« June ‘08 Round Table–Updated 07/01 | Home | Renown: A Game of Aesthetics »
Renown: Open Dynamics vs. Closed Dynamics
By Corvus | July 1, 2008
So my current Renown manual does a terrible job of describing game dynamics, focusing instead on game mechanics in what may be too granular a fashion. So, I thought it might be a good idea to explore my idea behind the actual gameplay of Renown, with an eye toward making the next iteration of the manual (currently under development by MsZ) stronger.
For those of you not familiar with the MDA framework approach to game design, mechanics are the discreet components of game design. The rocket launcher is a game mechanic. Jumping is a game mechanic. Dynamics are how the mechanics interact with each other in real time. Rocket jumping is a game dynamic. I won’t be talking about the ‘A’ of the framework, aesthetics, in this post. As pretty much everything else I write in pursuit of defining gameplay as storytelling centers around the A, I don’t feel too badly about that (although upon reflection, I think an A post about Renown may follow later this week).
I’ve made no secret that the inspiration behind Renown is a card game from Wizards of the Coast called Guillotine. The point of Guillotine is to collect high point value Noble cards during a clearly defined time frame. A separate deck of Action cards are used to rearrange the available Noble cards and affect the point values of collected cards (both yours and your opponents). Each Action card is clearly labeled with its effect.
Any given game of Guillotine is very much like every other game of Guillotine. The available action cards are well balanced, with fewer powerful action cards and many of the less powerful ones. Each round of play is the same length (12 cards), regardless if you’re playing with 2 people or 5 people. It is what I like to refer to as a game with closed dynamics. That is–nothing happens during play that was not planned for by the designers. At no point do you watch an opponent make a play in Guillotine and think, “Oh! I never thought of doing that!” It’s like playing in a garden–you may get stung by a bee if you’re not careful, but the bears never attack and end up playing croquet with your skull.
Renown was born when I asked myself what it would be like if the Noble cards and Action cards were one in the same and playing an Action card meant reducing the points in your hand.
Over each design iteration, I worked to open the dynamics even further. The number of cards made available in each round is dependent upon the number of players. Rather than having card values be the ultimate goal, I built in a currency (Favor) so that winning involves gathering high point cards in hopes of winning the pot. I added two suits of cards and reduced the number of cards in each suit. Each suit balances another and I tweaked the mechanics so that each pairing has a unique property. Life and Energy cards are worth more when you total your hand. Playing these cards as action cards means you lose them permanently, but more definitively harms your opponent. Potentially, it also forces them to add more Favor to the pot. Water and Fire cards force exchanges of cards (and potentially favor). This is the least penalizing of actions as the cards remain in play and may be exchanged again. Earth and Air cards add and remove available cards from play. They also cannot be forced out of your hand when another player plays an Action card against you.
The key is that the stronger an effect you have on gameplay–the more points you remove from your hand. It’s a trade off. Do you horde your power (like a Scorpio) or expend it (like a Leo)?[1]
To further complicate things, the suits are divided into two flavors of cards–Heroic and Villainous, as is the Favor. Your ultimate goal is to acquire one type of currency and get rid of the other. Because there can only be one winner, this means you’re competing against all players that are going for the same Favor as you and the dominant player going for the other type of Favor. This creates opportunity for wary cooperation between players as they gang up on a clearly dominant player while still trying to protect their own interests.
Finally, the most important thing about Renown is the human element. Like poker, there is a strong social dynamic to the game. Bluffing, lying, avoiding attention, pointing out threat (artificial or otherwise), all become an important part of the play. This is not a game that rewards playing nice and the mechanics support, almost require, an underhanded approach to gameplay. This is most evident in the bidding process. The rules state that players should bid the type of Favor they expect to win, but this isn’t always the most logical approach. In fact, since favor cancels each other out, it often makes sense to bid the favor you don’t want in order to keep from negating your winnings. Unless, of course, you’re planning on reversing your strategy at some point… The fact is that the bidding of favor is the crux of the bluffing component of the game. It is the source of the social component of the game.
Regardless, the entire point of the mechanics of Renown was to allow for unexpected things to happen during play. In other words, it is designed to be an open dynamic system. Every game will not be balanced. Unexpected strategies will emerge and, above all, if a player is particularly skilled at manipulating the dynamics–she could win the game with relatively low point values.
I think this is part of the problem I had in writing the first manual. I’m reluctant to tell people how to play because I don’t want to limit their approach and I cannot hope to fully explain the dynamics, as they aren’t safely contained within a closed system. Think of poker and how bidding and bluffing can dramatically alter play. Think how two players working together can manipulate a game in their favor without ever once actually cheating. This is like the gameplay of Renown–open, risky, unpredictable and a bit wild.
That being said, we’re finding ways to set players along the right wilderness track and will be providing a strong warning that the bears will likely be playing horseshoes with your pelvis before the game is over.
[1] Sorry, slipped a bit into Aesthetics there! [return]
Tagged:mda framework, open dynamics, Renown. |
July 1st, 2008 at 8:53 am
Some notes:
The (ones of my) players who has played (and enjoyed) Guillotine has an easier time with the rules, and tend to like the game better. I start my explanation of the rules with “Have you played Guillotine? [great/no matter]” - I’ve also started training new players in Guillotine because of this (before letting them near Renown).
I like discovering stuff myself. Don’t put every morsel of strategy in the Manual. (Save it for the strategy guide! :p ) I suggest providing small hints.
As you might have seen in my last report, I discovered that this game can be played “co-op” (One player helping another win). I guess this comes in under alliances.
July 1st, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Okay, this confirms my feeling that we just didn’t get it when we played Renown. None of us have any familiarity with Guillotine, and when we had cards that could shift the hierarchy we didn’t really understand why we’d want to.
I’m looking forward to the new manual,with the hope we’ll understand that game better. I can sense that there’s more to it than we know, at least.
July 13th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
I’m looking forward to the new manual. Hopefully it will help to streamline the rule explanation process. As for the dynamics of play, they do tend to come out after a few rounds. Once people understand how the bidding and card playing works, they start to form strategies that align with the cards they have.
I really need to get another group of people to play this with soon.