Exploring creativity: Making questions

Being creative is a desirable trait for a card designer. It helps you explore design space, discover things you didn't knew, and make your game feel fresh and different. It is also very fun, and while not all ideas can be included, some could be used in another new game.

There are many tricks for creativity. One that I like to use is to ask yourself questions to which you don't have an answer. From my experience, the best ones are those that require you to write a list, the longer, the better. Most people tend to stop looking at the first answer to their question, so allowing multiple answers is a way to make people look for more solutions.

A trick that tends to work, is to ask for all members of a group that satisfy a condition. Asking for the best members is not very good, because the human mind works like the cache of a computer. It looks first within a small list of elements from the recent memory, and if none of these work, then digs deeper into memory and search for a matching element. So, when asked for the best music band, a person will name the best group from that small list. If the person is required to think more than ten seconds about it, it is almost guaranteed that he or she will find better answers that are deeper in his or her memory.

An example question could be: "What are all the things you can do to a card?". It is interesting to explore not just the desirable actions, but also undesirable ones, to prevent unexpected problems that might arise; you might include some blank cards just in case a card gets lost or damaged. For this example, I'll restrict myself to just positive uses for a single card, ignoring decks and card-to-card interactions.

Good things you can do to a card:
Turn it sideways.
Hide info in the other side of the card.
Flip it.
Throw it to the air or to a hat.
Put it in some place/zone.
Pick it from some place/zone.
Set any number of values on it.
Spin it.
Memorize it.
Depict something in it.
Give it/Pick it from another person.
Cover it, totally or partially.
Put small things over it/under it.
Rate it.
Put opposite elements on different sides of the card.
Assign different meanings to it in different contexts/zones.
Put it horizontally, vertically, or inclined.
Give it a different shape, color or size.
Activate it (the rules should explain how to do it).
Talk to it.

Not all of these are useful, but the more design tools, the less restricted I will be while designing my game. For this reason, I'll add more ideas to this post as they come to me. I'm going to reserve card-to-card considerations and alike for another posts if there is enough interest, so say what you think about it!

How not to start a card game

For this entry, I was looking for advice I could give about how to start a card game. I could have spent an hour or two talking about the paperwork, the designs, the intrinsic elements of the process of creating a card game, and a bunch more of boring stuff that I've yet to mention. Even though I plan to talk about them someday, I promised last entry that this one would be shorter. That's why I'll take the other path, and talk about how not to start a card game.

While analyzing and designing card games, I've found some starting points that seemed ok at first sight, but that later in the process show their ugly face. Some in particular are very dangerous, as they almost always end being a disaster. I thought it would be a good idea to put some warning signs beforehand, so that new designers don't take the same path as me and waste their time with unworkable, uncommercial products. Here is a list of ideas you shouldn't bother to try:

• Games based around someone else's Intelectual Property:
  
  I mention this sign first because it is most commonly seen in new designers. Its popularity comes from the designer not having to bother with the background work, as it uses one done by another author. Game elements and cards are put into place fast by taking them directly from the source, and along with a card game system "borrowed" from another card game, the whole project can be finished in a single day. That is how Japan's card game industry works, by the way.
  
  Many downsides of this approach are summarized on Make up your own damned IP, a worth reading article from the blog InvertedCastle. Even with the owner's permission, the game's fate will become deeply attached to the original source, and it will fade away with it.
  
  
• Games with which you can play poker:
  
  Never, ever, design a card game with that idea on mind. On the surface, it looks as an added value. In practice, it suggests people that they could be playing poker instead of your game (not the best idea you would want to transmit). The nail in the coffin arrives when you realize that people might just buy a poker standard deck to play your game. Ouch!
  
  
• Strategy Games based around rock, paper, scissors:
  
  I've never understood why people associate strategy with rock, paper, scissors. For starters, the only strategy that works in that game is the lack of any discernible strategy. The only appeal the game could have, is the feeling that it is about reading the opponent's mind, which is completely lost once you add the randomness inherent to almost all card games.
  
  Note that the game includes as a principle that every tactic has a countermeasure, a property that is always interesting to have in a strategy game.
  

These aren't the only bad ideas you could attempt, but in any case, they would be material for another post. Hope you liked it!

So... what do you want to accomplish?

Let's assume that you get enough energy to create a card game from start to finish, and you are eager to sit down and start writing cards in your notebook. That's a conceivable scenario, and in fact, almost everyone I know started this way, including myself.

Now, although that's a perfectly valid way to start a game, you might want to ask yourself beforehand if that's what you really want to do. You might be wondering why. Hadn't I assumed at the start that you wanted to create a game, afterall? Well, this is because there's something that you might not have considered yet: while you wanted to design a game, the question is, which one?

Before going deeper on the question, I'll discuss some concepts about game design. Games are composed by a set of rules, wich form the game's internal structure. These rules define what the game resources are (be them be cards, points, dice, or any other with which the designer comes up), and their meaning. The logic conclusion is that in order to start designing cards, you need to abide to a certain set of rules.

Now, most people don't spontaneously decide to create a card game. What it happens is that they find a card game that they enjoy, and this is what gives them the idea of making their own. Because of that, they are inclined to adopt the set of rules of the original game, with maybe some small changes to adapt it to their personal tastes. The problem with this approach is that it limits too much what can be done with the game, so the end result will be very similar to the original source. Is that what you want to accomplish?

When working with a source reference, you can make changes to it at different levels of abstraction. The higher the level, the more impact the change has in the game, and the more different they will be in a subjetive scale of likeness. Each type of change has its advantages, and it's more adequated to a different kind of project. Here's a brief description of each one that I have improvised, ranging from most concrete to most abstract:

Type of change: Tweak.
Description: This is the most basic (low-level) change that can be done to a game. Tweaks include adjusting values to cards to maintain game balance, flavor changes, polishing the wording, and adding and removing cards to the game. Changes to the game rules are minor (if at all), and no new zones, resources, nor fields are added or removed. The nature of these changes is so basic that the result is still perceived as the same game, but they are nonetheless important. They can be the difference between a fun game and an unfun one.
Good for: New editions, new attempts at getting a game published, expansion sets, clones.
Not so good for: compilations, new games.
Skills required: Common sense, attention to detail, experience with the game.

Type of change: Variant.
Description: Tweaks played according to the game rules, variants play with the game rules. Variants tipically change the starting configuration, and can also add or remove game zones. No new systems are created, but sometimes some systems (for example, a "combat" system) work different. Still, the source game is still easily recognizable in the final product. Because they require little work and knowledge, most designers start either with a tweak or a variant of their favorite game.
Good for: New game modes, mods, spin-offs, compilations.
Not so good for: Expansion sets, showing your talent as a game designer.
Skills required: Out-of-the-box thinking. Ambition.

Type of change: Redesign.
Description: Tweaks left the game rules untouched. Variants changed some rules, but the systems remained constant. Redesign, likewise, changes the systems, and only abides to the fundamental concepts of the source. That way, it takes advantage of all the elements that made the original so good, without tying the designer to the old design.
Good for: Look-alikes. New games. Sequels. Publishing lines.
Not so good for: Spin-offs.
Skills required: Creativeness. Design skills. Abstract thinking.

Type of change: Departure.
Description: At this level of abstraction, changes can be made to the fundamental concepts of the referenced game (some examples of them are bluffing, diplomacy, or tactical battle), so that the game doesn't have to use the same. In fact, the only limits here are the fundamental aspects of card games. Working at this level, you don't even need a reference game, so the only practical reason to have one is to take away from it the concepts that don't work, or to create something completely different to it. Of course, this new game will have to stand on its own, and it's not easy working at such high levels of abstraction. A mistake here means that the game will be broken beyond repair, as it will have a fundamental flaw that cannot be corrected.
Good for: Basis for follow-ups. Avoiding comparisons. Showing your talent as a game designer.
Not so good for: Sequels.
Skills required: Abstract thinking. Vision of the global picture. Talent.

And that was all! I didn't thought it would take so much text, hope the next entries are much, much shorter.

Why do I never seem able to finish a game?

Let's say you've been playing for like a month this cool new card game. You have enjoyed it quite a bit, but the novelty starts wearing off. Then, in a spark of creativity, you come up with what seems to be a brilliant idea: you could make your own card game! Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

That's because everybody and his dog has had that same idea at some moment in his gaming life. The vast majority of those games never materialize, though. Why is that so? It doesn't seem to be that hard.

The main reason those games are abandoned is because most people makes the mistake of comparing the experience of creating a game with the one of playing it, when they're completely different. They think about the final product, but not about the long process that precedes it. As it's a lot of hard work, and most people don't find it fun, the game is abandoned long before they have a chance of playing it. Ironically, playtesting is a very tedious step: you have to print tons of proxies, play a dozen of mostly broken games, and then making changes to the initial design that will make all the previously printed proxies useless. Let's not enter in details if the game allows players to build their own decks...

Another reason these games never get done, is because the lack of long-term motivation. See, the excitement of starting a new project is strong enough to get you moving, but also short enough that it becomes satisfied pretty soon. Once satisfied, you lose all interest on the project (much like you stop drinking when you are no longer thirsty). If you want to finish a game, you need a motivation that lasts up till it's done. Money and love are strong ones, but can't be used for everything, so find one that suits you.

There's one last reason I want to mention: disappointment. The game is shafted because it's not up to the expectatives, has a major flaw somewhere, or it's just not fun. That could be expected if the designer was testing new things (which don't always deliver), but also by working with no clear direction. Before starting a project, you should have a good idea of what are you looking for, and more importantly, what are you trying to accomplish. But that's a matter for another post.

Here come the Card Game Tailors!

Do you enjoy design? Have you ever wanted to create a game, but you didn't know where to start? Are you looking for designers who have a clue about game balance and management? Do you want to know about the worst card game ever designed? Then this might be the right place for you!

My nickname is DrJones, and I've been designing card games for some years now. Many people have told me that they like what I do, and that I should try to get a job at the Game Industry. Of course, it would be better if those words came from the Game Industry itself, but when many different people tell you the same thing, you should at least consider it.

So, what can I do to fulfill this goal? Designing a card game is a good start! I get to learn more while I develop a portfolio to showcase, and with a bit of luck, some of my games might get published in an uncertain future! However, that's not enough. All my work becomes irrelevant if I don't have a way to get noticed by the guys at charge. After a bit of thinking, I opted for creating this blog about game design. But don't dismiss it right now as if it were just an exercise about shameless self-promotion. The plan is to make it so interesting and fun that it will achieve its purpose as a mere by-product. At least, that's the idea.

Meanwhile, I hope you enjoy the site enough to stay. Thanks for your time!