Printing errors, new cards and colour theory

Story cards, Question cards, Vice cards and Virtue cards

Well, it has been a busy week! Firstly I have been able to finish off and print the Virtue cards, vice cards, question cards and story cards. The only cards left to get to the first pass stage are the character cards and a single reference card. I have been able to print them all off also! Which has given me a laundry list of changes that need to be implemented asap. First of all the small sentences between the virtue,vice and question cards need to be shortened and enlarged to be visible on the final cards, all the cards need desaturating as a general rule, the question cards need to be balanced contrast wise. Final job is to change the colour of the proof cards so that they match the remaining proof cards (a sort of bronze colour instead of their current colour), then go over the proof card artwork, removing some of the more terrible edits and having the artist touch up the backgrounds. I also need to standardise the reds that appear throughout the card artwork.

That sounds like a lot, but the truth is this is going very quickly, the cards should be done with a little time to spare, but saying that I am still anxious to get them sent off to the card printers before it gets too late in the year; I still need to set up a presentation and a mini essay, not to mention that I still need to write out the rulebook properly! The card box is going to require about £30 to finish, but saying that it will not require much time to complete, which is good.

Overall I am very pleased with the progress of my game, I feel Preposterous has taught me much about the process of card game creation and if I am lucky it might even sell in a year or so!

Proof cards coming along great!

Preposterous proof cards! Artwork by Becky Michalak, Backgrounds, effects, editing by Myself

Well, Preposterous is coming along nicely now; I have been able to put together the majority of the proof cards already! Some need a little bit of work, also there are still another 10 proof cards, along with the 8 character cards to finish. However beyond that the majority of the cards are put together, the next step will be to put together the text only cards (story cards, virtue/vice and questions). I have acquired my presentation box for the game and plan to slightly modify it, my plan is to get a brass plate engraved over the box's Ace symbol with the game's name, then line the inside with red felt and get the rules onto a piece of card on the inside of the lid. Then everything shall be done and dusted with this game... well on the master's side of things; I still want to set it up for sale in the USA (and if that goes well England too) however there will be another stage of proofing before that, and since - for the moment - I am moving on to the third part of my masters degree, which will most likely be based on Preposterous but not be preposterous itself.

Deadlines

The end is Neigh! Well, at least for the second part of my Masters Degree.

So, what have I learnt?

Firstly, I have learnt that the concept of a mid-core game is an attempt to create a third games market in-between two other markets, however the evidence that suggested mid-core games suggests that a market exists for a different type of roleplaying game - one not based on statistics and simple power fantasy.

Secondly, I (believe) I have proven that roleplaying games are not so much about playing a character, more that they are about allowing the player to live out a power fantasy or freedom fantasy. I am not trying to say that this is a negative thing, more that I am more interested in another type of role-playing; I enjoy the aspect of storytelling with friends and collectively creating a world and story.

Thirdly, I have hopefully proven that it can be fun and enjoyable to sit down with a group of friends and create a story! It just takes the right environment and rules, but more importantly it requires just enough of a starting point to get things in motion. Preposterous has proven this concept with it's mechanics, it has also proven that a set criteria for what can or cannot be said completely destroys the players' capability to create anything comfortably.

With all of those conclusions my outcome becomes clear:

Before my presentation in December I plan to finish Preposterous and have a single copy of the game created. This will not be a easy goal to achieve, tragically the company (https://www.thegamecrafter.com/) would require more than a month's advanced notice to create a single copy of the game so I will have to improvise a card set for the time being. In all I need the game finished by the end of December, which is a short deadline to fulfill,  for the amount of cards that require work still, I believe it is a goal that is easily achievable however.

Secondly I will need to buffer out my blog, a lot of the finer details of my game's creation have not been posted as of yet. This list includes:

• A completed change log of the Preposterous rule set, including feedback and intentions for changes.

• A cut up short video of a play test of Preposterous.

• A card listing for Preposterous.

• Some more examples of the finished cards!

Besides all of this I plan to write a short essay explaining what I have learnt from Preposterous, just as a way to express the journey I have taken. I believe I will also need to translate this information into a short presentation (so a power-point), which should not be too difficult.

All in all the end is in sight and the work is mounting up, making me wish my time had been better spent, but I won't be discouraged! I am confidant that I can get this done with time to spare! In fact I have already secured a box for my first copy of preposterous! 

I just gotta get rid of that Spade and put a Brass plate on it!

Future Project.

This is jumping the gun slightly, but I am starting to feel as though the project I am doing at present (Preposterous!) Is a stepping stone that I am about ready to jump past. While I need to ensure the project is completed before moving on I need to start thinking about what the work I have done here means to me.

Well, I remember why I started Preposterous, I was thinking about mid-core games, the concept of a game that sits between casual and hardcore games as a perfect middle ground. Through research, I found that the idea of a 'new market' being mid-core games to be folly, or at least not up to the hype the industry had for it at present. I then returned to the source of my own game interests, which was storytelling above all else; I still feel that the main reason I pursue games in any capacity is because I truly love the interactive storytelling elements that I find in games. I wanted to find out what was the best type of game to encapsulate the interactive storytelling experience, because I truly believe that storytelling in games is all-important (to me).

From that I looked into the patterns of storytelling throughout history, trying to find a system or possibly a pattern; what I found was that all stories throughout history share huge correlations, and the story structures of human beings does not change all that much from story to story. From further research I found that storytelling was an integral part of humanity and people always wanted to hear stories and even tell them. So if it is that integral to us, then surely we must enjoy it right?

As a small test I devised a card game, the idea of which would be that it made it easy and fun to tell stories to one another. The problems with creating such a game were numerous, mostly because if you put a mechanic or system to storytelling the system has a tendency to fall apart. However, the core mechanics of storytelling stuck, and giving people constraints and random inspiration made it easier to tell stories to one another. One interesting thing I still want to test with my card game is audience possibility - I have a theory that since it doesn't involve any kind of story that the card game isn't limited to the traditional card game playing crowd, which is both a good thing and a bad thing. But I digress, the Preposterous card game is only there to prove that people enjoy telling each other stories, it is a fun activity that is gravely absent in role playing games specifically.

So I suppose - depending on how well Preposterous does - the next step would be to create a game that allows the players to easily tell stories to one another, in-depth and enjoyable role-playing storytelling games without any sort of development systems or numerical challenges. I want to bring role-playing back to where I think it should have gone, and make it about telling the story of a character, creating an experience between a group of players that is fun, immerse and above all about the story.

So that would be my next move, taking what I have learnt about storytelling as a game and creating a game that makes it as easy as possible for people. There are not many games to my knowledge that have done this (Fiasco might be one of only two games) which, again is good and bad - Bad, because it means it might not be possible or popular and good, because it means my work will not be a derivative. If there is anything I have learnt it is that people need boundaries to be creative, so I will have to create boundaries of some kind to make storytelling accessible. I will also need to find out if progression systems can work without destroying the role-player's empathy, the tendency at present being that once it starts being about stats players stop thinking of their characters as people. There are many problems but I look forward to this eagerly, the idea of creating a role-playing system that makes players care about the stories of their characters is exactly the kind of game that I want to play!

Possible name for the system - Novel.
Pros - On target with what I want to accomplish
Cons - Confusing slightly...

Taking Stock

I believe that I have become far too focused on the creation of my Preposterous card game in this design blog, I mean my focus in research is actually in storytelling, something I believe to be a lot of fun but is overlooked by the medium of games that can best express it - Tabletop & analog games.

So, to list some of my findings thus far - the problem I have found is that if you want to tell a story with a group of people you run into Ego. Everybody telling the story has to have a personal stake in the story, so they create a character for themselves, that character is their Protagonist; that character cannot fail or the player will loose interest in the story. This results in any two players falling into any form of competition to fall apart, neither one will allow the other to 'win' and get the better of their character and with no impartial systems or 'rules' they cannot progress. Hence the use of rules based around random chance in role-playing games, a chance based system is impartial and undeniable.

However, while this solved one problem it raised another.

Dominant strategy (or strategy in any form) emerged. The players of the game were presented with a system of rules, which, while it solved the problem of competition and resolution it focused the players on mastering a system and feeling dominant over everything else in the game; by adding quantifiable problems players lost sight of the storytelling and focused on strength based progression and mastery of a system.

This 'gamer logic' proceeded to shape tabletop role-playing in a big way, in fact to this day there are not many games in existence that do not focus the players on mastering some sort of system. Is that really role-playing? To me role-playing is putting yourself into the position of a character, putting on somebody else's shoes and playing out that character's story to it's humble conclusion.

I suppose that is where I separate from the rest of the audience a little bit, for a lot of people the game is about power fantasy, they want to be and feel like a mythical bad ass who is never wrong and could take on the world. Meaning that mastering that 'system', beating up all the bad guys and being stronger than the other players is where they derive enjoyment. My guess is that this is power fantasy at it's best, but there must be more to role playing than the power fantasy right?

The Playtesting Perils

What I have discovered through multiple play-testing of this game is that at current the game has some large problems. What I have found is that players have a lot of problems when it comes to being critical of other peoples storytelling abilities, beyond the obvious (I.E when people's stories stop making sense) players did not like telling people their stories were no good. I also found that the game had no real ending point and giving different cards effects complicated the game and detracted from what the game is about.

Just to re-iterate it - mostly for myself - the reason I created Preposterous was to make a game that made it easier to create stories and tell them to your friends, anything that does not work towards that is missing what the game is actually about.

The main problem preposterous had was balance, the game was always either heavily favoured on the side of players questioning stories or it was heavily in favour of the storyteller. I believe I have solved this in the newest iteration of the game's mechanics: I have removed the part of the game which relied on players deciding a player's storytelling was not good enough; it was obvious that players did not enjoy the idea of openly down-talking each others storytelling abilities. The new system includes a 'duel' system, where the aim is speed and the ability to weave more things into the players story on the fly. I have also re-introduced the ability to take stories off players as the game progresses, which should remove the problem that occurred when all players acquired points as fast as one another.

I will be play-testing these new rules within the next two weeks and creating a new iteration based on feedback, I will then find out if the original rule set is still preferred by anybody to make sure what I am doing is actually imrpoving on the game. For now here is the current Preposterous rules:

Preposterous Rules  (3-6 Duel-style play)

• Firstly, all players choose a character card, they place it face up in front of them so that other players can see. The cards are double sided; the players choose their gender by which face is visible. 
• Players then shuffle and draw one virtue and vice card, they place them either side of their character card; this denotes the characters reputation.
• Once all players have done that they are encouraged to ‘introduce themselves’ by giving their characters a name and a slight amount of history. This is not a required step, but it can be fun to establish things at this stage which you can recall later on.
• After this stage the first player draws a story card and places it in front of them. They then read out the title of said story and draw a number of proof cards in relation to how many questions are asked in the story setup. 
• The player then has 30 seconds to think, after that they must tell a Preposterous story using the proof cards they have to justify the events of their story. As a rule, each question on the story card must be answered, with a proof card attached to the events that answer said question. The player may not make a mistake in the telling; it must make sense and reference all elements of the character’s reputation (virtue, vice, title etc.). If the other players unanimously agree the story has a serious hole in it (by shouting Preposterous!), the player waffles or rambles or takes more than 30 seconds to prepare the story it is discarded and the turn order moves on.
• Once a story has been told, the players all draw a card from the proof pile and the storyteller hands out question cards to the players (one to each player). The players then must ask questions of the player’s stories in an attempt to disprove or poke holes in the story; they ask a question of a piece of proof offered up by the player and use the proof they have to back up their query. If the others players deem the question unsuitable it is discarded.
• The defending player must then defend their story against the allegations, they do this without any proof cards, the players then decide together which was the weakest argument the player made by means of a vote (the storyteller is involved in this vote), the player who asked that question may not duel the player for the story!
• If the players agree that a player gave plausible or strong arguments for all questions equally, then they can allow the storyteller to pick which player they shall duel with.
• The two players must then duel for the story! They take it in turns to flip cards from the proof deck and use them as talking points for their argument. Each time a player flips a card they have 5 seconds to think before they must make their argument, they must stay on topic, remembering to argue about the story and the story alone. The first player to fall off topic, take longer than 5 seconds to answer or slip up in their argument loses. The impartial character with the highest Social standing* may also at any point declare a winner based upon the quality of the arguments presented. 
• Once a winner has been determined that player takes the story card and places it face-up below their character, they must then take one of the original proof cards they played and place it above the story card, leaving the number value of the story card visible. This story element is then treated as part of the character’s reputation, meaning it must be referenced in every single story they tell from now on!
• *The social standing of the characters is based on their character cards, with the mayor at the top and the crook at the bottom. In 3 player games the player not involved in the duel is automatically the person with the highest social standing. 
• A player may at any time decide to challenge another player to a duel in lieu of creating another story. That player must offer up one of their stories, the player they challenge may accept, meaning they offer up a story of their own and begin the duel as normal; the winner takes ownership of both stories. If the other player does not accept the duel they turn their character card sideways, the player who announced the duel may then tell a story as normal. 
• At the end of the game all player with their character cards still facing forward (meaning they never backed down from a duel) get an extra point, for their true bravery. 
• The game ends when the last story card has been drawn, or any player is in the lead by 10 points at the end of a round. The last story told in the pile of story cards is a group story, meaning all players treat it as if they are the storyteller to an extent. Each player draws one of the proof cards (starting with the person on the lowest points), and answer one of the questions as if the entire group were at said event.
• Once the story has been told the players all attempt to re-tell the other elements of the stories, questioning another part of the story as normal; the game then follows the duel mechanic in an elimination style, eventually leaving one player with the final story. The final story value is also doubled!

 

 

Brightened up Test Printing

Brightened up Cards, still unfinished, strictly for test printing.

As you can see I have brightened up the card artwork a tad, now I have to see weather or not it looks any better when printed off. Once I have the formula down it shouldn't take too long to get all the cards ready to go, it will be time consuming but not too bad. I do need to press on with this if I want to get the game ready by January however; I will be hammering out some rule issues with more play testing and then finishing off the artwork post-processing.

New test print

The first layout changes! Now the artwork is a little more maximized and centralized. Also I really like the wet plate look they have now. I will be printing these off soon to compare them to the old design, also to make sure they work as card game cards still.

The Wet plate photo effect is not easy to apply so I want to find a way to streamline the process for the next batch of cards. I mean there is at least 128 to do...

UPDATE:

After printing this out I noticed that everything about these cards was far too dark for printing, presumably that is the difference between printing the cards out and having them on screen. The wet plate effect needs refining, at present the effect is geared up to work on photographs, as such it does not work on these illustrations. I will update the process and upload the image next.

Braggart: A similar game

While board games is not as large (or profitable) a market as their digital cousins, it is every bit as competitive. While shopping for other card games I was told of a card game known as Braggart; quite frankly it sounded as though it was almost exactly the same game as Preposterous! Now if this game was exactly the same as as Preposterous it would mean that the concept was sound and profitable (depending on how well the game did), but it was also mean that I could not produce preposterous. To my relief the game was very different to my game, focusing on very different ideas to that of my card game. Similarly in braggart your aim is to impress people with tales of great deeds with story element cards. However unlike my game in Braggart the cards come in 4 categories, the perfect construction of a story being one of each; the cards also have exact sentences used to make up the story, meaning there is no player based storytelling at all!

When I first heard about Braggart I was concerned for my concept, however after seeing the game's mechanics and workings I feel a need to distance myself from this. I Was thinking of giving a numerical value to different proof cards to determine proof strength, however after seeing this system it seems completely counter-productive to what I want to do with Preposterous. The idea behind Preposterous is that the true strength of analog games is role-playing and that systems should encourage this instead of finding ways to ignore it. I need to keep this in mind as I finish refining the rules for Preposterous!

Proof card layout change

The last design for the proof card was far too busy, to improve the card I have decided on a second, slightly better layout. My next move is to go through the other card layouts and fine tune them slightly, hopefully improving the card game as I do.

The Artwork is here!

Lipstick mark artwork first pass
by Rebecca Michalak

What a summer! I have just got ahold of 90 of the images for my Preposterous game! I think they really capture the mood of the world and while some of them require slight tweaking (this one as an example the lipstick mark is a tad too big) they perfectly capture Preposterous world, providing a much needed immersion. 

I have been looking into different post processing methods for the images to make them look as if they are 'wet plate photography'. I really like the results, especially when combined with background imagery. I do need to go out and take some background photographs (at current I am using a stock background image, something I do not want to do for the final) however this should not be too much of a problem.

Same image with post process effects.

I was lucky enough to find a tutorial for the above effect : 

http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/photo-effects-tutorials/wet-plate-photo-effect/

Obviously I did not follow this tutorial to the letter but I did follow it very closely!

My next step is to redesign the Card layouts, making sure to take in the feedback I received on the previous designs; the key focus I want the new cards to have is the stunning artwork!

While I am doing that my artist will be finishing off the box art and adding finishing touches to the card art. I will also need to make a final choice on font, I might even need to make my own if I have the time!

But things are looking up for preposterous now that the artwork is coming in...

Prototype update : Story prompts

Bit of an update on Preposterous! I have modified the prototype slightly so that the story cards not have specifications for what each proof card must prove. For example:    
                 


This is the proposed style for the Preposterous story cards (a first draft, everything might change). The basis of the game being that once these cards are flipped the player sets their hand aside and draws a number of proof cards equal to the number indicated on the card. The player must then answer the questions in listed on the card in succession using the proof cards as proof for the scenario they portray, this story must also reference the player's virtue/vice cards and character card. Once the player has successfully spun a tale other players may attempt to prove the story to be Preposterous! If they succeed, the play who finally disproved the story takes the story card, however if they are unable to thwart the story the storyteller may keep the card for himself.

There are also cards with special effects written into them, these cards allow for players to take other player's cards, they also allow for players to take other player's story cards which should shake the game up quite a bit! However since this is the playtesting stage I do not know if this will be included in the final rendition of the game.

Game of thrones, an examination

An epic tale, famed for its intrigue and complicated plot (not to mention controversial levels of depravity). Slightly groundbreaking, especially in mainstream media due to its more complex, inverted treatment of characters. Game of thrones follows protagonists to logical tragic conclusions to teach the viewer firstly that life, and by extension his story, is not fair. All of his protagonists fall for the same reasons that villains in stories do - they all are bested due to some unforeseen weakness or 'blindness' brought on by their absolute virtue in a world that is equal parts good and bad.

The chief and foremost example of this eventuality comes at the (SPOILER ALERT) execution of Lord Eddard stark. His mistake came when he did not foresee the betrayal of Little finger at his attempted coup d'etat of the Lannister king. His wife had vouched for Little finger, while it was made obvious to everybody that little finger was in love with Eddard's wife (Lady Catlyn). Lord Eddard did not see the betrayal coming due to his unquestioning trust. This is a story usually told in the reverse, as naturally a story follows the protagonist's ability to see what a villain or monster cannot, which eventually leads to the protagonist's thrilling escape from death and defeat of the much more powerful villain.

More interestingly, the hole left by the departure of the original protagonist is filled by the family of his primary antagonists when the newly crowned king shows his true colours as an out and out monster and becomes the new antagonist. Thus begins their story of redemption and rebirth, throughout the story they maintain the position of antagonists to the remnants of the protagonist's forces, however only by proxy. At the same time more antagonists, ones that have absolutely no redeemable features and are un-treatable 'monsters' emerge from both a mystic background and from the remnants of the ex-protagonist forces. These could be seen to be the 'true' antagonists of the story, which would make everybody in the story who stands against them protagonists, regardless of the place before this new enemy revealed itself. This teaches that all people, regardless of their prior affiliation fight for life when it is collectively threatened.

The plot of Game of thrones is a story, like any other it can be examined and patterns drawn from it, however by reversing its primary focus to teach a lesson that is not heard very often is groundbreaking for socially accepted mainstream media, also it is not something I have heard before. It shows that the basic plots are a formula that can be changed so long as it maintains a balance.

Production costs...

I have been doing some research into production costs for Preposterous! The information I have collected is both encouraging and a little disconcerting at the same time.

Basically what I have discovered is that, although there are many different printing services for board and card games in america and china for the purposes of printing, there are not many financially feasible options for an indie developer.  What I have discovered is Print on demand (POD) manufacture exists, and is very reasonable for the purposes of small scale production of preposterous.

The information below is my current plan for creation for Preposterous. The plan is to use an american print on demand (POD) service provided by a company The game crafter, who offer print on demand manufacture and even distribution services for as little as 30% of the profit. Which when compared to the standard split (30% owner, 40% retail, 30% manufacture), is actually a very reasonable amount, leaving the creator with a grand total of 70% of the profits.

So: To break it down:
Costs taken from conversions of website listed prices on 28/06/2013
Production costs per item:
 - £0.79 for a rule booklet
 - £3.28 for a printed game box
 - £8.18 for 128 printed poker sized playing cards
Meaning a total production cost per item of £12.26

Shipping for an individual item from the office appears to be £11.58 to bring a single copy to England. Not a feasible option, since it would bump the price far to high.

So if we were to create 100 copies of the game for £1226, then have the products shipped to England using a different company (or the same company if they are willing to compete):
We would be shipping a 30kg box, which measures 88 x 35 x 25 cm
(100 boxes .3.3 x 15.2 x 10.16, then allocating for bubble wrap).
The most competitive price I got was by Parcel hero, who quoted me at £111 however I imagine the game crafter would get a similar price on 100 copies.

This means an initial cost for a print run of 100 to be £1338 (I will round up to £1400, for a margin of error)
This means each copy of the game costs £14 to create!
If I sell each copy for around £20 I will make a profit of £6 on each copy, netting a profit of £600 IF I sell all 100 games.

The overall costs would be:
     -£1400 Production costs
     -£1000 Artist costs
     -£1000 Marketing costs (conventions, reviews, advertisements etc.this is a very low budget...)

Meaning I will be spending £3,400 and getting back £2000 (provided I happen to sell 100)
Either way I do this I will be making an initial loss, however if I happen to be successful and sell 500 copies I will have broken even and even made £3000 profit! (a long shot perhaps, but not impossible)
with my current employment I should be able to generate this much start up capital by the time I am ready to begin. I will also attempt to fund the games initial printing using Kickstarter, a crowd sourcing system which will validate the production of the game. Finally the game shall also be on sale in america for $25, netting me a profit of £4.50 per copy sold, hopefully (if the game succeeds) I will be able to fund the game using this money also.

Preposterous! Card designs and examples (Artwork done by Rebecca Michalak)

A selection of first draft proof cards to display layouts.

Backs and fronts of proof cards, story cards and character cards.

Previous layout, not used.

Preposterous! Development

Well its been quite a while since my last update, with that in mind I have made a considerable amount of progress with the game itself.

Preposterous! Is now a card storytelling game built around the player's ability to make up a good story. They do this by:

• First choosing a character card and drawing up to the hand limit of 5 proof cards.
• At the start of a players turn, they draw 3 cards (up to a maximum 5 card hand limit)
• Every player on their turn shall turn over a story card, the draw a number of proof cards equal to the number on the story card.
• The player then has 30 seconds to make a believable story using the proof cards, his character card and the story type.
• If a story fails to mention every one of these elements, or attempts to bundle two of the cards together into one singular point it has failed. This is decided ultimately by consensus. 
• The other players are all allowed to ask a single question during the story creation as an interjection (no calling back to stuff already said!), if the player is not able to answer the question or, in attempting to do so tries to change what he already established that player fails.
• Once the story is told, the players can offer up their own Proof cards to try and disprove that story, by calling into question one of the proof cards used to tell the story. Such as playing 'The word of mr.baker' to call into question the proposed chastity of the players 'honest grandmother' "Mr. Baker sez your grans a slag!" -The Crook, Opening of town florist party.
• Once proof is offered to dispute the story the player must use one of their own proof cards from their hand to dispute the claim. This must be a way of disputing the evidence offered to disprove the story.
• This process can be repeated by the other players, no player can ask two questions in a row, beyond this the only limit to disputes of a story are one per proof card used in a story.
• If the defending player had no more cards with which to defend their story they loose to any proof offered up.
• The player who either successfully tells a tale or disproves a tale keeps the story card, the number of points they gain is tallied by the number of proof cards used to tell the story.
• Every player other then the current player draws a card, the next turn starts.
• The game ends when all stories are told, or when the players call the story over. The winner is determined by counting up the story card values the player has accumulated and determining who has gained more points.

This is the first draft of the rules of the game and will no doubt change as the game is further playtested, so far the game has been playtested a grand total of 6 hours by 3 different groups.
I will be following with some samples of cards, with card artwork done by the talented Becky Michalak.

Preposterous! Card game backs

Card back design, Red line is the Cut line

An initial concept for my cards, for the game Preposterous!

Overall I am satisfied with the card design, it is interesting and captures the correct look and feel. However there are a number of things I would improve upon if given the time.

Firstly although cogs are in keeping with the aesthetic of steampunk I do feel that they are a little over done, they also typecast a game in a way I do not wish to. With that in mind I will be looking into other things I can place on the back of this card to make it look good, or maybe even removing that element of the back of the card in its entirety.

Beyond that I want to look into fonts more and update the boarder for the title, it appears to be messy at this distance. However for the conceptualization I really like the overall feel and colour scheme.

I think I prefer the card design without the Cogs...

No cogs looks better?

Card sizes

The different types of cards I can have made

One of the actual card templates

One of the things I am quite set on using is playing cards for my tabletop game. With that in mind I have taken the size charts and a template for a playing card, which I can use to work out the size and dimensions of my playing cards. I have decided to go for a Poker sized card, they seem to be the standard and since there is no reason for me to not have the standard card size I believe it would be strange to do so.

Some work on rule systems

Notes on a dice system, card system and Archetype system

So far most of the design for these games comes down to the types of systems I will be using. The mechanics for a board game are crucial, for the most part they are the entire game. I have been trying to think of ways of utilizing dice without making the user resort to a multitude of mental maths to work out what is a pass or failure. For that reason I have created the system noted above. The system for suggestive image cards is useful however I think it might work better with single words and an image to go along with the concept. Finally the character archetype cards are a way of allowing the players to have  a personal goal to achieve without having to memorize all of the ways the game can be won, it also allows them a starting point from which they can create their characters.

I am happy with these systems so far, however they are only initial concepts, there is still a lot of testing to be done with them before a game playtest can be started.

 

 

 

 

Notes on a story system

Above is a series of notes for a possible story layout system, which would be decided each time the players sat down. Basically for a storytelling game I would want rules that would layout the overall plot for the players, meaning that they would not feel lost at any point during the game. The idea was that cards were randomly drawn, these cards gave players a starting point for every bit of the story. The players then had a set amount of slots which represented the story lengthy, by the end of the board they had to have reached a conclusion with the story comfortably. I am not sure about this system personally however it may be something I want to try out with the picto-cards.

Methods of delivey

There are many way to display a game such as this, however the method of deliver for everything from the rules to the actual suggestions for narrative are crucial.

A popular method of allowing small amounts of rules to be randomly given out is to print all of the rules or suggestions onto cards, these cards are then shuffled and dealt out randomly. This system has its benefits, it allows for a quick an easy method for giving out rules as they become relevant. Using this system also means that the player will constantly have a physical reminder of the rules they have access to. The only foreseeable issue with this system is that once a single player has a single card, no other player can really have that same card. This also means that players become tactful, knowing what cards the other players might have and acting accordingly. While this is not strictly a bad thing it does detract from the main aims of my game concept.

Another system that might be viable is the percentile dice roll. In this system the players would roll a selection of dice and compare the results to a table. The result on the table would then be explained in some way and the players would elaborate. This system has the benefit of being the same for every single player, allowing for multiples of a single result. It also will be easier for me to create tables of results for players to roll in and explain them once. However the rules will then be hidden away in a 'rulebook', something I want to avoid at all costs. I think that the main problem with this system will be that players will have to read all the rules. If the players have to sit down before a game and decipher the system I have failed.

My desire to create a game that incorporates the best parts of both casual and hard core role playing games has eliminated one of the choices for me. The concept of including a rule book in any real format is unacceptable for the type of game I am trying to create. I cannot imagine any one of my players having to trawl through a rulebook to find out how something works. I will attempt to remove this element as much as physically possible to make the game as accessible as possible, while at the same time attempting to maintain the desired level of depth and interest.

A song of ice and fire

(A song of ice and fire)

In order to continue my research into the topic of role playing games I picked up another 'Hard-core' Tabletop role-playing game, based on the fantasy novel series 'A game of thrones'. This game series is housed within a large rulebook, the usual system in which hard-core role-playing games are found. I have found that by reading the book the system includes some interesting systems that I have not seen in many other popular systems, these rules are however the only things that truly stand out in this game, beyond the aesthetic.


The first system I want to talk about is the generation of a family, along with that, a family history. All of these elements are randomly generated, which I believe is a rather brilliant way of allowing people to create a family history without having to think of everything themselves. It seems that players find it much more easy to justify an ambiguous piece of information then they find it to create a piece of information without a starting point. This is a great find for me, I will be able to use this information when I begin to create my own storytelling system. I have noticed this same problem many times in roleplaying games, it seems that people require some sort of starting point from which to create their narrative. This is useful knowledge as it allows me to pinpoint what I actually need to provide in my game.

This idea might account to the reason why there are so many players who believe that games, such as D&D, are in fact not about role-playing at all, but instead about combat. I must keep this in mind when I present the rules for my own world, if I do not strike a balance in how rules are presented then I will not send the correct message in my game.

Another part of this system which personally stood out to me is that it happens to include a rule set for something called 'intrigue', the idea being that when a player wishes to get another player character, or non-player character to do something they must use their own skills against the other player's resistance and see which person comes out superior. While many systems brush upon this idea, the song of ice and fire game makes a point of making the rules of social engagement as deep and involved as the rules of physical engagement  This gives the players a variety of different starting points in which to focus their characters, this helps to stop players on focusing all of their game-play into 'power gaming' instead allowing them to focus on the many different methods of conflict resolution.

Overall I think that the most important thing that the song of ice and fire system does for its players is that it gives them a varied starting point from which to play the game. While most games only allow the player a series of archetypal starting points and a complicated system for physical engagement  The systems within this role-playing game give the players archetypes, however they do not force you to pick one. They then show the player three different forms of conflict in equal measure, allowing the player to freely choose one to specialize within, or to angle their character towards.

A quick few tabletop game ideas

Just a quick list of some of the ideas I have had for tabletop games thus far.

Preposterous! A Gentleman's Boasting game!

The first game that I had an idea for was a Victorian era's game of boasts.
Basically players would first introduce themselves by taking three cards from the pile and incorporating what appears on the cards as key features of their own persons.
They would then continue to draw a hand of 6 cards and attempt to create the greatest boast they can, they will attempt to tell a story and other characters will attempt to poke holes in the story with probing questions.
The boaster must use the cards in his hand along with the cards that make up his character to back up his story, however he plays the proof cards face down.
If somebody believes he did not play the card he said they must call him on it, if he has played the card he said the accuser must draw a card, however if the boaster was using another card the boast has failed and that player must draw a new set of cards equal to every card he played +1
Once a boast is successful the player discards a card, along with all risked proof cards, never showing what they actually are.
The player to win is the one who gets rid of all his hand first.

Window wars

for kids trapped in a car for a long period of time there is the window war, players field equal amounts of troops with suction cups on their bases. They then attempt to wipe out the opposing army by use of a very basic set of rules, they use cards to move and shoot and each model has a preset number of times it can be shot, this games feasibility comes from the fact it can be played absolutely anywhere without hindrance!

Wasteland

A little more deep, this game comprises of a group of players acting like a group of survivors in a wasteland. Card traits are used to determine what sort of wasteland they are in, they then create their character stats and set off into the wastes. Their aim is to survive for a preset amount of time (until they find their winning parameter), however there does not need to be a ending to this particular game. The monsters are generated using the same system as the wasteland as is the locations allowing the world around them to be endlessly renewed, who knows how much pep you need to survive?

The storytelling system

Although I am unsure exactly how this game will work as of yet I intend to make my masters all about trying to find out!

The basics are simple however,
The system will be created using systems to randomize and suggest narrative to players.
Cards will be drawn at random with suggestions to help fuel people's minds
The point is to somehow create a role playing system focused on good character development instead of competition, I want to make a system that promotes good storytelling and not competition.
The systems will have to include character stats in one form or another, to suggest a difference in ability between player characters and situations, however there will not be ways to advance a character in any major way, I do not want my game to be about the destination and not the journey.

Nomad

A quick game that follows a tribe of nomadic wanderers as they try to find a new land to settle in, players must attempt to take their group to distant lands finding food for their swelling numbers, dealing with hazards and even politics as their members fluctuate and the nomadic life takes its toll.

A new idea

I have always felt that limitations exist within the world of computer games, whilst their ability to tell a linear story is absolutely limitless I feel that it is completely impossible to create a world without limits and a new story every single day for the player. That is why to me tabletop systems have always been so important, because in such games the only limits as to what can happen is completely up to the people enjoying the experience. However that feeling of freedom is only a pipe dream without some sort of boundaries, ironically these are all important to the process of creation.

I think what I want to do is make a tabletop system which perfectly merges storytelling and role playing. My hopes for this is to make a system that aids and encourages creation of believable characters and stories, I wish to eradicate the competitive aspect that games like this seem to work on and instead find a way to encourage people to make an evocative story together.

If I am able to create such a game there are quite a few avenues open to me to monopolise and produce it! Luckily it seems that tabletop systems are much easier to produce then computer games, some companies have even taken to aiding the process of self published tabletop games!

A first stop would be kick starter, having a kick starter project would allow me to gather the relevant funds to properly market my games and publish them.

Another possibility would be to personally raise all the funds required for marketing my game and get this American based company to market the game:
https://www.thegamecrafter.com/
This would allow me to get into production right away, which is very desirable

My final option and also an option I might undertake simply to have my idea rated by professionals would be Atlas games:
http://www.atlas-games.com/information_writer.php
At the moment Atlas games, publishers of some of the best card games and 'Once upon a time' are looking for new card based game ideas. Of which I imagine my game will fall into.

It seems astounding how many options are open to a games designer who wants to create their own tabletop board game. I do not think I will have any trouble getting a final product out once I have the appropriate funds to start things off, it might be worth thinking up other games at the same time since it is likely I will need to make more then just the one game.

Who knows where this new aim might take me?

Some more simple storytelling systems

(Once upon a time, Atlas games)

There are certain systems that seem to focus on the process of telling a story, they are beautiful but also few and far between. One of the most prominent of these systems appears to be 'once upon a time' the game of telling a fairytale. This system seems to be first and foremost about telling a story as a group, attempting to use all of the aspects the player draws and bringing the story to conclude in the way you want it to. While this game is truly about telling a story as a team, the competition is purely to motivate the players towards a conclusion and there is no need for the feeling of a power fantasy, this game is not a role-playing game. The difference I believe is that in this version of a storytelling game the player is not attached to a specific character. This means that the player does not become possessive of any one element and does not feel that their avatar needs to succeed above all others and be more powerful then all other characters. 

There must be a way around this issue, a way to make a story that focuses on a conflict and resolution between characters but does not become a power hungry race to the finish line. It seems that there is an issue players face with a story when they are given an avatar and attached to events, they become engrossed in 'winning' for their players while in once upon a time they are not themselves in the story.

There are in fact other games of this type that exist such as nanofictionry, the game of creating your own mini stories. However I find this game type to be a little bit too casual and lacking any serious depth, they seem to be the type of throwaway game designed to be played when meeting new people at a party.

 

Storytelling systems for all they are worth

In this post I will be looking into a more analog version of a storytelling system, the humble table top storytelling game.

(AD&D 1st ed cover art)

One of the most famous and successful of the tabletop game systems is the Dungeons and Dragons series of tabletop board games. This system has evolved its ethos, philosophy and playing styles throughout its long life time, as its players has also changed so has the game, slowly taking into account changes in popular culture as well as constantly adding to its own cosmology. It is interesting to examine how this rule set has changed throughout the years.

In the first creation of this rule set it was the job of the Dungeon master to know the rules of the world and system inside and out, the very complex rule set was left for him and him alone to master while the players would only need to know the rules for creating their character. The idea was obviously brought in to get around the complexity of the overall game, however since the rules were themselves complex the character creation process was also complex. As the game moved on in generations both the creation of characters and the the rules that the DM would know by comparison to the players changed to become more balanced, and overall, more complex.

The popularity of this game system is unquestionable, however if this system has a classification it would have to be 'hard-core'. The amount of research required to be even remotely familiar with the system is amazing, however people are still more then willing to plunder through all of the rule sets in all of the books to sit down at a table and be a part of the adventure.

My thoughts? As somebody who has played more then 3 incarnations of this game set for years I cannot help but have an opinion about this system. While it is a great game, with systems for advancement  combat, choice and role playing it also becomes quite difficult to call this a storytelling system. The sheer amount of rules in this game, coupled with systems such as advancement, seems to detract from the actual process of role-playing in this game, being replaced by a desire within each of the players to 'advance' by any means. This inclusion of an advancement system coupled with a rule set that focused on combat above all else makes this game less about telling a good story and more about a power fantasy being played out, this leads to most player character being little more then an avatar capable of doing anything without a single emotion if the player presses the correct button.

(World of darkness storytelling system, White wolf)

In contrast to the Dungeons and dragons storytelling system comes the World of darkness storytelling system, a different take on the same type of table top role playing game. In world of darkness the rules are simplified as much as possible to attempt to counter the pitfall that the player falls into in the D&D system. The overall premise of the game is that in the modern world there are supernatural creatures with their own society and agendas, these creatures are dangerous and misunderstood but of the time antagonistic.
While this system makes the rules easier to learn and follow, and even more so includes elements about the characters that give players an insight into how the character feels, it still falls into some pitfalls. While the players now focus more on what their characters would do or feel they still have a looming sense of a requirement for advancement. This detaches from the players desire to in some way follow through the story as a character, instead wanting only to achieve power without really thinking about a reason for this.

Since both of these systems are the most popular types of tabletop game I think it is important to examine why they are successful, or more accurately why people play these games. It seems that I have already mentioned the main reason why people play D&D, it seems to be built around a power fantasy that the game fulfills for the player, along with the ability to follow the slight narrative of a quest story. It seems that the same can be said for World of darkness also, while most of the game play is based upon the atmosphere and dealing with the conflicts the the game presents to you a large part for players seems to be planning for their character to become big and powerful then steaming towards that goal with no regard for anything other then expansion.

These systems are very near and dear to my heart, however I do not wish to fall into the same category they seem to when trying to create my own storytelling system.

Midcore is bullshit. An examination

Link to the article: http://gamasutra.com/blogs/KevinGliner/20130306/187983/MidCore_Is_Bullshit.php

After a long and drawn out process of research into mid-core I happened upon this article quite by accident, the information within is very concise and 'final' in its own way, agreeing with my own research into the subject.

It seems that although mid-core is a good for product specific engagement and commitment characteristics where it is valid, it is also used as demographic characteristics, where it is not valid. It is interesting to think that at the moment games are marketed as if only one type of people play casual games and another play hard core games, as an extension of that it seems to have been assumed that a totally different group of people will only play mid-core games. This is of course a false idea, people are diverse and play different types of games all the time depending on what directly takes their fancy.

"To make a game more casual is to make it more accessible; to make it hardcore is to make it more engaging. Good casual design increases a player’s willingness to play but does nothing to increase their desire to play. Good hardcore design improves a player’s desire to play but does nothing to increase their willingness to play." (Kevin Gliner, Gamasutra)

This article has critically summed up the issues that the concept of mid-core games face. While the idea of a game that sits between the engagement model of a casual game and a hard-core game is a great idea in theory it ill only create a new type of engagement for computer games, it will not actually work if used as a demographic for games.

With this information in mind I think I will, instead of seeking to create games that fall into this model, seek to create games which have an equal balance of engagement and accessibility.

Looking back on my blog

In retrospective of the posts that have gone by during my time on this course, I have found that not everything I began my work looking into is relevant any longer. I began with a very clear and narrow goal, to research what exactly mid-core was for a company, however the more I looked into it the less I seemed to discover about the 'mid-core' genre of gaming. I also took a dive into a great personal interest of mine, the classification and analysis of storytelling and as an extension of that how interactive mediums effect the process. After initially identifying the '7 basic plots' which helped me to see what a story 'needed' to be desirable, I began to examine popular examples of computer games that attempted to tell a story from different points of view, comparing avatars (1st person storytelling) to characters (3rd person storytelling). What I found from all of this research was that stories usually fell into 7 basic archetypes which although break them down into their basic components do not limit them from being infinitely creative, I also found that people play games for different reasons, 1st person storytelling is about having a world to explore and telling the story of your character yourself, while 3rd person is more about watching a character's story and subtly influencing it. While 1st person can be very immersible at times it is not really as emotionally tied to anything, people seem to find it more difficult to create a deep narrative and prefer to have one given to them and edit it slightly.

I also looked into the games industry at present in the form of the Dice presentations, the situation at CCP games at present and a few other internet sites. What I discovered from examining these things is that at present the industry has identified 'mid-core' as a new market to sell games to, however this seems short sighted and shallow as a classification. It appears to be a brilliant step forward for the games industry if this market is explored, because it will allow big companies to finally step out of their own pre-built 'boxes' which limited what a game could and couldn't be, create something new and exciting with a little less attention paid to a single demographic and take a risk. However the way the industry is currently talking about it it seems to have become another demographic, and while aiming a game at 30-50 yr olds might allow for a little more diversity it is kind of missing the point of what this system could actually mean, that games are better when they are new and inventive, not when they are built on market data and demographics.

What I now want to look into is:

• A final classification for the mid-core genre.
• Indie games a systems,
• Storytelling systems for all they are worth
• Where does my interest really lie?

The Game soc Nationals - Observations of tabletop roleplaying games

I have never really heard of competitive roleplaying until somebody suggested I go to one of the events. It makes sense I suppose, you can always easily tell if somebody is role playing correctly or well just as anybody can tell a good actor from a bad one. I recently took some time to go and compete for the New World of Darkness title for competitive role playing at the Game society Nationals, however my main reason for going down was to see if there would be a noticeable difference in quality when somebody had been running storytelling systems for extended periods of time in their lives.

When it comes to tabletop storytelling systems the player is left largely without any constraints beyond their imagination and the Game masters world. You would think that this would in and of itself inspire creativity in the hearts of people who play these games, however the reality is quite different. I think tabletop games are a great example of how the ability to make any choice at any time and literally do anything does not make things especially better, it makes choices very difficult for the person making them as they are hampered by the options. Another reference to point that the Bioware and borderlands games make is that people love to make choice and they love for those choices to have a sublime impact on the story and have consequence and weight. But what they don't want is to be unable to choose what it is exactly that they should do.

The games that I played at Game soc were excellent in their own way because they pulled the players into the characters and made them easy to understand, one of the games featured an interesting dream sequence designed to be a tutorial where the player gets a feel for the character they have picked. They were designated by simple one word titles taken from tarot cards which gave us the overall theme for the character while not giving us too much information, the aim of which was to make sure that people did not end up in their specific comfort zones. I believe in these kinds of games there is a specific type of game play the player knows well and usually aspires to, this damages the act of role playing for that player because if they know too well what their ability's are and what they can do they will immediately seek to use these skills to their full effect in any situation using their gamer instincts, this leads to players acting exactly as they would do in linear role-playing games, killing thousands callously without any emotional impact to themselves or their characters, not even flinching when threatened and not for a second thinking 'what would my character do?'.

This seems to be the contradiction of tabletop role playing games, and one of the reasons the phrase 'No plan survives contact with the players' exists. When I began playing games such as Baulders gate and Neverwinter nights I was entranced by the amount of choice I got, the ability to go where I wanted and do what I wanted. This reached its ultimate expression in fallout, a game where I could go out and do anything in a fantasy world, however eventually I found the walls, the built in systems that the game used for advancement, the overlayed main story line and the startling amount of punishment any one human (including...especially the protagonist) could take. All of these things made my all rounded character into a mass murderer in a simple attempt to follow the plot, it became increasingly obvious I could not solve every problem with stealth, words, cunning or allies, it always had to come down to how quick I was with a gun or knife. It seems that the same applies to tabletop games, players are only interested in kicking the door in, looking for trouble and killing for XP, this to me seems counter intuitive as all of those things are handled much better by computer games as a whole, surely the reason tabletop games still exist is they allow more freedom of choice? Then why do people stick to the same thought process when given more freedom? I think the reason (apart from power fantasy and plain old 'its fun this way') is that there are no real games that are designed without the main consideration being these systems, PVP and PVE seem to be the main focus of the games designers so why wouldn't they be the main focus of the people who play those games?

Well, I would like to see something different,

Skyrim vs Dragon age - Avatar vs protagonist

One of the first things I wanted to do when I became a game designer was to create a role playing game which maximized the possibility for choice for the player, I believed that all a game truly needed to make a truly immersive role playing game was choice and feedback. However after a few titles that follow this concept emerged I found them lacking when it came to the actual role play value and immersion, it seems that when this is the case the player is not in fact playing a character but an 'avatar'. The avatar of a player has absolutely no role playing value and is little more then a doll to represent the player's interests, it seems as though in this sort of situation you would feel more role play value 'as if you were there'. However the reality is quite different, what actually seems to happen is the player feels no attachment to the avatar as an actual character, thus no role play value is generated.

I have been running a World of Darkness role playing game recently primarily as a research tool since my original project subject was the WoD IP and moving it to a digital medium. However I have continued the game because it is a storytelling game allowing me to see how players react to role playing stimuli, I am also recording the games to review how people react to parts of the game. What I have found about the game which has put me onto this line of inquiry is that if you give the players a blank canvas of an area and do not give them clear goals they will not decide any for themselves. They will feel lost without any feel for the character even though they themselves are the character, they do not attempt to try and tell their own story but instead await to be given the story to work from.

It is off this that I base my hypothesis that choice alone does not allow players freedom, the more choice you give to somebody after a certain amount actually makes things harder to do at the end of things. It seems that there is a big difference between playing a role playing game and role playing a character, playing a character does not actually inspire roleplay but is instead seen as mastering a system. The player cannot really ever feel the emotions of the situation imagined to them, however what they can do is emote with a fictional character so long as they completely acknowledge that the character is not in fact them but a separate entity with their own goals and desires, you are simply imposing your will upon them not becoming them.

Evidence:
Bioware RPG stratagy
Wod Game

(Randy Pitchford, creator of Borderlands 2)

The above link features a talk by the creator of Borderlands 2 where he talks about the importance of choices in games, but more importantly how people react to choice in certain situations. He reported that after a series of tests people only really care about the worst option and the best option when it comes down to it, people also seem to think more positively towards the choices they make and negatively towards the choices they did not make. With these considerations borderlands includes a lot of simply choices between 2 different outcomes, the purpose of this is not to allow diversity in an end result but to give the player more choices, simply because choices are empowering to gamers even if they do not have any real power.

(Mass effect, Bioware)

A prime example of the above teachings is Bioware's Mass effect IP, a game that offered series of choices for the protagonist which had a rather large amount of impact to the storyline, much like the one shown here. However they eluded to a branch in the ending of the game which could never have lived up to its own Hype. The most successful part of this game series however is that they did not need to live up to the impossible goal they set because they made every single choice matter on a personal lever to the player, this was do to the high levels of empathy the player could feel towards their protagonist. The 'shepherd' had lots of well written character development and relationships with their crew members which allowed for a significant roleplaying feeling and the ability to see serious value in every single choice that the player makes. 

Tablets: The mid core console

With tablet consoles becoming one of the most popular pieces of technology in circulation at present, they serve as the most likely flagship for a game aimed at the mid core genre. Games which are not only aimed at the traditional market but also are aimed at a new market, people between the ages of 30-50 with commitments that would make a traditional hard core game too time consuming to play properly.

The problem with tablets however is that they use a completely different input systems compared to traditional gaming systems since they do not have buttons, also due to the small screen constraints the UI and other inputs must be completely minimalistic. These elements do not translate well to a game that is built around speed reactions in any significant way, however luckily the focus of mid core games should not be speedy reactions or competition lest we loose non-traditional gamers from our target market.

So a tablet seems to be almost purpose built for a mid core game, the two seem to go together like.. I dont know a car and wheels?

Anyway if the main reward we are giving to our player is not the same as traditional games 'achievement and feelings of superiority and adrenaline' what are we going to be offering to our players?

Well lets look at some games that are successful without working on adrenaline based reaction time rewards!

The Room:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/appsblog/2013/jan/23/the-room-iphone-ipad-1m-sales 

The room was a very successful iphone game app which did not in any way work on adrenaline or thumb speed dominance reward models. The entire game focused around a very intricate safe, you are given a letter from the man who owns it, he states that you are the only one he trusts to open it. After that the only objective of the game is to figure out how to open the safe and find out what is within, it is a deeply rewarding puzzle game with a minimal set up meaning the game play is uninhibited.

It is a great example of a successful mid core game which works solely on mechanics, it is a challenge of wits which allows the player to test their cognative functions against the game, presumably this could be enjoyed by anybody who has ever played a crossword or sudoku.

This game teaches us that puzzle based games make great mid core mechanics, as they allow players to test their mental skills against the game and feel validated when they succeed, however these types of games have a certain failing. Once the player fails to defeat a puzzle or challenge presented by the game it immediately loses any sort of joy to the player, it stops being something that the player wants to do and instead becomes something they have to do. Some games have found the workaround to be giving the player an option to skip that part of the respective gameplay, however I do not think this to be an adequate solution to the problem, you do not feel like you accomplished anything when it is handed to you, it would be like being able to have the boss of a level killed for you. Perhaps it would be better to have a multitude of ways to solve a puzzle while keeping it at the same level of difficulty, because not being able to solve a puzzle immediately makes somebody feel worthless.

Puzzles and mental challenges are a good as a mechanic however I feel that such a game would not really be a mid core game but more of a casual game if it was simply a puzzle collection, there needs to be slightly more to a game in my opinion. One thing that fiction has proven is that everybody loves a good story so maybe that is what is missing. The thing that really makes The Room a captivating game is how its minimalistic storytelling brings the player into the situation properly without making them feel as though they should be overwhelmed by it all.

The seven basic plots

Overcoming the monster

As you may already have guessed from the title the overcoming the monster plot focuses around a central protagonist being forced to face down a personification of evil. All of these parametrise can be interpreted in a variety of different ways, this plot by no means has to have violence for example. There is also a 'dark' version of this plot, where the story centralises around the monster, or a person who becomes the personification of evil and it eventually leads to his downfall. The identifiable stages of an overcoming the monster plot are as follows:

1) Anticipation stage: In the first stage of the story the reader is usually made aware of some great evil monster, possibly from a distance, however sometimes the reader is also given a glimpse of the great evils destructive power. The story then progresses as the evil casts a shadow over a community or in some other way threatens the peace, the protagonist of the story is given a call to confront this evil.

2) Dream stage: The protagonist begins his journey of preparation to confront the great evil that threatens the heroes world, they encounter a reasonable amount of success along the way however the overall mood is anticipation of the dangers they will soon be facing.

3) Frustration stage: The protagonist comes face to face with his great monster and even after the protagonists preparation they seem insignificant compared to the awesome power of the monster. Eventually the protagonist will seem to fall under the power of the monster, the story shall seem to only have one outcome.

4)Nightmare stage: The final confrontation begins, the protagonist seems unbelievably outmatched by the might of the monster, until at the last moment comes the 'reversal'

5)The thrilling escape from death and the death of the monster: At the final moment the monster is dealt a fatal blow, the protagonist escapes from the clutches of death and the protagonist reaps the rewards, fame, fortune, love and liberation for his people.

These stages can be found in every overcoming the monster plot line, their order may however change. There is of course a dark version of this story, where either the protagonist becomes the monster or the protagonist was the monster all along, in these stories the events go very similarly however the story focuses on the monster's effects on the story, shrouding the protagonist to show the blindness to the protagonist that is the monsters weakness.

These story lines are very common in games, they allow the player to follow the hero through their action packed adventure in which they overcome all obstacles in their defeat of a great evil entity.
Game: Zelda
Film: Kill Bill
Book: David and Goliath

Rags to Riches

Rags to riches seems to be deeply linked into our collective subconscious, perhaps something that we all wish for ourselves or maybe a metaphor for growing up. Apart from the most simple of the stories rags to riches usually break down into 5 identifiable stories:

1) Initial bad life followed by the 'call': We are introduced to the protagonist in a starting 'lower state', this is shown primarily by the protagonist being surrounded by 'dark figures' who constantly demean them and scorn them. This situation ends with the character being called in some way out into the wider world.

2) Out into the world, initial success: Although this new movement in their life may be somehow fraught with new challenges the protagonists shall gain some amount of success, they may even be able to outstrip some former dark figures in his life. They may even meet for the first time their love interest, however in some way it will be made clear that their success is not complete

3) The central crisis: All of a sudden everything goes horribly wrong, the shadows of the oppressors return and the fortunes the protagonist has amassed all are taken away from the protagonist, they are left powerless and unable to change his/her fortunes anymore, this is the lowest point in the story.

4) Independence and the final ordeal: The crisis is finally over when the protagonist (still unfulfilled) finds a sense of inner strength and Independence. This continues to reward the protagonist until they are put to a final trial, usually with dark figures or malevolent forces blocking the protagonist from his true goal, only when this final obstacle has been overcome can the shadows that loom over the protagonist be resolved.

5) Final union, completion and fulfilment: The protagonist finally gains a form of recognition for their work, they will either gain the love of their life, succeed to some sort of 'kingdom' or gain the wealth and fame that they deserve. This signifies perfect fulfilment and a final happy ending.

There is of course many ways to interpret these ideas and in some cases even other ways to structure these events, but most likely the story shall play out like this. There is a dark version of this story where the events carry out very much the same, however the means for his desire for gain are purely egotistical, all of his adversaries become victims to his own monstrous ambitions until finally the protagonist is left in a void with his hollow and worthless accomplishments.

The Rags to Riches story is not as common in games, however elements have been played out in certain titles  and there are games that work on the same elements that this works on:
Games: Dragon age 2, The sims (on a certain level the gameplay is about taking your sim from rags to riches)
Books:The adventures of Tom Sawyer
Films: The persuit of Happiness

The Quest

One of the most aptly named and obvious of the basic plots, the story focuses on a selfless and noble protagonist being pulled toward an all important goal which always becomes bigger then their own goals, this goal drags the protagonist onwards in such a way that the protagonist cannot feel satisfied or sated until they manage to complete their tasks.
The basic rundown of a quest plot line goes as so:

1) The Call: The happy atmosphere of the hero's life is shattered and an element of oppression is flung all around him, possibly his land is taken over. They may be given some sort of supernatural vision of what they must do

2) The journey: The protagonist and his group set off across life-threatening and horrific ordeals, each of these ordeals shall end in a thrilling escape from death for the protagonist but not necessary for his companions. Along the way they will probably receive help and advice from a wise old figure, or even a love interest, they may even transcend death through extreme effort.

3) Arrival and frustration: The protagonist arrives within sight of his goal but they find that they are far away from reaching the end of his story and is left feeling unfulfilled. They then sees a series of monolithic obstacles between him and his final goals.

4) The final ordeals: The protagonist has to face the final set of of goals (usually 3) the final one usually the most threatening of all, these final challenges prove the true worth of the protagonist and identify all of his true strengths.

5) The Goal: After a last thrilling escape from death the hero's goals are finally met, they save the kingdom, win the heart of a love interest and more importantly vanquishes the evil threat that they had vowed to.

There is a dark quest version of this story, best personified in the famous story Moby Dick, where captain Ahab pursues the white whale for no other reason then to destroy it. He is the central dark figure, opposed to the life of Moby Dick, he is willing to sacrifice anything to get what he desires and eventually after a long series of ordeals where he proves himself truly without repentance he causes his own destruction.

Another very commonly used plot for computer games is the quest, usually the quest plot bleeds into other similar plots, the common difference between the quests is found in the structure of the events as they transpire.
Games: Mass effect
Films: Star wars
Books: Lord of the rings

Voyage and return

Another iconic plot line documents the protagonist's progression from their normal world into another alternate world, then the story follows their slow progression back to their previous world. Weather or not the story is a happy or light story depends on weather or not the journey to the alternate world brings a revelation to the protagonist, if not the story is likely the 'Dark' variant of voyage and return.

1) Anticipation stage: The story begins with the protagonist in some way open to a shattering new experience, their consciousness is restricted in some way, possibly young and inexperienced with limited worldly experience. whatever the reason may be they find their way out of their normal world into a larger world full of wonder.

2) Dream stage: At first this new world is engaging and puzzling, the world is very much a new adventure to the protagonist, however they can never feel truly at home there and it haunts them.

3) Fascination stage: Gradually the nature of the adventure moves from a feeling of adventure to frustration and oppression. A shadow begins to intrude, which becomes increasingly alarming.

4) Nightmare stage: The shadow becomes dominating and it seems to pose a serious threat to the protagonists survival.

5) Thrilling escape and return: When the threat that is overbearing the protagonist becomes far too much to bear they make a thrilling escape form their near certain death and arrive back where they started, then the important definitive question is asked.
'Did they learn anything from their adventure? or was it all just a dream'

There are a few voyage and return games out, however they are not as vast and popular as the stories that follow previously mentioned plots.
Game: Myst
Film: Finding Nemo
Book: Through the looking glass

Comedy

One of the most complicated of the basic plots simply because it has to span a lot of different possibilities. The basic incarnation of comedy plot focuses around revelation, the humour was derived from the characters being unaware of something that was seemingly obvious to the audience. Unlike the other plot lines comedy breaks down to two key stages, which are separated by revelation.

1) One or more characters are trapped in They either go through a change of
a dark state of ignorance or arrogance heart or are exposed and punished.
Which casts a shadow over others.

2) The identity or true nature of one or Their true identities or nature are revealed.
more characters is hidden or unclear.

3) Lovers are still in a state of uncertainty: Each lover is united with his or her
e.g they are separated by misunderstanding 'Other half'
or are still in the process of pairing off.

4) Families are divided and things are Families are reunited and everything
'Not as they should be'. is restored to its proper place.

A lot of things in the comedy plot are a lot less certain when compared to the the other plot lines, however there is one thing that is always certain in a comedy. A true happy ending cannot be reached until every individual in the story discovers who they are or is punished for not reaching this revelation.

Due to the transient nature of the comedy plot line it is hard to sum it up so simply, because its very nature means that it has to cover a variety of different situations. It is true however that a comedy will always have these story elements:

1)We see a little world in which people have passed under a shadow of confusion, uncertainty and frustration, and are shut off from one another.

2) The confusion gets worse until the pressure of darkness is at its more acute and everyone is in a nightmarish tangle.

3) Finally, with the coming of light things not previously recognised, perceptions are dramatically changed. The shadows are dispelled, the situation is miraculously transformed and the little world is brought together in a state of joyful union.

Just to confound the plot of comedy further unlike all of the other plots there is no 'dark' version of comedy per Se, because if you attempt to make a dark comedy you are left with a tragedy. Likewise tragedy does not have a light version, it becomes a comedy.

Comedy if a difficult story to appear on an interactive medium, however it finds its way in on quite a few titles.
Game: Conkers bad fur day
Movie: Forgetting sarah marshall
Book: The princess bride

Tragedy

Tragedy is almost as complex and diverse as comedy, seeing as any plot out of the seven can be a tragedy. Tragedy traditionally ends with its protagonists left alone in a void created by their own hubris or actions, leading ultimately to their deaths, it is rare to find a tragedy that doesn't at least imply these things.
The plot of a tragedy can be broken down into these five stages, however there are many variations:

1) Anticipation stage: The protagonist is in some way incomplete or unfulfilled and his thoughts are turned towards the future in hopes of some unusual gratification. Some objects of desire or course of action presents itself, and his energies have found a focus.

2) Dream stage: The protagonist becomes in some way committed to his course of action and for a while things go almost improbably well for the hero. He is winning the gratification he had dreamt of, and seems to be 'getting away with it'.

3) Frustration stage: Almost imperceptibly things go wrong. The protagonist cannot find a point of rest, he beings to experience a sense of frustration, and in order to secure his position may feel compelled to further 'dark acts' which lock him into his course of action even more irrevocably. a 'shadow figure' may appear at this point, seeming in some obscure way to threaten him.

4) Nightmare stage: Things are now slipping seriously out of the hero's control. He has a mounting sense of threat and despair. Forces of opposition and fate are closing in on him.

5) Destruction or death wish stage: Either by the forces the protagonist has aroused against them self, or by some final act of violence which precipitates their own death the protagonist is destroyed.

This is by no means the only way in which a tragedy plot can be defined however it does show the key stages which most tragedy stories must have, an unfulfilled protagonist shall be tempted into dark acts which will eventually leave the protagonist utter damnation and eventual death.
The plot of tragedy has also been based around the divided self, the story shows a reasonable and kind protagonist who has certain flaws in her personality which create a 'dark' version of this character, this dark compulsion causes the seemingly nice and kind individual to follow the plot of a tragedy. The story can also monitor the characters transformation from a seemingly kind and reasonable person into a monster in any of the other stories.

There do not seem to be any games that truly follow the plot of a tragedy  mostly because nobody wants to play the guy who gets screwed over at the end of the story. Some games provide you with the choice to die in a tragic way however they only do this to add a level of consequence to the game.
Game: Some games have tragic elements, like Gears of war's romance between Dom and Mia
Book: Hamlet
Film: No country for old men

Rebirth

The final of the seven basic plots, the theme of rebirth can take many forms, however it will always follow the same sequence of events.

1) A young protagonist falls under the shadow of a dark power.

2) For a while, all may seem to go reasonably well, the threat may even seem to have receded.

3) But eventually it approaches again in full force, until the protagonist is seen imprisoned in a state of living death.

4) This continues for a long time, until it seems that the dark power has completely triumphed.

5) Finally the protagonist comes to a miraculous redemption, when the imprisoned figure is redeemed by the characters with which they have developed the most close relationships with.

The rebirth plot bases itself solely on the relationships between the protagonists and those most dear to them. The dark version of this plot would follow the protagonist as he falls under the power of a dark entity, and although they may get many chances to be revived by their past relationships, their actions before they fell under the dark power cause these people to fail them.

The rebirth plot appears in games slightly but not as much as the other plots, mostly because it dosnt seem to carry the mechanics popular games sell with as easy as some other plots.
Game: Similarly to the tragedy rebirth only appears in the form of the reformed villains in games.
Book: The ice queen
Film: The Grinch

Alright so that is a summery of the 7 basic plots to a story.