A playtesting lesson from Reiner Knizia

[HeTeleports]

The gauntlet was thrown down in 2007.
I'm curious whether your game was ready for Gen Con 2008.


After re-reading through this post (and reviewing the game design video from Will Wright), I might come to a controversial statement.
But I'll only say it if we hear about whether the gauntlet challenge is still there.

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

I assume you are talking about Dirty Secrets. If so, then yes, the game was published for that GenCon and it has proved itself multiple times as a well-playtested design and well-written rules-explanation.

However, this thread is not an open discussion topic. I recommend deciding on which forum is best for the point you'd like to make and starting a new thread there, linking back to this one. Please send me a private message if you want help with that decision.

Best, Ron

[HeTeleports]

Thanks Ron. I must have missed the game's name in the post. I'm reading its playtests now.

[Quizoid]

TANGENT: It's interesting how you bring Eurogaming into the equation.  The hobby has changed my tastes in games (even narrowing down my scope of indies that I'm into).  The games are so well put together and balanced.  Something about getting into them has caused me to really be most attracted to games that don't rely on somewhat arbitrarily set parameters by a GM.  The best example I've found is Polaris, where there's really not even a lick of setting up a properly and numerically formidable situation for the heroes to go up against.  Instead, you're setting up (for lack of a better word) psychologically formidable and/or stimulating situations for your partner. 

Back to topic, I have not bought certain books due to reviews stating that the rules were unclear, so, I suppose in that way some games failed (for me) in terms of playtesting.  To bring it down to an even more elemental level, I'd say it's not the game itself that needs playtesting, but the product (being the words on the page as read by those whose shoulders you are not lurking over).  In this sense, board-gaming companies could learn from this rule too, as, all-too-often rules are unclear.  It seems rare I don't learn a game from both the rule book and Board Game Geek. 

[Quizoid]

I wouldn't say that a measure of a good game is if you'd play it over and over again for ever.  Some games are awesome experiences yet not emotionally taxing, or otherwise something you might not want to play all the time forever.  Also, there's just the matter of wanting variety of experience.  For a time, I was looking for the holy grail of games.  A Tri-Stat dX, a GURPS, a Universalis.  Something I could just use and stick with forever.  But now, that almost feels as silly as trying to find one TV show to watch over and over again forever.  I'm enjoying the specific experiences created by each different game, and the variety in the space between them.

[Ron Edwards]

Hi there,

This isn't really a discussion thread, but an instructional one for using the forum. I think a lot of the points you're making would be very powerful if they were part of Actual Play threads. I recommend that you start some threads aimed at these points there. Send me a private message if you'd like to get some orientation about that.

Best, Ron