Skip to Content
 

Making a good adventure game - spin off

7 replies [Last post]
innuendo
Offline
Joined: 05/25/2010

I figured I would split my little foray into a specific game from the conceptual post so as to not take discussion off course in that thread.

With that said I find it easier to work on specific game mechanics that purely conceptual game theory (not that I mind game theory, it's just harder to deal with such abstract things and iron out what works and what doesn't)...

So I was kicking around ideas in my head for an adventure game based off the idea of becoming king and once there keeping control. I've got a few ideas I figure it does me no good to keep them to myself.

So I was thinking of really focusing on emergent gameplay and while not getting into "1000 blank white cards" territory, really having a game that players build themselves.

The basics are simple. Players start in the middle of the board in "the village" and surrounding the relatively small settlement is lots of wilderness with monsters and what not.

Players have two resources to manage in addition to whatever character stats they have (not sure how character development would work at this point, i'm more focused on world development): Gold and Fame. Gold is simple and will be the only currency in the game for all purchases. Since the rest of the game is going to get some very complex layers I wanted to keep this simple.

Fame is different. Players start at 0 on a -20 to 20 (arbitrary numbers at this point, can always be adjusted in testing). When you do thing "the people" like your fame goes up, when you do things that they don't your fame goes down. If you are negative in fame you are "infamous' of course. Having your fame towards either extreme will open new options for since the people will know you by sight and whisper your name.

Speaking of "the people", since this game is going to be so player controlled I wanted one very strongly game controlled entity to regulate the game. The people are not on the board but they will react to your every action based on criteria for what they like and what they don't like. These should stay simple but in general they like having their needs met. That means they need Food, Shelter, Health, Security, and Wealth (possibly more possibly less as testing dictates). These could be simple ten point sliders from 0-10 and will fluctuate all game long.

As a regular player at the start of the game you can't really provide for these needs. Sure you can hunt and provide food or you can battle monsters to provide security, both of these things will drive your fame up. However if you start stealing from the people or what have you your infamy will rise.

As for the main point of the game. Becoming King is simple. Get enough Fame (10 points or so) and the people will elect you their ruler. As ruler you have all maner of options open up and this is where the gameplay really opens up. As king you can initiate building projects. Now I'm torn about whether or not to use buildings from a list of options with certain effects or to let players design their own buildings. Possibly a blacksmith to sell weapons with the gold generated going to the king of course, or a healer tent with potions and other salves. By letting players design their own buildings you could even see rise of Prisons to jail other players (however jailing a rival to the throne who is famous/wealthy could give rise to riots)

Basically the idea is to let players make their own rules for buildings. Now there would be a communal marketplace by default with basic items like potions and what not, but a King could try to undercut the market and take that profit for themselves. A regulating factor of the game could be how the market preforms. If players aren't spending enough the public coffers run dry. If the people are poor they are more likely to revolt against the king and overthrow him.

This can be used by the king and by the other players. Possibly players could steal from the people in order to provoke riots at the lack of security and wealth. Players could also try to give money to the people to try and earn more favor than the king and be elected in his place. This sort of divergent and varied gameplay will have players coming up with new ways to try and control the people and use them to their advantage. There will still be elements of monster killing and character development like any good adventure game, but learning to use the people and their needs to maximize your fame/gold is going to be key.

Whether or not something like "design your own buildings" makes it or gets the cut for being too complex is to be seen. I at least wanted to explore the idea a little. If it doesn't then there would be a set of 50 or so cards that can be built as public works. this will make the game a little easier to control and regulate so when I think about it would be the easier way to go design wise. As the king you can build from the public works deck to grow your city and try to please the players. Or do you try to control the people and become a tyrant. Who knows, but there is a lot of options from this setting and I love the idea of using "the people" and their needs as communal way to interact with the game in varied ways.

So this is just an open forum as far as I'm concerned and I'll lay claim to none of these ideas should anyone want to take them and run. I'm not in a position to publish anything or take anything to completion so I'm more than willing to brainstorm here and see what comes out of it.

Any thoughts or ideas for where to go next?

knobfer
Offline
Joined: 05/04/2010
the fame system

Instead of having a - and + fame system, maybe try to implement them as two seperate scales. For example, if you were a "good" famous king but all of a sudden you started to do "bad" things, your fame would become low again and people would forget you (upon reaching zero) until you were high enough infamous.

innuendo
Offline
Joined: 05/25/2010
That's very true and I didn't

That's very true and I didn't think of that. Hmm, one scale was so much simpler though. Well then I think it would be simpler to stick to just a Fame scale and not have it go -/+ like you said. Then devise some other mechanic for measuring if that fame is heroism or infamy. That way the fame scale is simply "how many people know you" sort of thing.

Pastor_Mora
Pastor_Mora's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/05/2010
Game Objective

Will this be like an eternal medieval SimCity or will it have a game objective? I mean, it looks like a RPG "have fun as long as you want" thing. How do you WIN your game?

Jean Of mArc
Jean Of mArc's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2010
Hey innuendo, This game

Hey innuendo,

This game sounds like a lot of fun, and has potential for sure. Here are my thoughts on it:

- Is this a single or multiplayer game? Are the players competing for fame or working together somehow?
- If this is a multiplayer game, then the player-based building creation can almost take care of itself. Ie, one player can come up with an idea before the game starts, and other players can accept it, modify it, or deny it. If they accept it, then ALL players have the right to build that building during the game. Therefore, if anything is unfair or unbalanced, then at least all players can benefit from it, or have the chance to change it before it is used.
- Otherwise, the game would be much harder to balance, and I would recommend having pre-made buildings. The reason I say this is because in real games, the balance of a game must be heavily tried and tested before it is released. However, if you let players go wild on making their own things, then they might really take away from the balance of the game simply because they have never been tested against everything else. It could work, maybe, if you had a point system for evaluating a building, where each feature costs a certain amount of points (or gold) and so the more "advanced" it is, the more it will cost.
- As for the fame issue, I don't know if you really would need two scales to keep track of both good and bad. There could be "good" chips (green) and "bad" chips (red) and every time you do ANYTHING, you get a chip of one of the two. The total amount of chips, regardless of colour, indicates your currrent level of fame. But when evaluating if you are famous or infamous, then the colour matters more: whichever you have more of determines what you are.
- I could be wrong, but isn't it strange that the people elect a king? Monarchies aren't democratic... Though becoming king is a lot cooler than becoming president, and explains the control that you have a lot better... :)

Anyway, keep it up! I think it sounds like a fun game concept! :D

innuendo
Offline
Joined: 05/25/2010
Definitely multiplayer and I

Definitely multiplayer and I think players all have their own self interests in mind first and foremost. But as a king becomes a tyrant I think in my head there will be some loose team building in a sense that they will share a common goal of overthrowing the king. So in that regard by focusing the game on one player the king will have to keep the favor of the people, and the other players, or risk losing his throne.

I love the idea of a list of effects you can build on buildings, with each effect having a cost. So you can building a one stop shop or build lots of little buildings with single effects. Something to explore

fame tokens or chips is a good idea. there can be effects that cause you to lose fame as well. This is smart, thank you.

The "elect the king" was more or less based on the idea that people without a leader in historical times, when needed, would appoint the most confidant or charismatic person to be the defacto king. This is consistent with tribal gatherings and what not. This isn't some pre-established village. Im' thinking this is a real rags to riches game for the city you start in. It begins as a gathering of huts, and through the players actions can become a thriving village? Maybe too ambitious but I think it's doable if we do the right things with building construction systems.

As the the first question above the last post, I have no idea how you win yet! Probably some mix of fame and gold.

Thanks for the imput

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
It seem like a "The sims"

It seem like a "The sims" game where the concept is to make players define their on goal while playing.

The problem is that it makes a toy rather than a game since there are no objectives to win.

Marx
Offline
Joined: 06/02/2010
I love the idea of

I love the idea of player-generated buildings. Jean of Marc is right though... not everything can be left up to the player, and the idea of implementing a system in which you make a building and then "purchase" effects for that building is fantastic.

I do have to ask about game objectives. What are the players doing while the king is building things? Questing? Just running around town stealing gold and creating riots? Defending the city from an onslaught of attackers? (I rather like that last one. :D) Or are you seeking to turn it more into a diplomatic struggle for the throne? That could be a very interesting route.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut