How do you design?

1. get an idea for a game, maybe its a theme, maybe is a method of optimizing and existing game core for things you see as problems

0. (you should do this first but lots of people end up doing it later. do it sooner than that.) read as much material as you can online about game design theory, production process, etc, etc, etc. there are a ton of resources, lots of online forums like this one, extremely good blogs, and a few books on theory available on open pdf.

2. write out a whole bunch of ideas in a notebook, playing around with ideas in your head, trying to connect the dots between theme and mechanics. you want to kill any definitely bad ideas here, but leave room for growth and change. there should be a lot of both.

3. get some of the most basic components made in a rough prototype form. cardboard chits, recycled monopoly money and hotels, whatever you need. start working through your core mechanics ON THE TABLE. i dont care how smart you are or how well you thought your system through, there will be things you did not foresee and many of them will potentially break your game as you first envisioned it.

4. start to consolidate your game into a well defined, consistent set of mechanics, theme, and rules. at this point you want to start a log in your notebook that has much more organisation than just random brainstorming. write the rules down. explain all the thematic and mechanistic considerations. identify your priority areas for work.

5. build a slightly better prototype. it should start to look more like what you want the game to look like, and less like a pile of random junk. start working on your game, doing solo or 1 on 1 "playthroughs" as you flesh out your priority areas and identify new problems or areas for improvement. log every single change or problem or solution down in your notebook.

6. rinse and repeat. your game should start to evolve towards a workable system at this point. if you kept up with step 0, you have avoided some major pitfalls and have had some goals to aim for during the entire processs.

7. you now have a "game" that has the rules, the pieces and components, everything you need to play. start getting it play-tested in groups if you havent already. first with friends (more willing to playtest broken mechanics), then with strangers or acquaintances at various venues. listen to their comments and criticism, fix anything that is obviously broken, but dont let them run your game direction, its your game.

8. polish your game up, and get it blind tested. be prepared for pain.

9. reconsider your options for publishing

10 start that process

This is generally my process as well, although every game idea I've had has started in different places. These lists are great, although I don't think there's anything wrong with rearranging the order of it works better for you!

If you're a game designer at heart, you've probably "designed" various types of games or variations on games all your life. No reason you can't count those as your stepping stones to a masterpiece! I've made games since I was a pre-teen. I was GM for all our Robotech RPG sessions through High school, creating scenarios along with it. While serving as a missionary in Ecuador, I came up with variations with uno cards to kill some of the down time when we didn't have teaching visits - I even drew a grid on a bed sheet and used 4 packs of poker cards to create an air/naval battle game to play with the other missionaries!

In my early 30's, I created tons of airsoft BB gun battle scenarios, including overnight camps with night vision and lasers. Lately, I've come up with cool variations of board games, including combining Elder Sign with Settlers of Catan Cities and Knights.

Finally, I started thinking of things that frustrated me in some games, and what I'd do differently. Then I applied that to some mechanics I liked, and thought through some themes that appealed to me until I decided which fit my other concepts best.

You can design games purely as a hobby - publication doesn't have to be the ultimate goal. My current project is about 50/50 of each - when it's ready, I want to enter it into contests, but doubt I'll try to sell it or Kick Start it if it doesn't receive any recognition. But I sure have enjoyed the process, and whether it's ever published or not, it will still be (when I'm ready to stop tweaking it) my own masterpiece of creative art.

Note: referring to my artistic design of the game, not the borrowed art for the prototype lol!

P.S. I didn't even mention how I used scripting in map editors in video games to create automated scenarios (anyone ever play Joint Ops?) - there are a lot of things to draw from when you start designing a new board or card game!

My process is generally to have an idea and mull it over in my head for a while. If the idea is still there and nagging at my brain after that time (the period varies from hours to months) I try to figure out a way to put together a scrappy, hand made prototype of some small part of the game, then try it out solo.

If I'm still interested at this point, I may iterate over the scrappy proto a few times, adding some stuff each time before playing solo, or I may start work on a slightly better prototype.

If I have a victim/playtester available who is likely to not resent me for trying a complete piece of crud on them, I'll try to get them to play it, either at the scrappy prototype stage or later, depending on how things go.

I generally start making notes on the rules fairly early, and this evolves into a rules document over the first few iterations.

I usually put together a "print and play" prototype pretty early (cards made using nanDECK) and revise and reprint these as appropriate, along with the rules. I probably still don't have a full size game, but each iteration moves towards it.

When I feel I have something that at least looks like a playable game I start considering getting bigger playtests done, either with a group of friends locally who help me out from time to time, or at a Playtest UK meetup to get feedback from other designers.

From then on it's just keep iterating: playtest, analyse results, revise the rules and/or prototype, test again... Some revisions add, some take away.

Eventually decide that a design is in a state where I can pitch it to publishers, or I shelve it.

I don't worry about procuring art because I don't want to self publish. For me, Kickstarter is right out!

Well, I'm a complete amateur at board game design, but I am an industrial designer so I'm using pretty much the same process, which can be summed up as: RESEARCH -> IDEATION -> DEVELOPMENT -> PRODUCTION
With a lot of back and forth between phases.
I'm mostly a theme guy so I start reasearching about the subject, so for example, let's say that I want to make a sci fi game about first contact with alien races. I'll read about that, scientific ideas, sci fi novels and stories, watch star trek, and stuff like that. From all of that I'll take notes and try to identify and categorize elements that can be thought of as relevant. There's almost no filter here, I try to learn as much of the subject as I can in a reasonable time frame (we all need deadlines to get things done). I get everything written down as it can be usefull down the line.
I'm talking about theme now but you can do pretty much the same about a mechanic, trying to see where it has been used, derivatives and the like.
Then the ideation phase is where I first define the game. Is it going to be silly or serious, short, heavy? I set the goals and mood of the game and try variations, maybe it doesn't work as a serious game but it does as a silly short party game. I treat games as experiences so I try to define what kind of experience I want to achieve. Once that's settled I see which mechanics are better suited for that end. How do they interact, what elements are going to be needed.
This leads directly to the development wich is prototype and playtest heavy. It's about failing early and often, the idea is to lock down the core mechanics first, having a playable game that's fun before adding complementary mechanics or making some of those more deep. This is the longest phase and it's easy to get forever stuck there as there's always something else to improve or to change. You have to know when to wrap thing up. Then there's the production phase that I've never reached in board game design but it would be the moment where you close on the details, aesthetics, graphic and parts, design. This I guess you'll do it with a publisher because you need to know the production capabilities and how many units are going to be produced in order to select the production technology that's better suited for the project.

From looking at the responses here I see that most people are working on very similar workflows, so it shows that the design process is quite universal.

Well you can use "Print on-demand" services such as "The Game Crafter" (TGC) and put out a game for $19.99 + $5.00 profit. So you can still make games, invest nothing and see how those games sell.

If you're talking about getting it made in China, then you are correct: for $5.00 manufacturing and freight - if you want to RETAIL at $24.99. If it's a card game with some parts, like dice, wooden markers, winks, etc. you can certainly achieve that price point (Could be like $3.50 + $1.50 freight).

But for sure you can self-publish via TGC (http://www.thegamecrafter.com) and AdMagic (http://www.printplaygames.com) a couple of the bigger players in the print on-demand.

(del please)

My first game went through a legitimate publisher and I never thought of going through Kickstarter...you have to BE a business in order to do a KS campaign...product quality is just the beginning; there's graphic design, rules writing, component printing/shopping, component proofs, box design/art, distribution plans, assembly issues, marketing, which includes conventions/FLGS/online outlets, website design/maintenance, testing schedules. blind testing...I can go on. Each of these things alone will DEMAND your time and if you're developing WHILE you're running the KS, you'll find yourself sacrificing development time for time pushing the product.

If you do it, you'll need a team and people that have had experience in KS to help guide you.

It's an endeavor that you'll need a TON of information of before you go that route. In some cases, it's better to go through one investor because having to please all your backers is a far more daunting task than impressing a single entity.

I guess I'm jaded because I see tons of failed board game kickstarters...primarily because it's such a low barrier of entry and the act of these people going at this without the right information (and failing) only serves to water down the legitimate and quality projects.

...and it's painfully obvious to spot amateur projects.

I'm not discouraging you from doing the Kickstarter...I just agree with ElKobold in advising to learn how to create a quality game first before going to KS.

I can answer this one.

Art design is the first give-away.

I`m not an artist. I can't tell you what exactly is wrong. But I usually can tell "professional" art from the one done by an amateur (and so do most backers).

But our design wasn't professional either.
In fact, art direction (for me personally) is probably the most difficult thing in self-publishing.

This is professional: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/roxley/brass-an-industrial-revolution

My process? Make game... test game... repeat until it's paying me.

My advice? Stages 1 to 4 are a waste of time. Skip straight to the handmade prototyping phase. Start with a small set of cards, simple board, generic dice and whatever else you need to have it on the table within an hour or two of development.

Let the game experience be your guide.

Writing down your sequence of play, settling on a theme, picking components and simplifying the game? All of this is likely change later in development after loads and loads of playtesting.

There are a number of cognitive biases that can be triggered by writing something down. I see alot of first time designers trying to hard to chase their initial vision despite having a very strong start on a different game.

You may set out to make a Silk Road trading game, but stumble on a great set of mechanics for a space war. Keep your eyes open, follow the fun, experiment and NEVER get too attached until you know you're on track for the final game.

Don't worry too much about artists, component costs or anything else until you're late into external playtesting. The reality is, players will pay whatever a game is worth.

Focus on making the best game you can, that uses only the components that are vital to the experience. You do this and players won't complain about the price... or more like... they'll complain either way but MOST people will still be satisfied with their purchase.

Money, marketing, artwork? These ARE important. But only once you have a strong game that is worth investing in.

Even professionals have plenty of stuff we've chucked in the garbage.

- Component Pricing as a Design Limitation -
The only exception I'd make to paying close attention to the price early in development is if it's a core design choice.

Sometimes, I make a dice game. I allow myself "No more than 10 dice or 60 cards". I toy with these limitations to see if I can make a good game.

This can be especially effective for new designers because it helps keep our games simple. Limited components usually mean simpler to design, cheaper to make, easier to balance, and so forth.

But even so, I'm not against removing the limitations if the design skews in that direction.