Over the past several months, we've been hard at work at #arcsboardgame. The work has been so intense that I haven't had time to write up new design/developer diaries to keep everyone posted. Eventually, I'd like to start doing that again, but here's a 🧵in the meantime.
Arcs has been, by far, the most challenging project I've ever undertaken and I think that's probably true for the studio at large. The game presents steep demands to basically every aspect of how we make games here.
Today, I want to look at one small challenge in the game's campaign design and give you a sense of how the game tangles with it. Let's talk about templating!
By templating, I mean the process by which the game presents its design. Templating is at the intersection of a game's language-system, its mechanical design, and its graphic design.
To get a sense of how tricky this is for Arcs, it's worth stepping back and reminding everyone of the core challenge. Arcs has 24 plotlines in three different lengths. Every plotline is essentially a little Root-Legacy game which explains the emergent asymmetry of a position.
Despite the vast differences in each plotline, they all need to use the same template. In Root terms, this would mean that each plotline would basically need to have the same player board layout. If you've played Root, you know this is impossible. Why go through the trouble?
For instance, we could just have a different player board for each act of the story. It'll be a bunch of extra punchboard, but backers love content right?! But, even that would not do the trick because Arcs is not Root Legacy, it's Build-A-Root.
Each session, you will have a single plotline which informs your powers, what you can unlock, and your objectives (as well as certain elements of the larger game). If you decide to change horses midstream, you don't abandon the things you've a already unlocked. Things stack.
This is a very exciting conceit because it allows for a much more free-form campaign experience that is perfectly in keeping with the kinds of emergent, player-driven experiences we build at @LederGames. BUT it is a nightmare when it comes to templating content.
I could spend probably a few thousand words talking about the frenzied past few months, but I think it might be more fun to just show off some of the game's content so you can get a sense of how it all works. Let's start with an easy one.
(Obvious caveat, this game is still in development, needs tons of art, development, proofing, whatnot. Nothing here is final).
At the start of the game you get 2 fate cards. You select one and grab the associated content (we're thinking tuck boxes but I'll save the production/product discussion for another time).
Let's say you pick the Steward. You'll then get a box with a little brick of cards, tokens, and pieces that you might need. This brick is organized into layers for each act. The first card you'll see is the act 1 setup card. You'll follow it and stop when you get to the next act.
Essentially, the setup cards act as little chapter stops and guides to the content. After you resolve them, you put them in a part of the game box called the "scrap heap" this is stuff that is discarded until the end of the campaign just to get it out of the way.
This plotline has a few critical elements. First, you'll see it comes with an objective. For the Steward they need to make sure the empire stays in control of the far corners of the Reach. If they fail, they can make up the difference by paying VP (power).
If they complete this objective, they get to unlock Courtly Favors, which is a handy ability. Any cards that don't get unlocked are scrapped at the end of the game. Competition also means that they can advance their plot to the next act if they wish.
Lastly, they will automatically gain Fleet Influence at the start of the game. As long as they can pay for its upkeep in the intermissions, they can keep this card throughout the game, no matter what else happens.
Let's look at Act 2.
In Act two, the rules of the game start to shift for everyone. In this plotline, that means the rise of the First Regent. Basically, players unify their supplies of cubes are must play a tricky area majority game where the winner gets to control the tax mechanism.
Usually, this hastens the decline of the empire, and most players decide they'd rather be Outlaws. So, Act three provides the Steward with some room to pivot.
In addition to beefing up Imperial Ships and providing a way to establish remote power centers with Imperial Messengers and Imperial Support (basically letting you drop infrastructure on empty slots around the map), players also gain Imperial Seal.
This is a "Summit Power" means means that during the negotiation phase (Summits), you can bribe other outlaws to rejoin the fold.
And, you'll notice too that the third act has a End-Game Scoring trigger. This just provides a steady stream of points (it's checked at the end of each hand) for reasserting imperial authority across the Reach. All act 3 conditions have scoring that is structured like this.
But, what if you didn't want to play through this whole plotline? During the upkeep phase, an additional number of fate cards linked to the next set of plotlines (in the case of the first intermission, it's the B plotlines which are two acts) are revealed.
So, when it comes to your turn to resolve upkeep, you have a look at a public display of these fate cards (1 for each player) and have the option of activating it instead. If you do, you swap out your current plotline box for the one you chose.
Take Pathfinder for instance. The first act only has 2 cards, but they both dramatically alter how you will play the game. During setup, you'll have to forsake all of your cities and spaceports and you'll instead be worried about finding the location of a hidden gate on the map.
To do this, you'll have to change out your player board for a flagship board, which essentially puts you in "vagabond mode" for the rest of the campaign.
Critically, you could abandon this plotline as well. Maybe in the third act you opt to become a peacekeeper, committed to ending the war that has engulfed your people. Of course, you'll have to do this while still managing things from your flagship rather than your little empire.
And that's really what makes this thing so special. By the end of the campaign, you're not just the peacekeeper. You're the Steward who spurned the empire, tried to find another home, grew disillusioned, and came back to try to fix what they left behind.
I'll add that I more-or-less picked this path at random. There are 24 of this dang things and they combine in all sorts of weird and wonderful ways.
This game has been hard to work on for lots of reasons, but I can't think of any project I'd rather be working on. It's exactly the sort of thing we do well at @LederGames. It's too demanding for a small studio, but too risky for a big studio. I can't wait for you to see it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I've been thinking about this piece by @Charlie_L_Hall today. It's a nicely reported article and worth your time. But, I think it also leaves out some important things. 🧵
Most everything written about crowdfunding these days always mentions two things: first, that crowdfunding has exploded over the past fifteen years and, second, that there appears to be some burnout--both among creators and consumers for what seems like an endless hype cycle.
Really this is a less interesting point than it seems because the first point helps us explain the second. It's pretty simple really. In the beginning, the culture around crowdfunding and tabletop was pretty small. If you wanted to make money you had to appeal to a wide swath.
Today I wanted to highlight the work of two of our previewers who looked at Arcs before the campaign and say a little about the role of previewers in our KS generally. 🧵
It's worth mentioning that the world of KS previewers is...a little goofy. There's a lot of paid-hype people out there and a lot of folks looking for ways to get easy clicks. None of this is even necessarily a bad thing, it's just the nature of that corner of tabletop media.
At Leder (and WGG) we've been lucky enough to not have to rely on those folks. I say "lucky" because, as a a Midwesterner, that kind of self-promotion and hype-generation makes me uncomfortable. I can see the utility but it's not something I want to use.
I had a chance to play @Koenigvonsiam's new game, Brian Boru, today. It's really wonderful and deserving of your time. It's also given me a lot to think about, so I thought I'd write a little about the experience of playing it as designer and the idea of originality in design. 🧵
I've been following Peer's work for a long time and adore it. The King of Siam (rethemed these days to The King is Dead) remains one of my most played games. But, more than that, KoS helped me think through some elements in the design I was working on at the time, Pax Pamir (1e).
At the time, Pamir was a mess. The game was caught between two different design schools and I wasn't sure if it was possible to tell the stories I wanted to tell. KoS hit me like a bolt of lightening. It somehow did twice as much in half of the space and showed me a way forward.
For the past year, I've been working on a new title for Leder Games. It's still got a long way to go, but it's starting to take a very clear shape. Today, I want to share a little bit about what it is and what I hope to do with it. The working title is Arcs.
Arcs started very differently from any other game I've worked on. Normally, after finishing a game, I feel pretty exhausted. But, after finishing Oath, I was filled with all sorts of odd ideas that didn't fit into that game. I wanted to stay in the space but design something new.
At the time, we were working on a space game in the studio. I asked Patrick if I could play around with that setting but using a different design framework. If we liked it, we could use it for his game, or it could become it's own project or do something else.
To celebrate the amazing @ShutUpShow review of Oath by @TomBrewstErr () I want to take some time today to talk about how much of a team effort the game was. Nearly everyone on staff contributed in one way or another.
Surprising no one, Oath was a massive project. We could have probably built three full games in the time it took to make Oath.
The early steps of the design began right after we finished Root (early 2018). Most of the early conversations about the game were with @PatrickLeder where we talked about the difficulties of building a campaign game without an ending.
Today Drew and I put up the pre-launch page for the new edition of John Company. If you'd like to know when the game goes live, you can sign up here. kickstarter.com/projects/12432…
I'll be writing a lot more about the design in the coming months. But it seemed like a good time to tackle a few big questions in one place.
John Company is the game I never stop working on. It was started back in 2009(!) and it kept humming in the back of my head every since. In a way, all of the other history games I've done are just outgrowths of it. It is a very big design with a lot to say.