12 Tenets of Game Design for Stonemaier Games
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 07. 2024
- In today’s video I will discuss the 12 tenets of game design for Stonemaier Games: What they are, why we selected them, examples of how we’ve implemented these in our games.
1. Quick setup and start: We appreciate a streamlined setup with (at most) minimal pre-game choices. - Between Two Castles and Between Two Cities
2. Intuitive to learn and retain. The design of the game takes into account the accessibility and learning experience-ideally, new players can be presented with a few core rules and start to take turns due to the presentation and order of operations. Retention is also a factor, enabled by few to no rule exceptions. -Libertalia and Smitten
3. Ability to plan ahead before taking your turn (you shouldn’t have to wait for the previous player to complete their turn to be able to decide what you’re doing on your turn). --Charterstone
4. Limited analysis paralysis with choices displayed on player mats, game board, etc. There is a reasonable amount of information on display, not dozens of cards and tiles with detailed text that players need to read from across the table. --Viticulture
5. Tension and positive player interaction, not hostility. We like to limit the potential for spite while still encouraging various forms of interaction and tension. -My Little Scythe
6. Interesting choices and strong agency (with only a dose of luck). We love agency in games; it means that players have control over their fate. Random elements are largely there for variability; if there is luck involved, players are opting into it or are at least able to make decisions based on random input (e.g., instead of rolling dice to determine an outcome). --Euphoria
7. Rewards and forward momentum, not punishment and backwards movement. Our games help players feel like they’ve progressed during the game to a superior position than at the beginning (i.e., engine building). --Wingspan
8. Strong connection between theme and mechanisms. Mechanisms are designed to around a theme to keep players immersed in the experience instead of the structure of the game constantly reminding players that they’re playing a game (e.g., we avoid phases and action checklists). --Scythe
9. The potential for dramatic, memorable moments in a game is difficult to achieve, but it’s a huge plus when the game allows and encourages them to happen. --Tapestry
10. Distinctly tactile experience. We love games with appealing, exciting components, ideally accomplished in an eco-friendly manner. It can be as simple as the cardboard Tetris-style pieces in Patchwork or as complex (yet important) as the wheels in Tzolk’in. --Pendulum
11. Variable factors that create replayability-you can’t play the same exact game twice, even if you try. -Rolling Realms
12. Multiple paths to victory. Various game subsystems are balanced through playtesting and data analysis to be equal in their ability to reach the winning criteria. -Red Rising
Become a champion of this channel: stonemaier-games.myshopify.co...
podcast link: stonemaiergames.com/about/pod...
Intro animation by Jeff Payne vimeo.com/jaaronpayne and video proofing by Cody Simonsen - Hry
That's so funny, that video comes at the right time! I'm gonna submit a game soon to you guys :) Hopefully you guys likes it!
Thank you for considering us for your submission!
@Stonemaier Games oh nooo! I realized that I don't respect one of the qualification. That's too bad... maybe next time :)
Such a great video. Amazingly helpful. I'm a first-time game designer, but after years of playing Stonemaier games, it's almost not surprising that my game fits your mold so well. After a few more blind tests, I'll be in touch.
I love the replayability of Scythe. The factions, the mats, the objectives... You can't just follow a premade plan, you always have to improvise!
I've been binging your videos lately and love how much great information you share, especially in the design related ones. Thanks for all you do for the community!
Thank you! :) If there's anything you'd like to see more/less, let me know!
Thanks for the updated list!
Combining these tenets with your submission guidelines while designing has boosted me so much! Even though I may never actually submit a design to Stonemaier Games, I feel that one of my games has become something I can really be proud of.
I'll be playtesting this design at Emerald City Comic Con in March- it's first public debut. (edit: grammar)
That's all that matters--I'm so glad your game is getting to a place where you're really proud of it!
Theses are really great principles and align well with the kinds of games I like. I like some randomness, eg deck building with dynamic market, as it can add excitement, as long as I have agency in shaping the probabilities of outcomes. I also love positive or minimal direct interaction so the feelings around a table during a game are fairly positive. Love your videos!
Such a remarkable value in what you are sharing with everyone. Thank you so much!
My pleasure!
I appreciate how articulate you are about what you value in your products. I've know SMG have a certain "feel" but. This is so much more precise.
Thank you!
This channel has become my go-to source of information and enjoyment. Love what you do Jamie. My admiration 💯 to your work and passion for the Board Game hobby and community.
Thank you so much! I'm glad this channel resonates with you. :) --Jamey
These are great! Especially number 5 in my opinion, which was my first, second and third most important consideration throughout the process of designing Come Together!
I love your commitment to these tenets. It provides clear borders for where your games can and cannot go. Some of my favorite games violate several of your tenets, but those games have different ambitions and ideas than yous. Excellent video!
Thank you! That's the thing about these tenets--they're guidelines for our games, but I like many games that stretch well outside of many of our tenets. :)
This was an awesome video, thanks Jamey for the effort you put into those!
My pleasure, thank you!
Nice video, Jamey. Always good to recap those 12 tenets. Lately, I have been keen to play more "ameritrash" games where there is more luck and randomness involved to create those tense moments (like in John Company) than I was to play classic euro games which my group of friends are already starting to name them "Excel Simulations" , where optimization is the key word. However, I like the idea you've touch upon about giving players randomness as inputs to gain agency and think about how to implement all kind of biased / un-biased randomness through smart mechanisms. It's hard to make a game, I'm trying now to bring up at the table a first prototype, but man, it's a lot of hard work and constant dedication. But I think it's worth the time and effort. Take care!
Really great video Jamey - thanks! I suppose the only thing I'd say is that while it's great to hear you say these, what stands out the most is that this feels so natural when you sit down to play one of your games. There's something implicit about how those things all come through to varying degrees (depending on the game of course) that just makes it a al-round great experience, regardless of whether you win or lose. My favourite publisher by a long way (for a lot of reasons) so thanks for the enjoyment your games (and the time that you put into them) has given me 🙂
Thanks so much, Andy! I think that's at least partially the state of "flow" we try to integrate into our games--I'm glad you get that "natural" feeling when you play. :)
Great video Jamie! Stonemaier games always have amazing presentation and are easy to teach!
Thanks Donald!
I'm sure if you have some reasons to not speak about unreleased games in your current workshop, but I feel it would be nice to hear about some of your(and the designers)excitement on projects you are working on even if they are not completed yet. Maybe even just an introductory to any recent games you agreed to publish and introducing the designer...
If this is something you have done/do often then I apologize for not investigating well enough.
Another great video, thanks again!
I'm definitely very, very excited about the future, though I want to properly showcase my excitement for what we currently offer--especially our newest products--before focusing my public excitement on the future. When we're ready to start talking about each new project, you'll know. :)
Love this and thank you for pasting the text into the video description!
I'll add a couple of my own design thought/tenets that I've compiled over time:
- The best way to play should be the funnest way to play
- The first time someone plays the game is usually the only time
- Gamers will put up with long setup times, down time between turns, and fiddly gameplay but that doesn't make it ok
- If you ever say to a player "remember to...", you have a design problem
- Optimize game design for maximum number of total plays
- The less interesting a choice is mechanically, the more interesting that choice should be narratively
These are excellent; these are my favorites:
- The first time someone plays the game is usually the only time (so the first game must be satisfying/fun)
- If you ever say to a player "remember to...", you have a design problem (I'd apply the same to the word "except")
- The less interesting a choice is mechanically, the more interesting that choice should be narratively (I've never thought about it that way, but I like it)
Great video. This got me thinking and improving the game I'm making
Thanks! I'm glad it was helpful. :)
I love Scythe, but the setup is admittedly pretty intimidating for new players
Which part of setup? I agree that there are a number of pieces to place on your player mat, though we tried to make it easy to find which pieces go where (and it can even be somewhat satisfying to do that). Beyond that, you shuffle a few decks of cards and you're good to go! :)
I like the game for how it looks but find that the game has a horrible match of expectations and mechanics. I mean: walk around with cool big mechs that I can upgrade and steal stuff with but the game punishes me for doing it? whut?
@@pudicio I'm sorry Scythe didn't meet your expectations. Actions have consequences, even in Scythe.
@@jameystegmaier I guess nothing that has to do with the setup EACH time you play, but the FIRST time you play. I usually play everything two-player with my partner who likes playing but not setting up. The first I opened up Scythe and she saw all the little wooden bits in every player color, she walked away and told me to get her when everything is all set 😂
@@pudicio I think that’s mostly a problem with specific players’ expectations. But it’s definitely compounded by how the game presents itself a bit. I personally like that contrast, I mean, my favorite game is Root and the look of that game is EXTREMELY dissonant with how it plays.
I love tenet number 1. I’m currently working on a game with as little setup as possible. Ideally you would just set a board or a card on the table and that would be it. The game will teach you as you go. I’m not sure how minimal you could go with this but it’s fun to play around with. Thanks for these videos, Jamey.
I have a topic suggestion. Have you ever done a video for essential tips or essential equipment for budding game designers? A list of tools and/or tricks you use frequently when designing your games.
Thanks again!
Thanks! There are some games with great learn-as-you-play tutorials; here's a video on that topic: czcams.com/video/fhil3lk0yx4/video.html
As for essential tips, currently they're spread out over a few articles here: stonemaiergames.com/kickstarter/how-to-design-a-tabletop-game/
#5 is really funny to me because your talking about how you don’t want to create spite by players attacking and stealing from eachother and I’m a designer who is finally getting my first game published early next year and my game is all about attacking and stealing! 😂I’ve had some many friends yelling at their spouse during play testing sessions…. All in good fun though. Works for some games but doesn’t for others like you said.
Congrats on your first game! This is definitely a tenet that's more about personal preference than about what's "right" for game design in general. I've had a lot of fun with games that involve that type of interaction (though I think I still prefer the Libertalia version of it :) ).
@@jameystegmaier Thankyou and I agree as well. It's funny because I love so many of your euro style games with worker placement and self-management that I want to design a game like that but a lot of my games turn out very aggressive and not like that
Wonderful stuff! I'd love to learn more about your thoughts on "Flow", which used to be one of the 12 tenets, and is still referenced in your submission guidelines as essentially "short turns, no rounds, few or no phases". I hunted around for more insight on that and the broader topic of flow in general, but didn't turn anything up. Would be a super helpful video and/or blog post.
Thanks Ash! I think I talk a lot about flow in this video: czcams.com/video/ekgQ2MLQJZQ/video.html
I also have a video coming out soon about medium-weight games for 5+ players, and flow is a big topic in it (typically either in the form of short, simple turns or simultaneous play).
The biggest key, in my mind, is that the game doesn't interrupt the players with artificial structure to remind them that they're playing a game, instead allowing players to get into--and stay in--a flow state of full immersion.
Rather than exception I think there is a basis for emphasis on some rules more than others. I really believe that if a game pairs the mechanisms with the theme effectively that the gameplay will be most of the way to being an enjoyable experience. Often games that fail to excite players or get them invested are jarring in their consideration of theme, or things feel pasted on. Some gamers are likely to care more about mechanisms than theme, certainly, but if you're producing something you want to broaden its appeal where possible and thinking this way can lead to more inspiration.
#1 - maybe this should be more a rule for the publisher than the designer. I LOVE games with variable setup, elaborate player boards, etc. But I do greatly appreciate when a publisher realizes there might be ways to make life easier for the player, such as providing a nice insert, reducing variations for player count ("remove these cards if playing 2p"), and having a game board and player boards that make it very clear where everything goes. Also an aid for setup or a very clear setup portion of the rule book, again, without having to refer to other parts of the rules for variations with different player counts.
#2 - every time I play Viticulture and Wingspan I am grateful for the "end of round" steps printed on Viticulture's board and Wingspan's end-of-round reminder tile.
#7 - I think this is a major reason why I really like many SM games for solo - many solo modes for games rely on knocking a player back with events or penalties or fires that must be put out, but Automa Factory in SM Games works with the philosophy of encouraging constant forward momentum.
#10 - I got Pendulum as a surprise gift this Christmas and I really like it! (I did not expect to.) It's quite a good looking game.
Technically none of these are rules, just principles we try to follow in our games as a publisher. :)
Scalability is important too- like a 2 player game being as fun as a 5 player game
I agree!
@@jameystegmaier Very few games do this well. I am not opposed to games having slight tweaks on win conditions based on player count especially if more players drags the game on past its welcome. Thanks for your videos!
For me I agree with everything except 2 of the items are not necessary.
#5 everything in one of our gaming group can be made hostile. Even if it’s Sushi Go. If making a game that is mean, be upfront about it and it’ll find the right audience. (Perhaps not SM Games audience)
#8 not always necessary depending on group. As a Feld fan, sometimes themes are paper thin.
Very interesting, I am thinking through all my game designs now, to see how many match up. I tend to design games around themes that are under represented. At what stage do you like to see a game (as in submission)? Prototype functional artwork ready?
Here's how we say it on our submission guidelines (stonemaiergames.com/about/submission-guidelines/):
Your Game Must Be:
Fully Created, Not Just an Idea: Ideas are important but largely worthless. Actually taking a game from a concept to a fully-formed creation is a completely different matter-that’s what we’re looking for.
Polished and Playtested: Part of our role as the publisher is to playtest and arrange for blind playtesting of your game beyond the scope of what you can do. But it’s still your responsibility to extensively playtest (and blind playtest) your game before sending it to us.
Playable: The #1 mistake we see is that the prototypes we receive are unplayable, either due to the rules, the lack of reference cards, or other factors that could have been solved by blind playtesting. You get one chance to make a first impression, and if that involves an unplayable game, we’re not going to publish it.
Thoughtfully Graphic Designed: It’s our responsibility to make the game look great in terms of art and graphic design. However, submitting your game to us without any art or thoughtful design will make the playtesting process very difficult. Please use placeholder art that reflects how you view the world of your game, and be intentional with your graphic design for the final prototype-user interface matters. Do not commission final art, though-that’s our responsibility as a publisher.
Rules: We need to be able to figure out how to play the game by reading the rules. Just as with any written work, confusing writing, poor English, and numerous typos will negatively affect our impression of your work. A Microsoft Word file is completely fine, but please try to insert examples and photographs/images throughout the rules.
Retain: that’s a good one. It is so painful to relearn a game.
My Little Scythe is funny, because I remember receiving apples that were useless to me but my friend got “friendship points”. She did that in Flamecraft too.
I like in Rolling Realms, the player can choose to discard the rolled die value to gain a resource which is only worth 1/10th of a point but it can be worth it.
Friendship for the win in My Little Scythe! :)
Thank you again for the insightful video. As a mostly solo player, I find quick setup & start to be very important to my enjoyment. The quicker I can get to playing, the more invested I am.
One thing you didn't mention that I'm curious about is your use of art in a game and how that affects your design. I would say each of your games has a very specific art style and layout that helps add to the theme and mechanics. Do you have any specific rules for implementing art into game design as you go? Do you do art after the game is mostly finished and thus it doesn't really influence the design process or do you take that into consideration as you design?
It depends on whether I'm the designer or if I'm just the developer. Either way, I typically commission art while we're in the blind playtesting stage, though sometimes it happens earlier and has an impact on the mechanisms themselves. Scythe and Charterstone are examples of that.
Dear Jamey,
my question is this: in what ways can set backs be made 'fun'?
For some years now I've been dabbling a bit with boardgame design, without real submissions until now. Recently, I've been making this subject more of a study, by wathcing as much youtube video's as possible. I really love your video's and you give some real good advise, thank you so much! I hope you can answer this question for me.
I'am working on a semi-coöp citybuilding game. The core principle of this game however is not neccesary management, it is influence and power. I really try to work out the mechanics based on the theme. In my head this game is also a simulation. I'm implementing aspects like growth, foodreserves, commerce and trade, housing, roadnetworks, technological progress, etc. In city (need) management, there are negative factors and I've been thinking about implementing these five:
- starvation
- emigration (people leaving)
- waste
- crime
- health (hazards)
But here is my problem. When players have build there city and when they run out of food, they have to remove people. And after certain prosperity levels, they have to add waste, and then remove it to reduce health hazards. And this is no fun! and also no progress.
In your video's you have said multiple times, that the feeling of progress is important, among others. That is has to be meaningfull. And I'm afraid that these negative factors, these risks are making the game dull, no fun.
Do you have a tip for me, how I can make these set backs more enjoyable to play with? I know I have to "kill my darlings", but it would make me sad to do so.
Thank you!
Joost: Thanks for sharing this design challenge. I think the overall goal is to offer tradeoffs. Like, yes, you might have fewer people, but maybe fewer people is a good thing too. Or maybe whenever a person leaves the city to find food, they discover something outside the city that may help you.
I recommend looking into the game Atiwa, as it deals with these thematic and design challenges in interesting ways.
I also recommend looking into the game Cthulhu: Death May Die, as it's a game where players grow stronger as something bad happens (as their insanity increases), but they're also moving faster towards losing. Good and bad things can be paired in that way.
@@jameystegmaier Hi, thanks for this great advise! I'll definitely check them out.
Thanks for the video! I think even highly rated games get criticism when they don't meet these principles, like Gloomhaven having a lot of detailed rules and relatively long setup time. About Catan: personally I think the game gets away with having an important decision before the game begins, because it's pretty easy to guide new players in that decision. Pick spots next to numbers that are close to 7 (which are conveniently printed in a bigger font and another color), and make sure to get different resources.
I'm wondering if you could make a follow-up video about how Stonemaier games have gotten away with breaking some of these rules. Or, if a game design initially doesn't adhere to all 12 tenets, what do you do? Change the design drastically to adhere to the tenets, or only slightly so that you get away with it?
I'm thinking about Wingspan which does have a round structure and important decisions before the game starts, Tapestry which has a number of stacks to shuffle (admittedly setup could've been worse for Tapestry) and a lot of information on the game board, Scythe which has negative player interaction. These are great and succesful games, for which I guess you must have considered how to deal with them not adhering fully to the tenets.
I'll think about doing an "exceptions" video and how we justified them. Typically each game starts without any exceptions, but exceptions are added if it's best for the experience.
I certainly like to see many of your tenets in games. My biggest exception would be #8 - as I like many abstract games, the mechanisms are hugely important to me, but lack of theme is totally ok (desired even?)
Off topic - Wrexham came so near to causing an upset in today's (Sunday) FA Cup 4th Round (Rd of 32) against Sheffield United. Sheffield scored a tying goal deep in added time (95th min) to get a 3-3 tie and force a rematch/replay.
This is the sort of pairing that makes the FA Cup magical - Sheffield are 2nd in the 2nd tier league (a ranking of 22nd best, just below the Premier League), while Wrexham lead in the 5th tier (ranked 93rd, a gulf of 71 places below).
The 5th Round (Rd of 16) draw will be made tomorrow at 1 pm St. Louis time, so Wrexham will know who they play next time, assuming they beat Sheffield in the replay.
Wrexham was so close! I think this was their chance, but we'll see. :)
@@jameystegmaier I agree - it may be tough for "David" to keep momentum going and slay "Goliath" on the road.
Hi Jamey, since you already told before that most of the games Stonemaier publish that is not yours came trough the Designer Day's, how can someone of another country send to you a prototype of a game or even show to you a game idea? Let me say that I personally think I have a game that fulfill 9 or 10 of this tenets and I also thing that will be a perfect fit for Stonemaier since this is a game you guys yet do not have anything about.
Of the games we've published, only one was discovered at Design Day. Most games are submitted to us from around the world via the submissions form on our website.
Played beyond the sun last week and found it interesting but wow that setup was long.
7 wonders is my favourite game and even there I think the setup is too long . The guild setup is especially egregious
Catan has awful pre game decisions I agree. The game can be over before it begins with a bad choice
let me guess before I watch
engine Building
cool pieces
simple turn choices
eco friendly
minimal " take that "
good art
inoffensive to any 1 group of people
player interaction at some level
not combat driven
2 to 5 players atleast
solo mode
big box to fit all expansions
Not bad guesses.
But not really correct either. I think you overstated the ‘production’ here, when the topic on the video is clearly stated ‘Game design’.
X Quick Set Up and Start
- Intuitive to learn and play….hmmm I guess ‘simple turn choices’ might belong in that category
X Ability to plan ahead
- Limited analysis paralysis….hmmm I can give you ‘simple turn choices’ here or above, but not both
☑️Tension and positive player interaction, not hostility…….Ok I’ll give you “minimal take that’.
X Interesting choices and strong agency
☑️Rewards and forward momentum……ok, I’ll give you ‘engine building’, kind of
X Strong connection between theme and mechanisms
X Potential for dramatic, memorable moments
☑️Distinctly tactile experience…..hmmm…ok, maybe I’ll grant you ‘cool pieces’
X Variable factors that create replayabilty
X Multiple paths to victory
I have to agree with your point about the Red Rising cards...especially since we're still learning them. At 56 my eyes aren't what they used to be and I'm finding myself standing and leaning or even sometimes walking around the table to read and view things.
I would like to see a video on the analysis that leads to the balance among the multiple paths to victory. I can imagine brute-forcing it through many human plays with carefully taken notes, and I can imagine teaching an AI the game and letting it find the optimal values. Do you all use a middle way between those?
Definitely, the middle way we use is a combination of lots of local playtesting and lots of unguided/blind playtesting (analyzing both the data and the anecdotal reports).