So playtesting for El Cid is underway and problems are popping up here and there. Little problems, mind you. Nothing is horribly broken and on the whole the game works as intended.
However, each problem needs to be addressed, and that's usually an additional sentence thrown into the rules. All of our rules can fit onto the front of one page, so tacking on rules is a very noticeable choice (to me), and it makes me slightly uncomfortable every time I do it. Obviously, El Cid is mostly a small selection of very low-level mechanics (and it turns out it actually creates interesting high-level behavior!), but it's not perfect yet. . .
Here's the problem: when is "remolding" your design based on playtesting simply patching up problem areas? For instance, in the attack sequence someone has to start it off and originally we said the player to the left holding El Cid would start, with El Cid going last. However, this caused players to not want El Cid at all in the last turn or two simply because they didn't want to go last. The fix was easy. Give the first turn to the player holding El Cid. Since it's a fairly arbitrary (and abstract) choice anyway, and it boosts El Cid's strategic importance, I view that as a "remolding" change.
However, I start to get uncomfortable as we patch up the bidding procedure. Bidding was quite simple before, but we soon discovered we needed rules to cover a tie and rules if players are still tied, resulting in a coin flip. Makes me uncomfortable because no where else in the game do you roll a die or flip a coin to determine the outcome. Now, is that a reasonable high-level rule, or should we have designed the bidding procedure to make tying bids impossible? Easiest way to do that would have open bidding/auction style bids, but that eliminates a lot of the fun in the closed bidding and I think damages the game more than it fixes.
So is the coin flip a necessary evil, not that big of a deal really, or completely avoidable via a system we haven't thought of yet?
Also (to take the discussion past our own game), I understand one should strive for collections of low-level rules and avoid high-level rules, but is there a categorical difference between the two, or is it much more of a gradient and you have to guestimate based on what you're comfortable with?
Hmm... well, El Cid could go to the player who won him last, but I don't think that supports the "El Cid is a true mercenary" theme we were shooting for. Either way, it still doesn't address a tie for the bid in the first turn in a 4 or 6 player game, where everyone is completely tied. Perhaps in a tie it could go into an open bid between the tying players.
And yes, bidding is quite essential to the game. Since people bid and choose how much to spend on armies in the same step, choosing how much to bid is a very strategic choice. Eliminating bidding would require a complete reworking of how El Cid works, making an entirely new game. While that may be the only way to fix it, I don't think it is, or at the very least I'd like to try to solve the problem without resorting to essentially scraping the idea.
How does bidding affect the game? By forcing alliances beyond just arbitrary lines (to pool resources so your allies win El Cid), by creating a "second-guessing" mechanic that increases a sense of limited information while rewarding players who can best anticipate the actions of their rivals, and by forcing players to make a choice between the powerful piece or many less powerful pieces. Players are also bidding on turn order (player who wins El Cid goes first) which has its own strategic aspects to it. So, in effect, most of the strategy of the game comes from the bidding, the choices stemming from the bidding, and choices to limit other players' ability to bid later in the game, thus increasing your chance of eliminating them. It's important, and I don't feel stubborn thinking so.
edit: And thanks for the comments... i was replying to SVan's original post when the other two posts went up. Yeah, flipping a coin really does feel like a cop out, but I think open bidding might work better. Thanks for the advice... though I'm still a bit fuzzy on the difference between "remolding" and "patching," but I suppose that's because it's a very fuzzy concept to begin with, where you have to rely on your intuition to guide you, not categorical differences.
...
If only designing games was like the games we designed.