Game Design Thought and Direction

I recently had a very interesting conversation with another game developer. Although we were working on the same type of game, our approach was very different. Where Tortured Earth opted for details and defined rules, their game design left more to the GM discretion. Our marketing focused more on personal  game demos, theirs focused on online presence. Point for point, we seemed to occupy opposite ends of some designers spectrum.

At the opening of the conversation, I feel the other game designer was being delicate about how he presented his arguments to me. Game designers basically come in two flavors: Bold and Bowl You Over or Politically Correct. Sometimes I feel I'm one of the few third varieties available: Honest. 

I feel I've come to fall into the third category mainly because I know I have constructed the game I want to play. Not only is it something I want to play but it's something I want to write for, continue to contribute to, and expand upon. I really do like seeing other solutions available to the problems we've had to face.

An interesting tidbit to come out of the conversation was their location. They are located in northern Canada. I'm in south Louisiana. We've both run developmental playtests and have constructed our games, modified our rules, and shaped our product as a result of those sessions. With that little piece of insight, I can't help but wonder if the local gaming community preferences are different. Is there some cultural line existing between our two sample populations.

During the past four years, the original version of Tortured Earth has been play tested throughout the southeastern United States. We've migrated to practically all conventions along the Gulf Coast, ranged as far west as New Mexico and as far north as Kentucky to Missouri. Our play sessions over that time have indicated weak spots within the system, areas of underdevelopment, and segments needing consolidation. We've face an onslaught of rules lawyers who have picked apart our system and given us incredible levels of feedback.

This other developmental team is currently undergoing similar developmental pains. However, their sessions seem to reveal a step on the side of rules light. Where our GMs prefer to close loopholes and support guidelines to skill use, their GMs lean more towards improvisation of rules and loose interpretations of mechanics.

I find the question fascinating. Could game design and preference be a regional ideology or do the playtest groups represent errant data points on an otherwise linear design plan? In speaking with the gentleman, I can honestly say I wish his team the best of luck. They bring some interesting concepts to the table and pose rather unique marketing plans. In closing our conversation, I asked he keep in touch with me. As more elements of their game are released, I hope to see a continual growth in both their concept and rule formulation. For more about their game, see Round Table.

Thanks again, guys! 

K. B. Kidder

If you are checking out this post for the first time, you may access our website by clicking here: Tortured Earth

Character species released for review: Allorn, Dwarf, Elf, Eoceph, and Goblin.

Combat Creatures released for review: Braunach, Faeda, Fetid Hound, Minotaur, and Wolf.

If you are interested in the creature development process, you may submit your own creatures by filling out the following form. We will review the forms before publishing the creatures to the website. Creature Creation Form

If you would like to see what Tortured Earth looks like, the GM portion of the rule book is available as a free download on the Tortured Earth Home Page. Tortured Earth Beta GM Guide