Choice and Time: When do negative points work in games?

Photo

One of the best lessons from UnPub 5 is how difficult it is to make negative point scoring feel right. Negative Point Scoring is pretty much what it sounds like: A mechanism in which players can lose points and possibly end up in negative range at the end of the game. Let me back up a bit to give you some background on A La Kart:


Hazards in A La Kart
Each turn, players make a blind bid of one card. The player who bids the highest "speed" number on their card (after various modifiers based on player-powers) wins the first available prize from the track. Bear in mind that the prize cards are set in the track randomly, so the first available prizes might actually be detrimental hazards.

Originally, my system for scoring hazards was that the first didn't cost anything, but the second cost one point, and the third cost two. The fourth hazard began a new set, so it didn't cost you anything, but the fifth would cost another point and the sixth would cost another two. Because each player only scores one prize each turn, and there were a total of twelve turns, that meant hazards felt especially punishing.

Players were disengaging as they saw their score fall ever deeper into a seemingly insurmountable debt. It just wasn't fun.


Not Scoring Feels Bad Enough

Thanks to some input from Jeremy Commandeur, I realized that simply missing an opportunity to score was bad enough. There was no need to compound that missed opportunity with further punishment. All it did was trigger a player's loss-aversion instinct and overall give players a sour taste for the game.

Because players had to take the next available card, they sometimes would accidentally stumble into hazards. I didn't give them enough control or time to avoid piling up a big stack of negative points. It just wasn't the right fit for the gameplay. So I removed negative points.

The next day, I decided hazards wouldn't cost any negative points at all. Instead, having the fewest hazards at the end of the game would give you a bonus of 5 points. Playtests with this system came out far better. Players were not as dismayed at taking hazards as much since it didn't technically cost them anything as long as they still had the fewest in the group.


This was my lesson from those playtests...


Give players the CHOICE whether to risk going negative.
Then give players enough TIME to mitigate that risk.


In Scoundrels of Skullport, you can avoid corruption as much as possible and come out ahead. What's more, you can take just a little bit of corruption while planning to buy it off with helpful quests and intrigue cards. You could still come away with less steep a penalty than opponents who wallowed in the underworlds.

In Ticket to Ride, you might score negative points if you don't complete a ticket, but you decide whether to keep that ticket in the first place and can spend the entire game making sure it's worthwhile. You don't have to take any more tickets than you initially got in the setup, but you are quite free to take that risk if you're feeling confident.

In Coloretto, you score positive points for your three largest sets of cards while scoring negative points for any other sets. Because the scoring is based on triangular numbers, you'll always end the game with positive points and have several opportunities to avoid collecting sets of cards you don't want.

Negative points are fine, as long as players know they're making that risky deal and they have enough time to offset those costs. Those two in combination make a fun decision and an opportunity for players to feel clever. That's a win/win to me.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

5 Graphic Design and Typography Tips for your Card Game

Image
Chris Farrell of Illuminating Games just wrote a thorough critique of card games setting their body text to be so small that they cannot be read at arm's length, let alone across the table. Here's an excerpt, but the whole thing is worth a read for any would-be card game designers out there. (Myself included.) Break out your copy of the base set of Dominion, and look at the Chapel. This has a text box roughly 3.5cm by 4.5cm. It's got a single line of text. That line of text is 1 (one) millimeter high. 1mm! For me, it's only clearly readable at half an arm's length even in the bright light of day. (...) Compare this to a more sane game like Glory to Rome, where the font size is 2-3 times as large (text is 2mm high, keywords 3mm and usually highlighted). I can generally read Glory to Rome cards across the table, and can certainly see the important keywords. To heap insult upon injury, not only does Glory to Rome have far more legible text than Dominion it also has
Read more

Low-High Dice Game

Image
A dice game inspired by the stock market (and playing lots of Martian Dice). Roll a bunch of dice and choose which sets to keep. Choose your strategy wisely! Stuff You Need Two-to-Six PLAYERS A PENCIL and PAPER to keep score Thirteen standard six-sided DICE How to Play The shortest player takes the first turn. On your turn, first roll all thirteen dice. Several dice will have matching results. These are called SETS. (A single die result is a set, too.) You must choose a set to keep. For example, your first roll results are 111124445555 . The sets are four 1 s, one 2 , three 4 s, and four 5 s. After keeping a set of dice, lock them up in a row. This is called the GOOD TRACK. For example,  you could keep the set of four 1 s, one 2 , three 4 s, or four 5 s . You decide to keep the four 1 s and line them up in your good track. After keeping a set, you may end your turn or re-roll the remaining unlocked dice. When you re-roll, immediately set aside any results that ar
Read more

The Thousand-Year Game Design Challenge

Image
UPDATE: The submission period has closed and here are the entries. If you're an entrant, continue sending pics or vids of people playing your game. The first step to a game lasting a thousand years is for people to play it today. UPDATE 2: And here's the winner! To support games designed for longevity – that can be learned, played and shared for hundreds of years – we offer this challenge to any game designers, artists and imaginative people who also share this desire. Challenge Create a game. The game can be of any theme or genre you desire, but there is one restriction: You're creating a "new classic," like Chess, Tag or card games. So, create a game to be enjoyed by generations of players for a thousand years. Prize $1,000 to the winning entrant, to be announced and awarded January 1, 2012. Entry Deadline Entries must be submitted before midnight July August 31st, 2011. ( Update ) Entry Guidelines Enter by posting a comment below with a link
Read more