Time for a new series in the TiGD! I propose a series about "player goals". It's easy to come up with mechanics, but what exactly are the players supposed to be attempting to do in our games? What kinds of things can be set before our players as ways to "win" the game?
Here are some rough ideas for topics we could consider, and people should chime in with other ideas if they have any!
--Defining goals vs. designing mechanics: Which comes first? Is one "easier" than the other? Do they flow together naturally?
--"Race"-oriented games: The game ends when one player completes a specific goal. Obviously includes "racing" games like Hare&Tortoise, but also games like Settlers of Catan or Citadels. Or, for that matter, games like Illuminati, where not all players have the same goal.
--"VP acquisition" games: Puerto Rico, Princes of Florence, etc. The game system gives one or more ways to earn "victory points", which typically come in small increments and add up to "big" final scores.
--"Cash acquisition" games: Acquire, Monopoly, Chinatown, etc. Games where the goal is to make the most money; analogous to VP acquisition games, but with the added effect that money is also a resource in the game.
--"Territorial conquest" games: Risk, Axis and Allies, Vinci, etc. The game is won (in whole or in part) by acquiring territory or "space on the board", often involving combat.
--"Deduction" games: Clue, Mystery of the Abbey, etc. The players are trying to solve a "mystery", typically through process of elimination.
Note that the distinctions between these aren't always hard and fast; Settlers, for example, could be considered a "race", a "vp acquisition", and a "cash acquisition" game; "deduction" games are in some sense a subset of "race" games, since players are trying to be the first to solve the mystery; one could probably subdivide "VP acquisition" into several categories. I'm not necessarily seeking compartmentalization of games so much as understanding of the different ways that goals can motivate mechanics and player experience. But if you feel any of the categories could stand further subdivision, let's hear about it!
I welcome comments and suggestions about this series!
-Jeff
![Syndicate content](/misc/feed.png "Comments for \"[TiGD] New series: "player goals"\""){kind=small}
Good suggestion, thanks! My guess is that most of these games probably also fit into one of the other models (e.g., Risk = territorial expansion, Monopoly = cash acquisition, etc), but they may legitimately comprise a subclass unto themselves. And it's certainly worth discussing as a possible way to define victory conditions in our own games.
I would say Illuminati is first and foremost a race game, because it ends when someone acquires his tenth group or when he meets his individual goal. But I would say it also could be described as what I called a "cash acquisition" game, in the sense that the commodities that advance you toward the victory condition, the groups, also provide functional benefits in trying to acquire other groups (most have power, or transferable power, or alignments that can modify the required roll, etc).