun is guaranteed, as well as the fact that such games are suitable for any company. However, many of these games (but by no means all) repeat those known to us since childhood, which already do not require any external components, except perhaps a pen, a piece of paper or a deck of cards.

For a long time there was no diversity in board games, but one mechanic caused quite a lot of noise and is still popular. We call it "throw-dvin", in the West it is accepted " Spin 'n 'move", which, in principle, is the same thing. A very simple mechanic that uses random dice rolls. It doesn't take long to follow an example: Monopoly. Actually, we owe the success of this game to the popularization of this mechanic in many games of the last century. In childhood, probably, many played games like "slides and stairs", where the same mechanics were used - roll a die, move to the specified value. Depending on luck, we go up, shortening the path, or go down, starting again. In modern games, such mechanics are often abandoned or modified different ways. This is due to the incredibly long games, which by the end begins to annoy more than bring pleasure to lucky players. Perhaps the only popular game that exploits the "throw-bang" today remains Monopoly. People's love for timeless classics - it is like that.

Even more components and maps.

Another integral part of modern games has become O Greater variety of game components. Ancient games were a set of abstract figures, chips, dice. Over time, both old elements began to evolve (abstract figures became more detailed, dice acquired new faces), and new ones appeared: tablets, maps, tracks, resources, and even mobile applications. Such progress deserves attention, at least because the introduction of new components has led to separate, massively popular genres and mechanics.

Take cards for example - there are board games that are played entirely on a card engine. With some exceptions, they may contain tokens or chips for convenience. A real boom in the 90s was made by the card game Magic the gathering (abbreviated as MTG), which became the parent of a new genre of CCG (collectible card games) and is still popular with an audience of millions. Card games have become a hobby for many players, and cards never go out of style due to the fact that there is always a collector ready to buy them from you, even if you stop playing. Needless to say, the game has long become a sports discipline, constantly holding tournaments and attracting new players?

Here we will also talk about LCD (live card game, LCG), which in fact is not much different from CCG: we have a set of cards and we can create a deck from them. However, it is LCDs that are closer to the format of board games as we are used to them. If in the TCG we have to look for cards from collectors like us, or, hoping for luck, buy and open boosters (where there is a chance to get both a set of rare and expensive cards, and mediocre cheap ones), then in the LCD everything is much simpler: there is a stationary, basic, set and additions to it. Those. you are guaranteed to know what is waiting for you in the box. Among other things, the LCD often has a real playing field (rather than improvised, as in CCG), there may be components of other familiar games (chips, resources, miniatures, etc.). And most importantly - they may not be a confrontation between two players (Android netrunner), but cooperation (LCD Lord of the Rings, Arkham Horror, Pathfinder LCG).

Closing the topic of cards and their use in board games, one cannot fail to mention such mechanics as deckbuilding ( deckbuilding). First, it is the core of the above games. Secondly, it occurs as a primary or secondary mechanic in board games that do not fit into the framework of the LCD. These games are based on a public deck (or decks) from which players build their own during the game, usually in competition with other players. The goal is to make the most harmoniously working deck of cards and beat the rest on the terms of the game (usually for points or knocking out other players). Prominent representatives are Dominion, Cthulhu Wars, Eminent domain, Star Empires.

Since we have touched on the term -building (-building) *, we will mention the “collection” that goes along with it. Usually this is the so-called collection of sets (set collection). Both mechanics involve a set of certain components to achieve maximum superiority. Components can be both cards and various tokens and chips. In building, you usually use what you get, but in assembly, your task is to assemble a specific set. A vivid example is the game 7 wonders. A simple family draft game where victory is determined by the success of which cards you acquire during the game. What gives depth to the game is precisely the fact that you can collect several sets, and your task will be to grab what you need, and at the same time not give the opponent what he needs. One way or another, the collection of sets is present in many games: Train Ticket, Stone Age, Microworld, Pandemic, and others.

* Players usually build decks, but not always. For example, a recentDiceForge (edge ​​of fate) offers the so-calledDiceBuilding, in other words - the structure of the cube. Throughout the game, players change the faces on their cubes, improving them and giving new opportunities. In the West, the term is used less and lessdeckbuilding due to the fact that there are a lot of building games, and not all of them build decks of cards. It can be anything, so more and more mechanics are called namesStuffBuilding (literally - a structure of anything).

Draft is a simple yet deep mechanic. Usually used in card games, but may also be present where there are no cards. It usually consists of the following: players are dealt cards in their hand, from which they are free to choose one, and pass all the rest to their neighbor. Meanwhile, another neighbor passes his cards to you. Just? Just! But an important role is played by the miscalculation of opponents, keeping track of which cards are transferred in a circle, and which ones should be kept in this case, and which ones should be transferred to neighbors. This is how the aforementioned 7 miracles work. The drafting mechanics are fascinating and can be found in many places: Blood Rage, Mars Terraforming, Inish and many others.

And where without large-scale strategies ...

It's time to talk about the category of strategies. Perhaps the most common category among others and the most diverse. The complexity in it is overwhelmingly either at the level of family games, or large, complex and hardcore. There are many of these strategies of yours in the desktop world, for every taste and color! Do you want - economic, you want - military. Maybe mix? It is possible with conflicts, it is possible without. You can with a simple gathering, or you can with an auction and rates. It can be with an element of chance, or it can be completely without it. In the same category, perhaps, the largest number of different mechanics that you can find among board games. However, two of them should be called dominant - this is the placement of workers ( worker placement) and territory control ( area control), or even a mixture of both! Let's talk about them.

In strategies, you may have your own tablet, or you may not have it at all. There may be dozens of resources or just one. But all strategies have something in common (in every sense) - this is the playing field. This is where the main action takes place. In the classic, timeless versions, the mechanics of setting up workers works according to the following principle: players have a limited supply of these same workers, and there is an equally limited supply of possible actions on the field. Worker tokens are put up for actions, which provide the resources needed for victory, points, new opportunities, etc. Tsimes, on the other hand, is that a worker cannot be put on an already occupied action. This is where planning and miscalculation come in, spying on the actions of the opponent and revealing his plans. Sometimes you can take an action that is not entirely necessary for yourself, just to not give an advantage to someone else, and sometimes you have to make a difficult decision, choosing one of the many options. Placing workers is perhaps the most popular decision in strategies. It is mainly used in games of the European school of game design. They rarely meet direct confrontation (rather indirect conflict) and success depends on your planning and miscalculation. There are, however, games with conflict: for example, in Lords of Waterdeep, you can manipulate enemy workers with the help of behind-the-scenes intrigues or deliberately lay out penalties (the game has a corruption mechanic) for those actions that are interesting to your opponents. The workers themselves can be represented by anything. Usually they are simple meeples doing their job. But there are also original solutions. In The Adventures of Marco Polo, your workers are regular six-sided cubes. But their peculiarity is that the face with which you place these cubes on the action determines your possibilities and options.

Area Control (control of territories) - the process of holding strategically important points on the playing field, which inevitably leads to victory. Often, in such games, the game is not played for points, but until one of the players fulfills the victory condition. As in the case of Worker placement, players have resources and "workers", only in this case, taking positions plays a leading role. Such games are much more conflicting than fielding workers. Usually, these are large military strategies, where the dynamics are determined by the goal of the players. In the desktop version of the Game of Thrones (the one based on the novels by J. Martin) there are no victory points, but there is a large-scale map of the world and the motivation of players to capture the most territories. The game will last until one of the players captures 7 fortresses and rightfully sits on the iron throne. A very interesting approach to the control of territories in the table novelty Inish: players are generally free to move in the direction of one of three goals for victory - dominance over other players in the regions, control of regions or ancient Celtic temples.

There are also interesting design solutions by mixing two mechanics. In the Godfather game, you place workers who, at the end of the round, will control the territories where you put them, if they have enough influence. Both mechanics are very important and constantly keep in suspense.

I have to admit that I covered only the tip of the iceberg on introducing players to the basics of the mechanics and categories of board games, but I tried to isolate from them those that lie in the set of the most interesting (objectively and subjectively) games. Referring to the most authoritative source sites (for example, boardgamegeek), you can break the analysis of this topic into dozens of such articles. Today, however, the goal was to introduce the concepts themselves, so that an inexperienced player can have an idea about internal device his favorite games and became more savvy in his future choices.

We hope you now understand tabletop genres and mechanics a little better than before. Good luck and happy gaming!