10 - How to Avoid Unnecessary Effort in the First Prototype (Part 3)

In the third part about prototypes, we focus on testers:

Everywhere you read that a prototype should be inexpensive. It should be quickly discardable if it doesn’t work. It shouldn’t be too complex to modify. You will constantly be swapping and improving things. Additionally, mechanics should be added gradually. Furthermore, you don’t want to torment your testers, so it would be good if the game already functions reasonably well when you invite them.

If you want your testers to look at a game more than once, it helps if the game is already somewhat functional and has fun elements built in. That’s why it’s beneficial to try it out a few times beforehand with an especially enthusiastic friend. However, keep in mind that while a two-player game is easy to test with just two people, games designed for larger groups can be difficult to test with only two players.

For your board game, you will need many test rounds. Since you will typically need multiple players, this means you will also need a sufficient number of testers. That’s why it’s important to keep your testers engaged so they want to play multiple versions. You’ll have a few friends who really enjoy your game and will want to test different versions. However, board game preferences vary widely—not every player enjoys every type of mechanic or genre. This doesn’t mean your friends won’t want to help, but rotating testers and implementing improvements between sessions can ensure they see progress.

The duration of the game also affects test motivation. A game that can be completed in under an hour is much easier to bring to the table than a longer one. Additionally, frustration with unfinished mechanics is less severe in a shorter game than one that lasts two to three hours. If a longer game isn’t going well, it’s often better to end the session early. The feedback gathered will usually be enough to identify key issues.

It’s particularly important to test the game with strangers and/or blind testing (without assistance). Players should be able to complete a game based solely on the instructions, with no external help. However, before exposing the game to blind or public testing, the prototype should have already gone through multiple test rounds and reached a certain level of quality. While these settings can provide highly valuable feedback, they can also cause significant frustration.

For online prototype testing—where it’s easier to find remote testers—platforms like Tabletop Simulator or Tabletopia are useful.

My game is available on Tabletop Simulator in both German and English. If you’d like to try Magical Friends, you just need friends with Tabletop Simulator and can access it directly via the Steam Workshop: Steam Workshop Link. When launching the game, you’ll be notified that a link is being opened, through which a feedback form can be completed.

This is a very early form of the tabletop simulator version, now it almost looks like the real game.

I’d be happy about feedback, please write in the comments.

9 - How to Prevent Unnecessary Effort in the First Prototype (Part 2)

Heute geht es dort weiter, wo ich zuletzt aufgehört habe:

Überall liest man, dass ein Prototyp billig sein soll. So ein Prototyp soll schnell verwerfbar sein, falls er nicht funktioniert. Er soll nicht aufwendig sein, wenn man etwas verändern möchte. Man wird ständig Dinge austauschen und verbessern. Außerdem soll man Mechaniken nach und nach hinzufügen. Weiters möchte man seine Tester nicht quälen, es wäre also gut, wenn das Spiel schon einigermaßen funktioniert, wenn man Tester einlädt.

Zum Thema „Mechaniken nur nach und nach hinzuzufügen“ kann man einiges sagen. Generell ist es immer leichter, ein Spiel nach und nach komplexer zu gestalten und einen Kniff hier oder da hinzuzufügen, es aber an Stellen simpler zu machen, ist deutlich schwieriger. Wenn ein Spiel leicht zu lernen, aber schwer zu meistern ist, hat man auf jeden Fall etwas gut gemacht. So etwas anzustreben, ist nie verkehrt. Nachträglich etwas zu vereinfachen, bedeutet aber oft, dass man etwas verliert, wofür eine bestimmte Regel eingeführt wurde. Meistens taucht dann ein Problem wieder auf, das man damit gelöst hatte. Elegantere Lösungen sind überwiegend die, in denen man eine Mechanik durch eine schönere austauscht, in der dieses Problem gar nicht erst auftaucht. Das ist aber gar nicht so leicht, da man sich dafür als Designer erst mal von seiner ursprünglichen Idee loslösen muss. Also besser mit einem Minimum an Mechaniken beginnen und danach hinzufügen, was sich gut anfühlt.

Was bedeutet ein Minimum an Mechaniken? Unterschiedliche Spieltypen bedienen sich mehr oder weniger Mechaniken. Partyspiele oder kurze Kartenspiele bauen meist auf eine einzelne Mechanik auf. Dafür einen schnell verwerfbaren Prototypen zu erstellen, ist sehr angenehm und leicht. Schwieriger werden allerdings größere Spiele, Ideen, bei denen es mehrere Spielphasen gibt oder in denen man Mechaniken verknüpfen möchte. Beispielsweise wird in Magical Friends die Zugreihenfolge und die Kreaturenauswahl über eine Art Bietmechanik gelöst und das Spiel auf dem Spielbrett bedient sich einer anderen einfachen Mechanik.

Dabei hilft es sehr, wenn es Mechaniken sind, die man schon aus anderen Spielen kennt. Bietmechaniken gibt es in vielen Spielen, daran kann man schon vor dem Testen erkennen, welche Interaktionen bei der Mechanik besser und welche schlechter funktionieren könnten. Neue Mechaniken sind schwieriger. In dem Fall ist es hilfreich, wieder sehr simpel zu beginnen und sie nach und nach auszufeilen.

Gerade, wenn man ein größeres Spiel machen möchte, ist es sehr zu empfehlen, wenn man schon einige beliebte Spiele des entsprechenden Genres gespielt hat. Die Wertungen auf Boardgamegeek.com müssen nicht unbedingt den eigenen entsprechen, schaut man sich dort allerdings die Top 10 Spiele eines Genres an, wird man selbst, wenn einem die Spiele teilweise nicht so gut gefallen, einige tolle Umsetzungen von bestimmten Mechaniken finden. Es gibt Gründe, warum diese Spiele so beliebt sind. Versuche, sie zu finden, und überlege, ob sie für dein Spiel relevant sein könnten.

Nächste Woche werde ich dieses Thema fortsetzen, schreib mir einen Kommentar, wenn du dem Ganzen etwas hinzufügen möchtest. Ich und die anderen Leser freuen uns darüber.

Wenn du den Blog interessant findest, freue ich mich wenn du ihn abonnierst, das gibt mir Feedback ob Interesse dafür besteht.

Today, we continue where I left off last time.

Everywhere you read that a prototype should be cheap. Such a prototype should be easily discarded if it doesn’t work. It should not be complicated if changes need to be made. You will constantly replace and improve things. Additionally, mechanics should be added gradually. Furthermore, you don’t want to torment your testers—it would be good if the game already functions reasonably well when you invite testers.

There’s a lot to say about adding mechanics gradually. Generally, it is always easier to make a game progressively more complex and add a twist here or there, but making it simpler in certain areas is much more difficult. If a game is easy to learn but hard to master, you’ve definitely done something right. Striving for this is never a bad idea. Simplifying something afterward often means losing something for which a particular rule was introduced. Usually, a problem then resurfaces that had been solved by that rule. The most elegant solutions are those in which a mechanic is replaced by a more refined one that doesn’t introduce the original problem at all. However, this is not easy, because as a designer, you first have to detach yourself from your original idea. So, it’s better to start with a minimal set of mechanics and then add what feels right.

What does a minimum set of mechanics mean? Different types of games rely on more or fewer mechanics. Party games or short card games are often built on a single mechanic. Creating a quickly discardable prototype for such games is very convenient and easy. Larger games, however, become more challenging—ideas involving multiple game phases or mechanics that need to be interconnected. For example, in Magical Friends, the turn order and creature selection are resolved through a type of bidding mechanic, while the gameplay on the board uses another simple mechanic.

It is very helpful when mechanics are familiar from other games. Bidding mechanics exist in many games, and even before testing, you can already identify which interactions might work better or worse within that mechanic. New mechanics are trickier. In such cases, it is useful to start very simply and refine them gradually.

If you want to create a larger game, it is highly recommended to have played several popular games of the corresponding genre. Boardgamegeek.com rankings may not always match your personal preferences, but if you look at the top 10 games in a genre, even if you don’t love all of them, you will find great implementations of specific mechanics. There are reasons why these games are so popular. Try to identify those reasons and consider whether they might be relevant to your game.

Next week, I will continue this topic. Feel free to leave a comment if you want to add something—my readers and I would love to hear from you! If you find the blog interesting, I’d appreciate it if you subscribe, as it gives me feedback on the level of interest.

8 - How to Prevent Unnecessary Effort in the First Prototype (Part 1)

In this post, I’ll share my approach to creating a prototype, the missteps I made, and what I would do differently next time. There were several areas where I invested extra effort that turned out to be unnecessary.

It's widely advised that a prototype should be inexpensive, easy to discard if it doesn’t work, and simple to modify when changes are needed. Prototyping is an ongoing process of swapping out components, refining mechanics, and gradually adding new elements. Additionally, while testers should be challenged, you don’t want them to struggle with a game that barely functions—so ensuring basic playability before inviting testers is crucial.

In this first part, I’ll address the bolded points above. The remaining topics will be covered in one or more future blog posts.

Designing a Flexible Prototype

Some aspects of prototyping make implementation easier, while others present challenges. For instance, card and dice games are relatively simple to prototype—blank dice can be used to create custom faces, and game boards can easily be printed. Figures and cardboard standees are trickier but can often be sourced from existing games. Some games—like Magical Friends—rely heavily on visual elements for clarity. While prototypes don’t need to look polished, when a game features numerous distinct creatures on the board, maintaining clear visuals during testing becomes essential.

Here’s a mistake I made: I used images from the internet for my prototype. While this made it visually appealing right away, it created major limitations in testing. Copyright restrictions meant I couldn’t easily share the prototype or post photos online. If I were to develop another game, I’d either purchase a set of affordable stock images or find freely available graphics that I could legally use. Today, I’d likely generate these images using AI— when I created Magical Friends, tools weren’t as advanced. Ultimately, spending excessive time hunting for the perfect visuals isn’t necessary—at this stage, aesthetics should take a backseat to functionality.

An early prototype from 2019

A Good Approach: Avoid Creating 40 Different Creature Cards (with Standees) for Your First Prototype

For initial tests, a smaller number of creature cards is more than sufficient. Even if a full set is necessary to play the game properly, early tests can be conducted with shorter rounds. At this stage, the primary goal is to determine whether the game mechanics work and are enjoyable. Additionally, modifying something that affects all 40 cards requires an enormous amount of effort.

I’ve created prototypes for other game ideas before—some of which didn’t work—and I’m grateful that the effort put into Magical Friends wasn’t wasted. However, testing continued to be time-consuming, because I was reluctant to take a step back and simplify the prototype (which, in this case, primarily meant making it look less visually appealing).

That said, having a more elaborate prototype isn’t necessarily a bad thing. For testers, it can be nice to have a somewhat polished version even in the early stages. The real challenge is that modifying materials takes significantly more time than coming up with actual improvements for the game itself.

Despite all this, I’ll be keeping future prototypes simpler!

I have plenty more to say on this topic, but this post would become overwhelming. So, expect more soon! Do you have any thoughts or questions? Feel free to comment or reach out to me.