Sources of Inspiration and the Processes that Follow

I have gone both ways with games I have made. With either mechanics or themes I will start with something I already like, but then ask what could have been done differently to make it better.

From the mechanics side, just play a lot of games and figure out what you like and don't like for mechanics without concern what the theme is. Then take something you like and ask what could be changed to make it better or more compelling. Then build that game.

I do the same with themes. I like certain themes and ideas, but then I ask what would be a better or more compelling theme? How can I do the same theme better?

Most mechanics and themes have been done before, so it's a matter of doing it better.

I am by no means an experienced designer. I've designed one game (which we're busy play testing now). That game started with the mechanics. Actually it started with another board game. It was a game our game group loved, but never played anymore because it had limited replay-ability. So I set out to make a game using those basic mechanics that had more variety to it and would lend itself more to being able to be played over and over.

Once I had the mechanics down and had play tested a few times, enough to know that while small things would change the larger concept of the game was solid, then it was time to think of a theme that fit. This was a lot harder than I thought it would be as the theme had to make sense with the mechanics. I've come up with a theme now that works, I think.

I have one other game in mind to design, in the very early stages of planning. And this one I'm approaching from the complete opposite direction. A friend planted the idea of the theme and I'm busy trying to see how I could translate it into a game and what mechanics it would use.

I'm new to designing games, but so far I've always started with mechanics, and then added theme. The initial idea is usually sprung from an existing game or game type that I think could be made more fun with a different mechanic. For example, I might enjoy playing CCGs but have a number of complaints:

1. I'm tired of building decks in advance. That part used to be fun for me, but not so much any more.
2. I hate how long a 4 player game can take.
3. I don't like that players get eliminated and have to wait on everyone else to finish. Boring.
4. I wish cards were better balanced.
5. I don't like how how you often have nothing to do as you wait on your opponents to take their turns.
6. I don't like it when a game is far from being over, but the winner is all but decided, which often happens.

Now that I know what I want to "fix", I go from there. Based on my complaints, I know I want a game that has the following characteristics:

1. Everything will be self contained in the box. No work in advance required.
2. Game will take 30-45 minutes to play.
3. Nobody will get eliminated during the course of a game.
4. Cards will be (mostly) self-balancing.
5. Turns will be simultaneous.
6. As a player pulls ahead, they will get "weaker". Or, as a player falls behind, they'll get "stronger".

The hardest thing will probably be the balancing, so I consider that first. I could create a point system to help balance the cards, but that gets exceedingly tough when I try to figure out how many points easy special ability should be worth, and harder still when I start considering the way the cards will interact with one another. Instead of doing all that, I decide an auction based mechanic might solve my problem. That way the value of each card will be determined by what the players are willing to bid on them. All I have to do is make sure that no single card is SO powerful that by gaining it a player will be guaranteed victory.

I still need to decide what sort of auction based mechanic I should use. The standard mechanic of 1 player bids, then the next, and so on, until nobody is willing to top the highest bid is too slow, and involves waiting for your turn to bid, which I want to avoid. To combat that issue, I go with a silent auction mechanic where everyone only gets to bid once, and they do so simultaneously.

My thinking now is that players will spend all their money building an army and then they'll fight with them in a manner similar to how most CCGs work. Building the army still seems like it'll take way too long though, so I decide to fix that by having multiple cards auctioned off at once.

Once I fix it so the process of building an army is quick enough, I work on the combat mechanic. The traditional CCG combat mechanic will be too slow, and have copious amounts of down time between turns, which I want to avoid. To fix that, I need a mechanic where players can battle simultaneously. And to make sure nobody gets too far ahead, I need a self-balancing mechanic whereas you either get "weaker" as you get farther ahead, or "stronger" as you get farther behind.

That's actually where I'm at now.

Of course I don't ignore theme altogether. As I consider the mechanics, possible themes emerge. For this game, I need a theme where it makes sense to bid on combatants that you'll later fight with. That makes me think of mercenaries, or possibly some sort of mech warriors.

My take is that whichever you start with, theme or mechanic, the other will reveal itself to you. I like to start with a mechanic, but I don't feel like I then have to manipulate a theme to work with the chosen mechanic. Certain themes just make sense and work naturally with the mechanic. Nothing feels forced.

desperadonate it's not that hard to do each way. I agree more personally with our esteemed friend about designing around a "dynamic" eg: I want a game where people struggle. Or I want a game where people create an alliance against an NPC. Or I want a game where people are excited on one final dice roll.

To help you out, here we go, your BGDF custom design challenge:

Design a game about Making a Movie using an auction based mechanic

There: I've given you a mechanic and a kind of idea. These two shouldn't really go together (see: designing with theme or mechanics first?) but I am SURE you could come up with some very rough ideas for that :)

sam