Ever read a game designer's notes on why they build a system in a certain way, e.g. to do a certain thing, and gotten a new appreciation of why a system works?
I'm interested in finding as many different sets of design notes as possible to get more of an appreciation of why people have done stuff they way they have. Any help appreciated.
So far I have:
FUDGE designer's notes:
http://www.panix.com/~sos/rpg/fud-des.html (http://www.panix.com/%7Esos/rpg/fud-des.html)
(originally posted by John Morrow).
The Making of Savage Worlds:
www.peginc.com/freebies/SWcore/MakingofSW.pdf (http://www.therpgsite.com/www.peginc.com/freebies/SWcore/MakingofSW.pdf)
Fuzion design (link not currently loading, though :( ).
http://knol.g.u.00rz.com/k/fuzion-rpg-design
Jonathan Tweet on additive in 3E:
http://www.jonathantweet.com/jotgamerunequest.html
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;545557Ever read a game designer's notes on why they build a system in a certain way, e.g. to do a certain thing, and gotten a new appreciation of why a system works?
I'm interested in finding as many different sets of design notes as possible to get more of an appreciation of why people have done stuff they way they have. Any help appreciated.
So far I have:
FUDGE designer's notes:
http://www.panix.com/~sos/rpg/fud-des.html (http://www.panix.com/%7Esos/rpg/fud-des.html)
(originally posted by John Morrow).
The Making of Savage Worlds:
www.peginc.com/freebies/SWcore/MakingofSW.pdf (http://www.therpgsite.com/www.peginc.com/freebies/SWcore/MakingofSW.pdf)
Fuzion design (link not currently loading, though :( ).
http://knol.g.u.00rz.com/k/fuzion-rpg-design
Jonathan Tweet on additive in 3E:
http://www.jonathantweet.com/jotgamerunequest.html
StarCluster 2 came with design notes, as did StarCluster 3 Designer's Edition. I'm not big on designer's notes.
-clash
Thanks Clash!
To the designer themselves, I guess notes are they're not unbelievably useful in the building process. To other designers' though you never know...I'm quite interested in seeing the in-depth, not-always-obvious reasoning behind seemingly capricious design decisions.
In some cases I think designer notes have a benefit to the designer themselves in the marketing side of things, however. Burning Wheel for instance gets love from the masses because the designer managed to explain how/why he's done things in a way that makes those ideas seem like good ones, regardless of whether they were or how obvious they were. I haven't linked anything here for it, since I think the notes are primarily embedded in the text itself.
Or in Savage Worlds' above, the design notes are quite useful to the end user too, since its a bit weird in places, or has subtle features, and prospective GMs often want to monkey with it without realizing what things do.
Age of Heroes comes with 12 pages of Designer Notes in Appendix B. And 3 pages of it's history in Appendix C.
The first is because I'm a huge believer in Designer Notes. The second is actually more for my own gaming groups (which is true of all the rules actually).
Thank...does there happen to be a free link to any of the notes, or anything you'd particularly care to mention?
(For either the design or the history, I guess - I find for games that have gone through several revisions a history is another thing that's often interesting in making sense of a design. Often a major overhaul leaves behind a few puzzling anachronisms, or results in a new bug leading to another change).
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;545602Thank...does there happen to be a free link to any of the notes, or anything you'd particularly care to mention?
No, it's part of the book but I don't have a PDF available and it's sort of meaningless without the rules and thus I never formatted it for independent display.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;545602Thank...does there happen to be a free link to any of the notes, or anything you'd particularly care to mention?
You can get a lot of insight about Brian's take on design from his old Elements of Design (http://www.rpg.net/columns/list-column.phtml?colname=elements) column on RPGnet. There are some quotes from some of Brian's designer's notes (likely an earlier version) here (http://boardgamegeek.com/wiki/page/family:4283).
While it was being published by Steve Jackson Games, The Space Gamer had quite a few designer's notes articles for games published at the time (search for "notes" here (http://wiki.acaeum.com/wiki/Index:The_Space_Gamer)). They sell PDFs of old The Space Gamer and Fantasy Gamer issues on Steve Jackson Games' E23 site here (http://e23.sjgames.com/search.html?gsys=Space%20Gamer) and here (http://e23.sjgames.com/search.html?gsys=Fantasy%20Gamer). If I remember correctly, the Star Patrol, Fringeworthy, and Man-to-Man design notes were particularly interesting.
There are a brief set of designer's notes in the Fuzion Jazz 1.2 PDF (http://b-com.narod.ru/fuzion/fj.pdf).
ICAR designer's notes (http://www.icar.co.uk/archive/designersnotes.php).
There were Call of Cthulhu Designers' Notes in Different Worlds #19 and Villains and Vigilantes Designer's Notes in Different Worlds #23, though I'm not sure where you'd get a copy of either (eBay?). Also Designer Notes: How I Designed Land of the Rising Sun" by Lee Gold in Different Worlds #8, "Champions: Designer's Notes" by Steve Peterson, "Designer's Notes for Superworld" by Steve Perrin, and "Supergame: Designer's Notes" by Jay & Aimee Hartlove also appear in Different Worlds #23 and "Designer's Notes: Man, Myth & Magic" by Herbie Brennan are in Different Worlds #33.
Quote from: John Morrow;545955You can get a lot of insight about Brian's take on design from his old Elements of Design (http://www.rpg.net/columns/list-column.phtml?colname=elements) column on RPGnet. There are some quotes from some of Brian's designer's notes (likely an earlier version) here (http://boardgamegeek.com/wiki/page/family:4283).
Wow, I'm amazed at what one can find online. That site even has a updated entry for 5.0 and an image of the Lulu Book cover.
I owe some thanks to whoever made the entry, I would have guessed that it would have flown well below anyone's radar.
Thanks for those! Fuzion jazz link doesn't seem to be working... or at least looks very odd. The links to Gleichman's column are interesting as well (I'd seen the levels of abstraction essay but not the others).
Different Worlds and Space Gamer notes hmm - I don't know where I'd find Different Worlds either, but the index of the latter may be quite useful - IIRC the pdfs were bit expensive to just grab offhand but targeted acquisition may be workable, if anything is particularly juicy.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;545962Thanks for those! Fuzion jazz link doesn't seem to be working... or at least looks very odd. The links to Gleichman's column are interesting as well (I'd seen the levels of abstraction essay but not the others).
Different Worlds and Space Gamer notes hmm - I don't know where I'd find Different Worlds either, but the index of the latter may be quite useful - IIRC the pdfs were bit expensive to just grab offhand but targeted acquisition may be workable, if anything is particularly juicy.
With respect to The Space Gamer and Fantasy Gamer, if you were going to get only one, I'd recommend Issue #76 which includes both the DC Heroes and Man-to-Man Designer's Notes articles as well as World of Hârn Designer's Notes, so it's a sort of three in one with some other interesting articles about how to run various games. The Man-to-Man article talks about how the GURPS combat system was designed and is quite useful, in my opinion.
ADDED: The Space Gamer #75 has designers notes for the Pacesetter games and the Twilight 2000 combat system by Frank Chadwick. That would probably be your next best choice. TSG #65 has 1.5 pages of design notes for the Tri-Tac games and TSG #51 has a single page on Star Patrol so both of those are questionable investments just for the Designer's Notes if money is tight, but they are both interesting and worth reading. I would pass on the Designer's Notes for The Fantasy Trip in TSG #29 because they are sadly not very useful.
I also have to add a recommendation for the 4 page article Metamorphosis Alpha Notebook in TSG #42 which is an account of the lessons Bill Armintrout learned running Metamorphosis Alpha when he was in college. One of the niftiest nostalgia and advice columns I've ever read.
Also, there are three pages of Designer's Notes for Gangbusters in Dragon #62.
There is currently a Different Worlds #23 on eBay.
Thanks again. I've grabbed (after some wrestling with e23) TSG 42,75 and 76. Still reading through them as yet, but fairly nifty magazine.
Also, have posted the Fuzion notes above (the unworking link) as a new thread.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;545568Thanks Clash!
To the designer themselves, I guess notes are they're not unbelievably useful in the building process. To other designers' though you never know...I'm quite interested in seeing the in-depth, not-always-obvious reasoning behind seemingly capricious design decisions.
Marco Chacon persuaded me to put designer's notes in SC 2, and I have always regretted it. Those for SC 3 DE were different - that is a special edition for game designers, containing a commercial/non-commercial license for making new stuff for the game and/or creating new games using the system. As a GM, I have no use for designer's notes. As a designer, though, I can learn from them, so I like them.
Why do I not like designer's notes as a GM? If the rules are not clear enough to stand on their own, they should be re-written until they are. Designer's notes should not be used to clear up ambiguities that should not be there. Systems should be robust enough to take tweaking at the hands of any GM and still work. You shouldn't need to look up what you can and can't touch.
As a designer, though, I want to learn how to use new stuff in my own games, so designer's notes work very well.
QuoteIn some cases I think designer notes have a benefit to the designer themselves in the marketing side of things, however. Burning Wheel for instance gets love from the masses because the designer managed to explain how/why he's done things in a way that makes those ideas seem like good ones, regardless of whether they were or how obvious they were. I haven't linked anything here for it, since I think the notes are primarily embedded in the text itself.
Marketing and I have at best a nodding acquaintance. I recognize the face, but we don't talk much.
-clash
Quote from: flyingmice;546038Why do I not like designer's notes as a GM? If the rules are not clear enough to stand on their own, they should be re-written until they are.
Designer notes are not intended to make the rules clear, but to explain why the rules are what they are.
As a GM and player who have looked at a large number of games over the years (I used to do reviews of free rpgs in the rec.games.frp.advocacy era), I typically enounter systems that are easy to understand mechanically but seem to have no reason to exist.
Good Designer Notes explains that reason and often gives one a new insight into what the game is about.
Now that type of Designer Notes may be contained in the game itself, but there they are in the way of rule lookups and cause needless page flipping and skimming.
IMO they are best either in the introduction (if short) or at the end of the rulebook.
And as a designer, who looks at the work of others- they are invaluable for gaining new insights.
Sadly, good designer notes are like hen teeth.
Quote from: gleichman;546041Designer notes are not intended to make the rules clear, but to explain why the rules are what they are.
As a GM and player who have looked at a large number of games over the years (I used to do reviews of free rpgs in the rec.games.frp.advocacy era), I typically enounter systems that are easy to understand mechanically but seem to have no reason to exist.
Good Designer Notes explains that reason and often gives one a new insight into what the game is about.
Now that type of Designer Notes may be contained in the game itself, but there they are in the way of rule looks and cause needless page flipping and skimming.
IMO they are best either in the introduction (if short) or at the end of the rulebook.
And as a designer, who looks at the work of others- they are invaluable for gaining new insights.
Sadly, good designer notes are like hen teeth.
That is the sort of thing I put into the intro. If you look through this thread, though, and through the thread on RPGnet, you will find the most often cited reasons GMs and players like designer's notes are (1) to better understand the rules, and (2) to better understand where they can fiddle with the rules. Properly explaining rules does away with reason 1, and designing the game so that it can be tweaked anywhere and still run does away with reason 2.
-clash
Quote from: flyingmice;546048That is the sort of thing I put into the intro. If you look through this thread, though, and through the thread on RPGnet, you will find the most often cited reasons GMs and players like designer's notes are (1) to better understand the rules, and (2) to better understand where they can fiddle with the rules. Properly explaining rules does away with reason 1, and designing the game so that it can be tweaked anywhere and still run does away with reason 2.
-clash
I've read at least one of your intros, and gained nothing like I want to see in Designer Notes. In fact, when I latter tried to gain the information directly from you here- you dismissed the request and refused to answer.
Quote from: gleichman;546049I've read at least one of your intros, and gained nothing like I want to see in Designer Notes. In fact, when I latter tried to gain the information directly from you here- you dismissed the request and refused to answer.
This is because you have certain strongly held opinions on what this entails, and I have very differing opinions. There is a fundamental difference, then, with no actual communication really possible on that point. Further attempts would just be counterproductive.
-clash
Quote from: flyingmice;546055There is a fundamental difference, then, with no actual communication really possible on that point. Further attempts would just be counterproductive.
Oh I know that, but wanted to point out while you were making excuses and patting yourself on the back that some people want more of designer notes than you in you wisdom are willing to provide.
Beyond that, there's little communication to be done between us.
Quote from: gleichman;546060Oh I know that, but wanted to point out while you were making excuses and patting yourself on the back that some people want more of designer notes than you in you wisdom are willing to provide.
Beyond that, there's little communication to be done between us.
(Emphasis mine)
Our opinions differ. I see no need to insult you, but I also see this is not reciprocated.
-clash
Quote from: flyingmice;546069Our opinions differ. I see no need to insult you, but I also see this is not reciprocated.
It wasn't an insult, it is sadly a simple fact.
BSJ - I am sorry and profoundly apologize for participating in a side discussion which turned out to be detrimental to what was once an interesting discussion. I hope your thread can recover without my interference.
-clash
No apologies necessary! If nothing else I understand the perspective you're coming from. As far as design notes go, there doesn't seem alot to discuss, either.
Have read through TSG 76 DC Heroes notes now - gives some more appreciation here of the difficulty of creating the game, in that he had to go through alot of material before building the rules. More explanation of why there's a result table, design problems he encountered (undefinedness of character statistics under different writers, how final complexity was decided by compromising everyone's preferences. Why the action and result table are there (since in DC characters may be able to "succeed" easily but generate no result, and it varies drastically between characters - Batman punching the Empire State Building vs. Superman doing so). Also discussion of subplots, amd why the AP scale for attributes is logarithmic (Superman again).
Nothing here that radically changes my appreciation of the game, but not bad. At least one spot where I can see designer weaseling (or just logic error?)- he asserts that a comprehensive system better supports the different conceptions of a character by various writers, which I don't see any support for, particularly.
I've not written designer notes before, I will likely do so for H&S2E, and put them up for a download somewhere.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;546261At least one spot where I can see designer weaseling (or just logic error?)- he asserts that a comprehensive system better supports the different conceptions of a character by various writers, which I don't see any support for, particularly.
I
think what Greg Gorden was trying to say that the system needed to be comprehensive in the sense that that it covered all possible superhero powers and all possible levels thereof.
Thus you could easily slide Superman up or down the scale for Strength and add or remove powers competely to reflect Golden Age Superman (lowest strength, didn't have Flight, etc) who was different than Silver Age Superman (could move planets, fly through space etc.) who in turn was different than Post-Crisis Superman (dropped some in power from teh Silver Age version).
And it seems he wante to handle even smaller bits of time- such as a specific writer's run on the comic.
Quote from: gleichman;546269I think what Greg Gorden was trying to say that the system needed to be comprehensive in the sense that that it covered all possible superhero powers and all possible levels thereof.
Ah OK, you may be right - I think I'm misreading him. The relevant quote here (for anyone who doesn't have the book).
Quote from: Greg GordenDid the game simulate portions of the DC Universe in detail, or was the game system general enough to be valid for most of the DC Universe? I felt that two important points favored a comprehensive game system:
1) Once a player or gamemaster has learned the system, all of the other rules should fit into that system. A well-designed comprehensive system gains more from simplicity than it loses in simulation detail.
2) The DC Universe has a "slipperiness" to it. Different writers have different ideas about the same characters. Characters gain and lose abilities, and the exact nature of a character's powers and skills will change from writer to writer. A comprehensive system is general enough to handle the variations. A GMin 1988 will not have to rewrite the system in order to play in the 1988 DC Universe.
I took comprehensive as meaning e.g. 'universal mechanic' but in its entirety he may be meaning as you say having an exhaustive list of powers, etc.
I don't think DC caters particularly well to 'slipperiness' in general - I think it would benefit from either looser/lighter mechanics, or a system that lets a GM (or player) re-spec a character as agreed upon - but OK, if that's what he means I retract my charge of shenanigans. Having the powers written that let you create any character does at least give the GM something to work with.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;546303I think it would benefit from either looser/lighter mechanics, or a system that lets a GM (or player) re-spec a character as agreed upon - but OK, if that's what he means I retract my charge of shenanigans. Having the powers written that let you create any character does at least give the GM something to work with.
You should also remember when the game was written, it was in the 80s about five years after Champions- and Champions basically owed the superhero gaming market. That was who they were gunning for.
It was a time of heavier systems. My own personal Golden Age in rpgs.
Also getting a kick out of TSG 42 - letter from Kevin Siembieda complaining about a review of the Palladium Fantasy Role Playing Game, where the reviewer apparently claimed combat would take forever because of armour SDC acting as extra HPs. Kevin complains this is untrue since a roll over AR means damage goes straight to hit points.
I found it amusing since of course later on (e.g. the next revision of PFRPG) of course all characters will be getting SDC built in :)
Quote from: gleichman;546312You should also remember when the game was written, it was in the 80s about five years after Champions- and Champions basically owed the superhero gaming market. That was who they were gunning for.
It was a time of heavier systems. My own personal Golden Age in rpgs.
That's something else which is good to get in perspective actually - and the complexity discussion in the same review helped with that. As a teenager I purchased the 3rd edition of DC Heroes after reading a review of the 2nd edition (which at the time had just ceased publication) in a back issue of Dragon (#165), which was already a few years old. Ran it once and ended up with a moderately burning hatred of it for awhile - or at least a love/hate thing. At the time I'd seen MSH (my preferred supers system still) but never actually seen Champions; eventually picked up the 6th Ed. of Hero, which puts DC back in perspective.
Hmm Man-to-man (for GURPS) design notes.
Some discussion of square vs. hex grids, how "action points" were considered and discarded. Principles here show Steve likes reasonably high-complexity games, but has tried to write in "multilevel" (modular) complexity system. Discussion of realism vs. playability as regards hit points (one shot kills not being fun, however realistic).
Some stuff on history - TFT vs. GURPS. Steve defends GURPS as being different to TFT - probably since, well, otherwise its time for the suing... IMHO the lineage is very clear, although there are differences. He has to do a detailed comparison to emphasize the differences - damage rules are different (no longer weapon based), turns are shorter, more complex chargen, success rolls are similar although TFT uses variable dice (from 2d6 to 7d6) while GURPS always uses 3d6..
One of the key points he's mentioned here is the addition of the Health stat - where strong characters in GURPS are not necessarily tough - interesting that by 4th Ed. GURPS hit points are again based on Strength.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;546347Hmm Man-to-man (for GURPS) design notes.
I thought what made those design notes particularly good was that he laid out the principles he was applying to the design fairly clearly and gave examples of the application of the principles, which is what I really like to see in design notes like that.
Back in the day, The Space Gamer was my favorite gaming magazine (I own all of the PDFs that are now available and still have my print copies from 37 to the end of the SJG run). In the pre-Internet days, the reviews, industry news, and eclectic mix of other stuff worked really well, though lots of it hasn't retained the value it once had (e.g., old Apple ][ and TRS-80 computer game reviews, industry news, etc.). It's also not hard to find plenty of reviews online for the games they reviewed, though what made their reviews good was that they'd talk about the bad as well as the good and are, of course, written from the perspective of when those games were released. There are still some real gems in there, like the article that I recommended #42, though. Now, if I could only get all of the issues of Different Worlds in PDF and the first 100-150 issues of White Dwarf in PDF on a CD-ROM like the the Dragon Magazine archive, I'd be happy.
Quote from: John Morrow;546364I thought what made those design notes particularly good was that he laid out the principles he was applying to the design fairly clearly and gave examples of the application of the principles, which is what I really like to see in design notes like that.
Back in the day, The Space Gamer was my favorite gaming magazine (I own all of the PDFs that are now available and still have my print copies from 37 to the end of the SJG run). In the pre-Internet days, the reviews, industry news, and eclectic mix of other stuff worked really well, though lots of it hasn't retained the value it once had (e.g., old Apple ][ and TRS-80 computer game reviews, industry news, etc.). It's also not hard to find plenty of reviews online for the games they reviewed, though what made their reviews good was that they'd talk about the bad as well as the good and are, of course, written from the perspective of when those games were released. There are still some real gems in there, like the article that I recommended #42, though. Now, if I could only get all of the issues of Different Worlds in PDF and the first 100-150 issues of White Dwarf in PDF on a CD-ROM like the the Dragon Magazine archive, I'd be happy.
I was always a Dragon guy, but yes its good magazine, and I may need to get more of them. I did enjoy the Metamorphosis Alpha article - I never played it, but I played enough Gamma World to get it, I think. I liked his comments on how to make interesting monsters particularly.
And for the Man to Man notes in #76, yes I'd agree that Steve laid out his objectives really well here.
Also in #76, the DC Heroes review following the design notes is quite good. Allen Varney also did the review in Dragon #165 that I mentioned above and commented that he actually really liked the game in his earlier review despite readers thinking he panned it --having read it now, I can see why they would think that.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;546382I was always a Dragon guy, but yes its good magazine, and I may need to get more of them. I did enjoy the Metamorphosis Alpha article - I never played it, but I played enough Gamma World to get it, I think. I liked his comments on how to make interesting monsters particularly.
I was more of a Traveller guy than a D&D guy and while Dragon was excellent, it had a strong D&D and TSR focus while The Space Gamer had a more scrappy anything goes style that covered just about everything. In many ways, I think Dragon has held up better over time, but like I said, there are still some real gems in those old TSGs. Even some of the fiction is decent. Different Worlds also had some quality articles in it. For example, William Hamblin's "Creating Realistic Cities For Fantasy Adventures" in Different Worlds #39 is the best high-level (population, size, basic demographics) article I've seen for creating fantasy cities based on historical precedents. And of course there is Glenn Blacow's "Aspects of Adventure Gaming" (http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/theory/models/blacow.html) from DW #10, one of the early game style articles.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;546382And for the Man to Man notes in #76, yes I'd agree that Steve laid out his objectives really well here.
I thought the point where he talks about "The only thing more important than realism is playability" and talks about nerfing the combat system because one-blow kills didn't seem like much fun is something useful to acknowledge. The "Play should be quick. Character creation shouldn't" idea is fine for players but I find it problematic when GMing a game unless the GM fudges NPC creation.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;546382Also in #76, the DC Heroes review following the design notes is quite good. Allen Varney also did the review in Dragon #165 that I mentioned above and commented that he actually really liked the game in his earlier review despite readers thinking he panned it --having read it now, I can see why they would think that.
The reviews in The Space Gamer could get pretty picking and critical, so that one doesn't seem particularly so.
Seeing the Ken Rolston article on Paranoia in #76 reminds me of a convention panel where he talked about the cognitive dissonance of being a member of Amnesty International but also laughing at a torture table he was writing for Paranoia. My group was invited over Ken Rolston's house for a Warhammer FRP playtest for the planned magic books that were never published. I have some photocopied playtest manuscripts he gave us for the original Realms of Sorcery (quite different from what was later published -- there was a copy of it floating around online) as well as the Divine Magic book (which I don't think was ever put online).
I think Dragon probably hit its stride later (somewhere between about 150-220 or so I particularly enjoyed it), but went downhill in the 3E era until it become a monthly splatbook. I suppose I'm more interested in fantasy RPGs generally, though system-agnostic articles and reviews of other games in Dragon were some of the more interesting articles for me there.
More good points on GURPS design there - I don't think he'd considered NPC vs. PC build times much, though he does note that one of the proposed MTM supplements is "a whole pack of pregenerated characters".
Realism vs. playability in HPs is something that's I think very rarely even thought of these days - seems that playability won this decisively. It was interesting how he said he did this, too:
Quote from: Steve JacksonSo, at every little decision-point that went into making up the combat system, we chose in favor of less damage. Thus, no individual subsystem is wrong — but, added all together, they give a combat system that makes player characters a little harder to kill than "real people" are. Just because it's more fun.
This is the sort of thing its interesting to see in design notes since its something hard to see just looking at the rules. A fairly high-level bit of designing perhaps, where its changing actual play with only slight nudges of the rules.
See also this reply (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=546397&postcount=7), which I wrote in the "Why Hex Maps?" thread.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;546403Realism vs. playability in HPs is something that's I think very rarely even thought of these days - seems that playability won this decisively. It was interesting how he said he did this, too:
The 80s was a wonderful time because designers did think about such things and described them openly in designer notes or other articles.
This was partly due to the strong infuence of wargames on rpgs- nearly all wargames of the period (70s through the 80s) included Designer Notes as a matter of course, explaining the games abstractions and what they drew from to create them. The rpg designers of the era (many also designed wargames) followed the same tradition.
In the 90s, when realism and simulation was basically abandoned in rpg design across the board (although D&D had always abandoned them) the use of designer notes all but disappeared. Attention turned to settings and mechanics that were thought interesting for the sake of their own existence alone. Thus designers had little to talk about in in the way of traditional Designer Notes- and little talking did they do.
Thus I think your search is going to turn up the most interesting material from the era you're already exploring.
It's great stuff, and I must say that I'm impressed by your digging into it. A very rare thing these days.
I love a lot found in the Man-to-Man designer notes...
Quote from: Steve JacksonI wanted a game that would satisfy three basic needs. First, it would be detailed and realistic; I don't like games where the referee is forced to "fake it" constantly. Second, it would be logical and well-organized, Third, it would be adaptable to any setting and any level of play.
And
Quote from: Steve JacksonExperience proves that garners don't mind complicated rules, In fact, many of us thrive on them! What everybody hates is badly-organized rules
And many others could be slotted into my own
Age of Heroes designer notes without missing a beat. Of course both are 80s games, so such similar thoughts shouldn't be unexpected.
If you can't get that other Fuzion Jazz link to work, you can try this link (http://liveweb.archive.org/http://b-com.narod.ru/fuzion/fj.pdf) which is the same URL via Wayback Machine.
Quote from: gleichman;546419I love a lot found in the Man-to-Man designer notes...
I assumed you'd approve of those Designer's Notes. They were very well done which is why I recommended them the most highly. Sadly, his designers notes for The Fantasy Trip in TSG #29 are more a timeline of development and about business decisions than any sort of discussion of the design because I would have like to have seen a discussion of that game's design. You might also find the wargaming design links in this reply (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=546397&postcount=7) in the Why Hexes? interesting.
Quote from: John Morrow;546426I assumed you'd approve of those Designer's Notes. They were very well donem which is why I recommended them the most highly.
It was an excellent recommmendation and I thank you for bring them up. It allows me to reflect upon good times. I have a faint memory of much of what was in that article (likely from other sources) but I hadn't visited them in decades.
The only better designer notes I've seen were in wargames.
What was so striking to me is that Jackson development process wasn't that dissimilar than my own, down to the fact that I was also considering using Action Points very early in the
Age of Heroes designed and abandoned them for the exact same reason.
In the end, he ended up with a very different game than mine, but it's easy to see from those notes how he got there.
Quote from: John Morrow;546426Sadly, his designers notes for The Fantasy Trip in TSG #29 are more a timeline of development and about business decisions than any sort of discussion of the design because I would have like to have seen a discussion of that game's design.
As would I, and I would have love to see something about why all three games (M-t-M, TFT and GURPS) were so Stat focused (I've always considered that the prime failure in GURPS).
Quote from: gleichman;546409The 80s was a wonderful time because designers did think about such things and described them openly in designer notes or other articles.
This was partly due to the strong infuence of wargames on rpgs- nearly all wargames of the period (70s through the 80s) included Designer Notes as a matter of course, explaining the games abstractions and what they drew from to create them. The rpg designers of the era (many also designed wargames) followed the same tradition.
In the 90s, when realism and simulation was basically abandoned in rpg design across the board (although D&D had always abandoned them) the use of designer notes all but disappeared. Attention turned to settings and mechanics that were thought interesting for the sake of their own existence alone. Thus designers had little to talk about in in the way of traditional Designer Notes- and little talking did they do.
Thus I think your search is going to turn up the most interesting material from the era you're already exploring.
It's great stuff, and I must say that I'm impressed by your digging into it. A very rare thing these days.
Thanks - yes trying to get an appreciation of the older systems since alot of interesting ideas from back then have been forgotten, and am getting more of an appreciation for the principles involved. 80s systems are one of the areas in my knowledge where there are alot of gaps (I started gaming in '91) so much obliged for the assistance here, both of you.
John - thanks also for the hex notes - I'll probably have to get the design book referenced therein, too - had no idea it existed.
Also - if either of you missed it the first time it was here but are interested, I did have another thread going (The Design And Development Archive) where I've been noting interesting mechanics and so on that I've found and discussing theory in general, any input/opinions there particularly on older systems would also be very welcome - if not that's also fine since I think its reached about 14 pages already, and I must admit it suffers from exceptionally bad organization.
http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=21479
Quote from: gleichman;546428As would I, and I would have love to see something about why all three games (M-t-M, TFT and GURPS) were so Stat focused (I've always considered that the prime failure in GURPS).
I think having a look at SJGames forums to answer that, but nothing from Steve Jackson himself regarding this. I did find there is a sub-group of GURPS-ites there sometimes referred to as the "Cult of Stat Normalization" who would say that its not so much a matter of the game being stat-focussed, as it is that very high attributes should be quite rare - searches around that finds various discussion on Gaussian distributions and so forth.
I also wonder if Tunnels and Trolls played any part in influencing TFT's design in this respect, given that I can see possible influences in other places - ST-required, magical fatigue and armour for instance.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;546431Also - if either of you missed it the first time it was here but are interested, I did have another thread going (The Design And Development Archive) where I've been noting interesting mechanics and so on that I've found and discussing theory in general, any input/opinions there particularly on older systems would also be very welcome - if not that's also fine since I think its reached about 14 pages already, and I must admit it suffers from exceptionally bad organization.
http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=21479
It's a cool thread, and I'd advise collecting it on a blog or website of your own so it can be organized.
For my part I wish I had held onto more of my rule books from back in the day, but I didn't. So that leaves me with only 30 year old memories to talk about most games.
I do however have bunch of Shadowrun, Deadlands the Weird West, and of course just about anything from HERO. So if you have questions about those I'm quite willing to answer them. Just PM me.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;546465I think having a look at SJGames forums to answer that, but nothing from Steve Jackson himself regarding this.
Likely, but it's information direct from Steve Jackson that I'm looking for. And information from that actual period as modern RPG 'culture' may have cause him to change his answer (at least in public).
Modern gamers for example hate (and I do mean
hate) many of the design concepts from the 80s including such things as 'realism', comprehensive rules, avoiding on-the fly GM rulings and other things that were (as the designer notes you're now reading clearly show) foremost in the minds of designers of that era.
That's because each decade was a rebellion and reaction to the one previous. The designs of the late 70s and 80s were driven by the those unhappy with D&D, those of the 90s by those unhappy with everything that came before, those of 00s by those uphappy... and so on.
We are now showing hints of the cycle returning to itself in the OSR movement. I'm wonder if this will hold during the 10's or fade. And if the next wave will be a return to 80s style design again.
I doubt things will be that nice, typically the past once lost is lost, and in truth the OSR movement holds little in common with the D&D as it was actually played and viewed across the hobby from the 70s.
Thanks, fair enough. I'd be equally doubtful of any resurgence in 80s design. Today's marketplace where anyone can publish perhaps means a few such games may appear, but doubtful they can earn any major share of gamerdom.
Another trend looking at the design notes is that systems directly modelled off reality, have given way to systems modelled off other systems.....abstractions of abstractions.
Looking at e.g. the T2000 design notes in #75 not a great deal on why specific dice were chosen or so on, but the extensive notes on ballistics by Chadwick convince me he knows his stuff, and give some indication of the thought processes he's gone through (armour values based on millimetres of steel!). Very different to how things are normally approached these days where a design typically starts with an existing design and then tweaks it. Have to go dig up my own copy of this to get more context.
(On the subject of edition change by default adding more distance between the rules and reality, it might be interesteding to compare the 2nd Ed. of the Twilight 2000 rules to comment on whether it lost anything in the rebuild here, but requires more knowledge of the subject than I have).
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;546675Another trend looking at the design notes is that systems directly modelled off reality, have given way to systems modelled off other systems.....abstractions of abstractions.
An excellent way of describing it.
I don't imagine any modern RPG designer would make a trip to the JFK Special Warfare Center to do research on their game (as the author of T2000 did).
Quote from: John Morrow;546364Now, if I could only get all of the issues of Different Worlds in PDF and the first 100-150 issues of White Dwarf in PDF on a CD-ROM like the the Dragon Magazine archive, I'd be happy.
I've found there's a website here which sells pdfs of the Different Worlds magazine here, incidentally ($12 each however).
http://www.diffworlds.com/dw_01-12.htm
Also, I've been through the wargame design booklet referenced in the hexmap thread. It was interesting to see the definition of a wargame hammered out (Force/Time/Space considerations, with Time+Space equalling movement). Other than that:
*The notes on movement vs. board size were interesting in the light of say 3E/4E design - these have way more movement than the author recommends, with squares being there I suppose more to resolve 'zone of control' issues, I suppose.
*Downloaded Dragonquest's character sheet (only found the 2nd ed, however) - something which was highlighted as an example of complexity but I couldn't see anything noteworthy there.
*odd that I'd never thought of Chess as being a wargame with non-defined distances, in retrospect (duh).
*interesting to see that so many of the original RPG companies were wargame companies - I hadn't realized that GDW was, for instance (and I had forgotten about SPIs existence completely, until I got to the ads in the back).
The guidelines on playtesting in there struck me as particularly outstanding.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;547556I've found there's a website here which sells pdfs of the Different Worlds magazine here, incidentally ($12 each however).
http://www.diffworlds.com/dw_01-12.htm
Those are print copies and, as you point out, the price is steep. Because of that, I put off getting a few issues that I'd like to have, which are no longer available.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;547556*The notes on movement vs. board size were interesting in the light of say 3E/4E design - these have way more movement than the author recommends, with squares being there I suppose more to resolve 'zone of control' issues, I suppose.
While that book talks about at least 4 hexes per turn, the Greg Costikyan article I also referenced (The First Course on Game Design? (http://www.costik.com/weblog/2004_04_01_blogchive.html)) about SPI had this bit of advice:
QuoteAs an example of "tips and tricks," consider this piece of wisdom from Jim Dunnigan: units should move about seven hexes. In a typical wargame, with its 2' x 3' game-map, and 16mm hexes, the ability to advance roughly seven hexes in a turn provides a sense of reasonably rapid movement while enabling players to respond to each other in a reasonably logical fashion. If movement rates are much slower (say, 3 hexes a turn), the game feels slow and wooden. Contrariwise, if movement rates are much higher, the game can feel chaotic.
The normal D&D 3.x PC movement of 4-6 squares (20' to 30') per turn is well within those recommended ranges.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;547556*odd that I'd never thought of Chess as being a wargame with non-defined distances, in retrospect (duh).
It think it shows up more clearly in Chinese Chess, where the king is confined to a palace with guards and there is a river between both halves of the board.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;547556*interesting to see that so many of the original RPG companies were wargame companies - I hadn't realized that GDW was, for instance (and I had forgotten about SPIs existence completely, until I got to the ads in the back).
You should go back and read the Greg Costikyan articles I posted links to in the hex map discussion. His background was SPI. See also his SPI Died for Your Sins (http://www.costik.com/spisins.html).
Given my design process I suspect that the designers notes on most of my games would be longer than the game itself. The only one I'd feel particularly inclined to write said notes for would be Dark Passages and that would probably really drive people away.
The design notes for Age of Heroes 'sold' the game to a couple of my (initially reluctant) players, who wanted see if the game lived up to it's bold intent in execution and emergent play.
Also, writing design notes can help you re-examine ideas/mechanics that you took for granted or glossed over during writing the actual game.
Quote from: David Johansen;547564The only one I'd feel particularly inclined to write said notes for would be Dark Passages and that would probably really drive people away.
Can you expand on what you think would drive people away, at least at a high level?
Quote from: John Morrow;547563You should go back and read the Greg Costikyan articles I posted links to in the hex map discussion. His background was SPI. See also his SPI Died for Your Sins (http://www.costik.com/spisins.html).
Sad reading.
I really miss those days, the arrival of the new issue of S&T was a good day indeed. The combination of history and gaming (they would often match the main article to the subject covered by the game) was pure bliss.
Quote from: John Morrow;547590Can you expand on what you think would drive people away, at least at a high level?
Bearing in mind that I really, really loathe D&D and see its only utility being a bad experience to drive people away from its stranglehold on the mainstream in search of decent rules?
Quote from: John Morrow;547563Those are print copies and, as you point out, the price is steep. Because of that, I put off getting a few issues that I'd like to have, which are no longer available.
My apologies, hadn't realized those were print.
QuoteWhile that book talks about at least 4 hexes per turn, the Greg Costikyan article I also referenced (The First Course on Game Design? (http://www.costik.com/weblog/2004_04_01_blogchive.html)) about SPI had this bit of advice:
The normal D&D 3.x PC movement of 4-6 squares (20' to 30') per turn is well within those recommended ranges.
True, though a 3.x PC can hustle twice as far (8 to 12 squares) as a full turn if they don't otherwise attack. I've been struck before by the differences between, say, the D&D Miniatures game (which I used to play awhile back) and where IIRC it normally took perhaps 2 turns to fully close with the opponents and say Warhammer, which I've only really observed from a distance but which seemed to take longer and definitely set up on a much larger board.
I'm mentioning this only out of interest; how far apart PCs and opponents start will be very situational in any case, giving different contexts to the movement rate figure. As such I'm not going to conclude that 3.x movement is "wrong", or anything like that.
QuoteYou should go back and read the Greg Costikyan articles I posted links to in the hex map discussion. His background was SPI. See also his SPI Died for Your Sins (http://www.costik.com/spisins.html).
Thanks! I've read through these now. Excellent articles (overall you're helping me achieve a feeling of ignorance I haven't had for awhile :) ). I found GC's description of a game as aimed at producing particular feelings or experiences in actual play, and minor tweaks as producing major shifts in end play (e.g. Everquest vs. Ultima) quite enlightening. His writing style is very pleasant, too.
I had seen the SPI article before. Very much a shame what happened to it. From a wargame perspective a cataclysm, and still very unfortunate from just an RPG perspective, as regards DragonQuest and its other RPGs.
I found some more designer's notes for Metagaming's Wizard and Dragons of the Underearth on the Sword & Shield RPG Blog:
http://swordandshieldrpg.blogspot.com/2011/05/strange-fascination-2-wizard-tftmelee.html
http://swordandshieldrpg.blogspot.com/2011/04/tft-basic-set-that-never-was-and-wasnt.html
See also Howard Thompson's letter here (http://swordandshieldrpg.blogspot.com/2010/12/strange-fascination-melee-wizard-and.html) on the same blog.
Quote from: gleichman;546428As would I, and I would have love to see something about why all three games (M-t-M, TFT and GURPS) were so Stat focused (I've always considered that the prime failure in GURPS).
This is more fan appreciation from the Sword and Shield RPG blog, and not Steve Jackson designer notes, but it might offer some clues to what the thinking was there:
http://swordandshieldrpg.blogspot.com/2009/07/dicey-business.html
Also along the same heavy '80s game theme, you can find an article in Avalon Hill's Heroes Role-Playing Magazine titled So What's So Great About Powers & Perils by that game's author in a scan of the magazine here (http://www.powersandperils.org/scans/Heroes/Heroes%20v1%20-01.pdf).