Pig-faced Orcs
                 Can designers learn anything
                 from old-school roleplaying
                 games?




James Reffell
IA Summit 2011
March 3rd 2011
Gamification
This is not a gamification talk. There will no talk of badges, points, leaderboards, or anything of that sort. I’m not even going to
talk about flow. Those concepts are interesting, but they mostly come from a very specific subset of games. And those were
not my favorite games, even as a kid.
awesome map i drew

         first convention badge
I liked Dungeons & Dragons. Most D&D players (at least ones my age) can tell you a story of how they discovered the
games. You can ask me that one tonight at the bar. What I will say is that while I had no idea I was going to be a designer
when I grew up, many of the things that made D&D fun for me were very ... designey. Like obsessively making elaborate
maps on grid paper.
Dungeons &                      Traveller                     Runequest
      Chainmail (1971)
         Gygax & Perren           Dragons (1974)                    (1977)                        (1978)
                                    Gygax & Arneson             Stafford & Perrin              Stafford & Perrin




Quick and totally incomplete history of pen & paper RPGs. Wargaming around for a long time. In the 70s, some folks got
bored & changed a few things: focus on individual, non-military units, fantasy elements. Realized they had something
different, packaged it up. More or less BOOM. Explosion, huge cultural impact, co-evolution w/ computer games.
Pig-faced orcs. Theme for the talk. Orcs, from Tolkien. Usually portrayed as monstrous humans like in the
movies. But in older D&D modules you often saw them illustrated w/ pig faces. Apparently a miscommunication
between Gary Gygax and the artist, now kind of symbolic of the earlier age.
Recently a few gamers have been delving into what made the originals interesting. Maybe some things that work
better (or differently) from what has come since. Old school. And the more I read and thoughts about it, the more
some of that seemed to apply to design as well. So here goes.
Give them something to
                                                                      Use sandboxes & railroads.
               manipulate.

                                                                      Preserve inconstancies &
               Embrace showmanship.
                                                                      messiness.

               Use randomness to build
                                                                      Steal from everywhere.
               story.

               Create minigames.                                      Enable risk-taking.



I’m going to propose 8 ideas. They start pretty concrete and move into the fuzzy. I’ll talk about how they are
used in RPGs, and how they could be used in design.
Give them something to manipulate.




Dice. Miniatures. Graph paper. Maps. Screens for the game master. These are all tools for games, and they all
have their official purpose -- creating randomness, simulating exploration, visualizing combat. But there’s another
purpose. They give you something to futz with. (Hand up who has tried to build a dice tower?)
Give them something to manipulate.




So pop psychology. Having things to manipulate -- particularly physical things with texture & visual interest you can
look at and hold and move around -- helps concentration. It has intrinsic aesthetic value. It also gives a feeling of
control. It gives you something to do during down moments. And it’s something traditional software usually lacks.
Give them something to manipulate.




There are some examples. Random number generation my wiggling the mouse -- strangely satisfying. Totally
equivalent to rolling dice, maybe not quite as much fun as that. Mobile devices are a better fit for this -- any app that
you need to shake, wave, wiggle, or whatever, is a god fit. Think about incorporating twitchy movement into your
designs.
Give them something to manipulate.




Those are a good start. But they’re missing two things. 1. Ongoing, idle manipulation while doing other tasks. 2.
Texture. When we start seeing more touch UIs with feedback (video games have been doing this here and there) we
me have something.
Embrace showmanship.




                                                             β€œA DM only rolls the
                                                           dice because of the noise
                                                                  they make.”




Here’s Gary Gygax. β€œA DM only rolls the dice because of the noise they make.” What’s he saying? Obviously dice
have a functional purpose (creating randomness). But sometimes -- and maybe in some sense every time -- a DM rolls
the dice, it’s also to build tension. Especially when the DM doesn’t tell you why she’s rolling it. That’s showmanship.
Embrace showmanship.




So I talked about dice as something to fiddle with. But there’s another reason for all the stuff -- miniatures, dice,
screens, etc. A good DM can use these to enhance the experience. Brenda Laurel has talked about computers as
theater in a theoretical sense, but I think we can learn from the tricks of theater. The cheats. Showmanship.
Embrace showmanship.




This is basically UI fanciness territory, but specifically the UI fanciness that adds drama. Let’s talk about Etsy. I love
Etsy. But the newsletter was a little too frequent. So I unsubscribed. Sad kitty. Sad kitty builds tension.
Embrace showmanship.




And when you DO unsubscribe, you get Paul Young. Every time you go away, you take a piece of me with you. That’s
drama! Well, at least pathos. But they key is if you want to embrace showmanship, you can’t be afraid of being a little
silly.
Use randomness to build story.




So, dice again. What are they for? In a basic sense, resolving actions that have a chance to succeed, just like in any
game of chance. But that’s in some ways the least interesting use of chance in role-playing games.
Use randomness to build story.




This is the famous Harlot Table. [Explain Harlot Table.] So, this is iconic and hilarious, but it’s also representative of a
core concept -- using the dice to generate story. Obviously a story with a brazen strumpet wandering into it will be
different from a story with a aged madam.
Use randomness to build story.




Maybe a better example is the rumor table from B2: Keep on the Borderlands. This was explicitly a training module for
new GMs and players. Are it suggests that you arm the players with a random selection of rumors before they start.
Some of the rumors are true, some false. Depending on what you roll, the characters may react very differently ...
Use randomness to build story.

                              1--Think of one of your players, describe his/her impact on your game, what he/she does, how his/
                              her presence or absence affects your GMing (if at all). What you expect to happen when s/he's
                              around, what kind of PCs s/he chooses, etc.

                              2--Add something to the wiki then explain why it was influential enough to you that you added it.

                              3--Four things you wish you want more of in your campaign, four things you wish you had less of.
                              Or, if you can;t do that, tell us why you can't. Is your campaign perfect? Rock--tell us why you think
                              it's humming so well.

                              4--Compare your favorite moment as a player to your favorite moment as a GM.

                              5--Write up a monster/trap combination. Neither the monster nor the trap must be original, but
                              the combo must be interesting.

                              6--Give us a spell. Just one. Or more if you're hardcore.

                              7--Dragons. Seriously, how often do you use dragons? Did they work the way they were supposed
                              to when you did? Were your players scared? How did it go?

                              8--Describe your local area, gamerwise--is their a local game store? Where do your players come
                              from? Do you want more players? Are they your friends? If you play with strangers, who are these
                              people? Where do they come from?

                              9--Google up a random mini, then describe this fellow or lass as an NPC. Give us some hooks for
                              him or her.
So, software? I don’t have a lot of examples, but here’s one idea. A lot of sites that involve user-created content give
                              10--Pull a gamebook off your shelf. Drink as much alcohol as you can. Generate a PC for that game
folks cues or hints to get them started. Adding a visibly random element might be entertaining. This table was posted
                              and liveblog your emotional rollercoaster as you create the person.
by Zak Smith to get other folks started writing blog posts. Now, this is a D&D context, but you can imagine ...
Create minigames.




Minigames. All roleplaying games basically have subgames -- sometimes clearly defined as such, sometimes more
fuzzy -- that you can play.
Create minigames.




    Character
                                                Trading                             Ship combat
    generation

Traveller is great here. Character generation is it’s own game. Your character can die before you’re β€œreally” playing!
Trading is a game. Different kinds of combat (starships, on planet, mass) are games. World creation is a game.
Create minigames.




37 Signals had a bit in their iPhone app where there was a setup delay. So they let you play Tic-Tac-Toe. Now, that’s
cute, but it’s not really related to the larger goal. The first mini-games in RPGs are usually character generation, so it
makes sense that the closest cousins in our domains are usually signup & portfolio creation.
Use sandboxes and railroads.




Sandboxes games and railroad games. These are concepts that span all sorts of games, they come up a lot in video
games. But that can get hung up on technical limitations, so let’s stick with pen & paper.
Use sandboxes and railroads.




Sandboxes. The game designer creates an area to explore, and maybe some mild motivation. The players choose
what to do first and how to do it. Plot emerges from play.
Railroad. There is an overarching plot. The players make choices within that, but the game designer makes sure they
experience the main points and usually in a set order.
Use sandboxes and railroads.




This one is less a pronouncement than an analytical framework. Think about what you’re designing and break it into
sandboxes and railroads. Take e-commerce. Someone is browsing -- they may have a vague idea what they want to
buy, but they’re more than happy to look at other things, comparison shop, research, get distracted. Sandbox!
Use sandboxes and railroads.




But eventually they’ve got some items in their shopping cart and want to check out. Boom! Railroad the crap out of
them. Lead them by the nose. Eliminate distractions. It’s not just about efficiency -- you have a narrative (in this case
β€œyou are happy with your purchases and trust us to ship them to you”) and you’re going to give them that story.
Preserve inconsistencies and messiness.




OK. So the thing about the old-school games is that they were originally built by hobbyists for other hobbyists. It
showed. There were mistakes, inconsistencies. Game balance was a concern but there wasn’t really any way to
achieve it and in any case that never stood in the way
Preserve inconsistencies and messiness.


                              β€œEvery rough edge I pound smooth
                              is one I can't use later in order to
                              prick my imagination.”

                              β€œGive me a sketchy, hodgepodge
                              setting with lots of holes and
                              unmapped areas and incoherence
                              and I'll give you a campaign to
                              remember.”


James Maliszewski wrote an essay called β€œStop Making Sense.” He talked about how when he was first creating
worlds, he strove for complete order, perfection, explaining everything. Leave no holes. But he’s found that the holes
and the things that didn’t quite make sense gave him room for continued creativity.
HASHTAGS?!?!




Expand that from a single person creating to a community and I think it holds. If we, as designers, leave some features
out (for a while), leave some messiness and inconsistency, it gives our users room to co-create with us. That’s how we
got hashtags and retweeting. You can always go back and fix, but sometimes you don’t need to.
Steal from everywhere.




This one is kind of hard to explain now, because D&D (and its successor like WoW) have been such a cultural force
over the past few decades that a lot of these things have been diffused. But at the time, this stuff was a complete
hodge podge of Tolkien, Burroughs, Leiber, adventure movies, actual medieval history, mythology. Total mishmash.
Steal from everywhere.




This is similar to the β€œleave gaps” point, but it’s not just cramming things in. It’s putting in seemingly disparate elements
and watching them gel, like magic. This is why I’m not really persuaded by the metaphor purists -- I find it kind of
charming when real-world metaphors mix with purely digital ones. As long as it works, throw it in.
Enable risk-taking. (Carefully.)




So it’s really important that characters can die. Some games have other kinds of risk, but in old school RPGS, death is
usually the big one. Characters die. That adds spice, it gives the stories meaning, it makes for legendary action. Game
I remember the best was a Star Wars game. One shot. My Han Solo-ish character heroically sacrificed himself to save
the group.
Enable risk-taking. (Carefully.)




Now, in design, some sorts of risk are unacceptable. It’s not acceptable to lose your users’ data. Or expose it to other
people w/out permission. But without ANY risk, sterility. So, how do you as a designer, expose your users to
β€œgood” (fun, narrative building) risk, but not β€œbad” (unfun, cynicism building) risk? I haven’t the foggiest. I’m working on
this one. :)
The ideas.


               Give them something to
                                                                         Use sandboxes & railroads.
               manipulate.

                                                                         Preserve inconstancies &
               Embrace showmanship.
                                                                         messiness.

               Use randomness to build
                                                                         Steal from everywhere.
               story.

               Create minigames.                                         Enable risk-taking.



So, here are my 8 points. If you want to start using them in your work, obviously the thing to do is get a D8 and rolle to
see where to start.
Thanks, Gary.




     Gary Gygax (1938-2008)




James Reffell
@jreffell
designcult.org
james.reffell@gmail.com
Image credits


  CC Tracy Lee http://www.flickr.com/photos/tracyleephoto/5442965871/



  Β© Otherworld miniatures http://www.otherworld.me.uk/


  CC Scott Akerman http://www.flickr.com/photos/sterlic/5364706165/


  CC Dave White http://www.flickr.com/photos/mrdestructicity/5028309972/



  CC Alan De Smet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gary_Gygax_Gen_Con_2007.JPG



  Β© Elena Hill http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Zak_Smith.jpg



   Β© XKCD http://xkcd.com/393/

Pig-faced Orcs: What designers can learn from old-school role-playing games

  • 1.
    Pig-faced Orcs Can designers learn anything from old-school roleplaying games? James Reffell IA Summit 2011 March 3rd 2011
  • 2.
    Gamification This is nota gamification talk. There will no talk of badges, points, leaderboards, or anything of that sort. I’m not even going to talk about flow. Those concepts are interesting, but they mostly come from a very specific subset of games. And those were not my favorite games, even as a kid.
  • 3.
    awesome map idrew first convention badge I liked Dungeons & Dragons. Most D&D players (at least ones my age) can tell you a story of how they discovered the games. You can ask me that one tonight at the bar. What I will say is that while I had no idea I was going to be a designer when I grew up, many of the things that made D&D fun for me were very ... designey. Like obsessively making elaborate maps on grid paper.
  • 4.
    Dungeons & Traveller Runequest Chainmail (1971) Gygax & Perren Dragons (1974) (1977) (1978) Gygax & Arneson Stafford & Perrin Stafford & Perrin Quick and totally incomplete history of pen & paper RPGs. Wargaming around for a long time. In the 70s, some folks got bored & changed a few things: focus on individual, non-military units, fantasy elements. Realized they had something different, packaged it up. More or less BOOM. Explosion, huge cultural impact, co-evolution w/ computer games.
  • 5.
    Pig-faced orcs. Themefor the talk. Orcs, from Tolkien. Usually portrayed as monstrous humans like in the movies. But in older D&D modules you often saw them illustrated w/ pig faces. Apparently a miscommunication between Gary Gygax and the artist, now kind of symbolic of the earlier age.
  • 6.
    Recently a fewgamers have been delving into what made the originals interesting. Maybe some things that work better (or differently) from what has come since. Old school. And the more I read and thoughts about it, the more some of that seemed to apply to design as well. So here goes.
  • 7.
    Give them somethingto Use sandboxes & railroads. manipulate. Preserve inconstancies & Embrace showmanship. messiness. Use randomness to build Steal from everywhere. story. Create minigames. Enable risk-taking. I’m going to propose 8 ideas. They start pretty concrete and move into the fuzzy. I’ll talk about how they are used in RPGs, and how they could be used in design.
  • 8.
    Give them somethingto manipulate. Dice. Miniatures. Graph paper. Maps. Screens for the game master. These are all tools for games, and they all have their official purpose -- creating randomness, simulating exploration, visualizing combat. But there’s another purpose. They give you something to futz with. (Hand up who has tried to build a dice tower?)
  • 9.
    Give them somethingto manipulate. So pop psychology. Having things to manipulate -- particularly physical things with texture & visual interest you can look at and hold and move around -- helps concentration. It has intrinsic aesthetic value. It also gives a feeling of control. It gives you something to do during down moments. And it’s something traditional software usually lacks.
  • 10.
    Give them somethingto manipulate. There are some examples. Random number generation my wiggling the mouse -- strangely satisfying. Totally equivalent to rolling dice, maybe not quite as much fun as that. Mobile devices are a better fit for this -- any app that you need to shake, wave, wiggle, or whatever, is a god fit. Think about incorporating twitchy movement into your designs.
  • 11.
    Give them somethingto manipulate. Those are a good start. But they’re missing two things. 1. Ongoing, idle manipulation while doing other tasks. 2. Texture. When we start seeing more touch UIs with feedback (video games have been doing this here and there) we me have something.
  • 12.
    Embrace showmanship. β€œA DM only rolls the dice because of the noise they make.” Here’s Gary Gygax. β€œA DM only rolls the dice because of the noise they make.” What’s he saying? Obviously dice have a functional purpose (creating randomness). But sometimes -- and maybe in some sense every time -- a DM rolls the dice, it’s also to build tension. Especially when the DM doesn’t tell you why she’s rolling it. That’s showmanship.
  • 13.
    Embrace showmanship. So Italked about dice as something to fiddle with. But there’s another reason for all the stuff -- miniatures, dice, screens, etc. A good DM can use these to enhance the experience. Brenda Laurel has talked about computers as theater in a theoretical sense, but I think we can learn from the tricks of theater. The cheats. Showmanship.
  • 14.
    Embrace showmanship. This isbasically UI fanciness territory, but specifically the UI fanciness that adds drama. Let’s talk about Etsy. I love Etsy. But the newsletter was a little too frequent. So I unsubscribed. Sad kitty. Sad kitty builds tension.
  • 15.
    Embrace showmanship. And whenyou DO unsubscribe, you get Paul Young. Every time you go away, you take a piece of me with you. That’s drama! Well, at least pathos. But they key is if you want to embrace showmanship, you can’t be afraid of being a little silly.
  • 16.
    Use randomness tobuild story. So, dice again. What are they for? In a basic sense, resolving actions that have a chance to succeed, just like in any game of chance. But that’s in some ways the least interesting use of chance in role-playing games.
  • 17.
    Use randomness tobuild story. This is the famous Harlot Table. [Explain Harlot Table.] So, this is iconic and hilarious, but it’s also representative of a core concept -- using the dice to generate story. Obviously a story with a brazen strumpet wandering into it will be different from a story with a aged madam.
  • 18.
    Use randomness tobuild story. Maybe a better example is the rumor table from B2: Keep on the Borderlands. This was explicitly a training module for new GMs and players. Are it suggests that you arm the players with a random selection of rumors before they start. Some of the rumors are true, some false. Depending on what you roll, the characters may react very differently ...
  • 19.
    Use randomness tobuild story. 1--Think of one of your players, describe his/her impact on your game, what he/she does, how his/ her presence or absence affects your GMing (if at all). What you expect to happen when s/he's around, what kind of PCs s/he chooses, etc. 2--Add something to the wiki then explain why it was influential enough to you that you added it. 3--Four things you wish you want more of in your campaign, four things you wish you had less of. Or, if you can;t do that, tell us why you can't. Is your campaign perfect? Rock--tell us why you think it's humming so well. 4--Compare your favorite moment as a player to your favorite moment as a GM. 5--Write up a monster/trap combination. Neither the monster nor the trap must be original, but the combo must be interesting. 6--Give us a spell. Just one. Or more if you're hardcore. 7--Dragons. Seriously, how often do you use dragons? Did they work the way they were supposed to when you did? Were your players scared? How did it go? 8--Describe your local area, gamerwise--is their a local game store? Where do your players come from? Do you want more players? Are they your friends? If you play with strangers, who are these people? Where do they come from? 9--Google up a random mini, then describe this fellow or lass as an NPC. Give us some hooks for him or her. So, software? I don’t have a lot of examples, but here’s one idea. A lot of sites that involve user-created content give 10--Pull a gamebook off your shelf. Drink as much alcohol as you can. Generate a PC for that game folks cues or hints to get them started. Adding a visibly random element might be entertaining. This table was posted and liveblog your emotional rollercoaster as you create the person. by Zak Smith to get other folks started writing blog posts. Now, this is a D&D context, but you can imagine ...
  • 20.
    Create minigames. Minigames. Allroleplaying games basically have subgames -- sometimes clearly defined as such, sometimes more fuzzy -- that you can play.
  • 21.
    Create minigames. Character Trading Ship combat generation Traveller is great here. Character generation is it’s own game. Your character can die before you’re β€œreally” playing! Trading is a game. Different kinds of combat (starships, on planet, mass) are games. World creation is a game.
  • 22.
    Create minigames. 37 Signalshad a bit in their iPhone app where there was a setup delay. So they let you play Tic-Tac-Toe. Now, that’s cute, but it’s not really related to the larger goal. The first mini-games in RPGs are usually character generation, so it makes sense that the closest cousins in our domains are usually signup & portfolio creation.
  • 23.
    Use sandboxes andrailroads. Sandboxes games and railroad games. These are concepts that span all sorts of games, they come up a lot in video games. But that can get hung up on technical limitations, so let’s stick with pen & paper.
  • 24.
    Use sandboxes andrailroads. Sandboxes. The game designer creates an area to explore, and maybe some mild motivation. The players choose what to do first and how to do it. Plot emerges from play. Railroad. There is an overarching plot. The players make choices within that, but the game designer makes sure they experience the main points and usually in a set order.
  • 25.
    Use sandboxes andrailroads. This one is less a pronouncement than an analytical framework. Think about what you’re designing and break it into sandboxes and railroads. Take e-commerce. Someone is browsing -- they may have a vague idea what they want to buy, but they’re more than happy to look at other things, comparison shop, research, get distracted. Sandbox!
  • 26.
    Use sandboxes andrailroads. But eventually they’ve got some items in their shopping cart and want to check out. Boom! Railroad the crap out of them. Lead them by the nose. Eliminate distractions. It’s not just about efficiency -- you have a narrative (in this case β€œyou are happy with your purchases and trust us to ship them to you”) and you’re going to give them that story.
  • 27.
    Preserve inconsistencies andmessiness. OK. So the thing about the old-school games is that they were originally built by hobbyists for other hobbyists. It showed. There were mistakes, inconsistencies. Game balance was a concern but there wasn’t really any way to achieve it and in any case that never stood in the way
  • 28.
    Preserve inconsistencies andmessiness. β€œEvery rough edge I pound smooth is one I can't use later in order to prick my imagination.” β€œGive me a sketchy, hodgepodge setting with lots of holes and unmapped areas and incoherence and I'll give you a campaign to remember.” James Maliszewski wrote an essay called β€œStop Making Sense.” He talked about how when he was first creating worlds, he strove for complete order, perfection, explaining everything. Leave no holes. But he’s found that the holes and the things that didn’t quite make sense gave him room for continued creativity.
  • 29.
    HASHTAGS?!?! Expand that froma single person creating to a community and I think it holds. If we, as designers, leave some features out (for a while), leave some messiness and inconsistency, it gives our users room to co-create with us. That’s how we got hashtags and retweeting. You can always go back and fix, but sometimes you don’t need to.
  • 30.
    Steal from everywhere. Thisone is kind of hard to explain now, because D&D (and its successor like WoW) have been such a cultural force over the past few decades that a lot of these things have been diffused. But at the time, this stuff was a complete hodge podge of Tolkien, Burroughs, Leiber, adventure movies, actual medieval history, mythology. Total mishmash.
  • 31.
    Steal from everywhere. Thisis similar to the β€œleave gaps” point, but it’s not just cramming things in. It’s putting in seemingly disparate elements and watching them gel, like magic. This is why I’m not really persuaded by the metaphor purists -- I find it kind of charming when real-world metaphors mix with purely digital ones. As long as it works, throw it in.
  • 32.
    Enable risk-taking. (Carefully.) Soit’s really important that characters can die. Some games have other kinds of risk, but in old school RPGS, death is usually the big one. Characters die. That adds spice, it gives the stories meaning, it makes for legendary action. Game I remember the best was a Star Wars game. One shot. My Han Solo-ish character heroically sacrificed himself to save the group.
  • 33.
    Enable risk-taking. (Carefully.) Now,in design, some sorts of risk are unacceptable. It’s not acceptable to lose your users’ data. Or expose it to other people w/out permission. But without ANY risk, sterility. So, how do you as a designer, expose your users to β€œgood” (fun, narrative building) risk, but not β€œbad” (unfun, cynicism building) risk? I haven’t the foggiest. I’m working on this one. :)
  • 34.
    The ideas. Give them something to Use sandboxes & railroads. manipulate. Preserve inconstancies & Embrace showmanship. messiness. Use randomness to build Steal from everywhere. story. Create minigames. Enable risk-taking. So, here are my 8 points. If you want to start using them in your work, obviously the thing to do is get a D8 and rolle to see where to start.
  • 35.
    Thanks, Gary. Gary Gygax (1938-2008) James Reffell @jreffell designcult.org james.reffell@gmail.com
  • 36.
    Image credits CC Tracy Lee http://www.flickr.com/photos/tracyleephoto/5442965871/ Β© Otherworld miniatures http://www.otherworld.me.uk/ CC Scott Akerman http://www.flickr.com/photos/sterlic/5364706165/ CC Dave White http://www.flickr.com/photos/mrdestructicity/5028309972/ CC Alan De Smet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gary_Gygax_Gen_Con_2007.JPG Β© Elena Hill http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Zak_Smith.jpg Β© XKCD http://xkcd.com/393/

Editor's Notes

  • #2Β Hi. I’m James Reffell. I’m a designer. This talk is “Pig-faced orcs: can designers learn anything from old-school role-playing games?” I hope we can, otherwise this is going to be real short.\n
  • #3Β First of all, this is not a gamification talk. There will no talk of badges, points, leaderboards, or anything of that sort. I’m not even going to talk about flow. Those concepts are interesting, but they mostly come from a very specific subset of games. And those were not my favorite games, even as a kid.\n
  • #4Β I liked Dungeons & Dragons. Most D&D players (at least ones my age) can tell you a story of how they discovered the games. You can ask me that one tonight at the bar. What I will say is that while I had no idea I was going to be a designer when I grew up, many of the things that made D&D fun for me were very ... designey. Like obsessively making elaborate maps on grid paper.\n
  • #5Β Quick and totally incomplete history of pen & paper RPGs. Wargaming around for a long time. In the 70s, some folks got bored & changed a few things: focus on individual, non-military units, fantasy elements. Realized they had something different, packaged it up. More or less BOOM. Explosion, huge cultural impact, co-evolution w/ computer games.\n
  • #6Β Pig-faced orcs. Theme for the talk. Orcs, from Tolkien. Usually portrayed as monstrous humans like in the movies. But in older D&D modules you often saw them illustrated w/ pig faces. Apparently a miscommunication between Gary Gygax and the artist, now kind of symbolic of the earlier age. \n
  • #7Β Recently a few gamers have been delving into what made the originals interesting. Maybe some things that work better (or differently) from what has come since. Old school. And the more I read and thoughts about it, the more some of that seemed to apply to design as well. So here goes.\n
  • #8Β I’m going to propose 8 ideas. They start pretty concrete and move into the fuzzy. I’ll talk about how they are used in RPGs, and how they could be used in design.\n
  • #9Β Dice. Miniatures. Graph paper. Maps. Screens for the game master. These are all tools for games, and they all have their official purpose -- creating randomness, simulating exploration, visualizing combat. But there’s another purpose. They give you something to futz with. (Hand up who has tried to build a dice tower?)\n
  • #10Β So pop psychology. Having things to manipulate -- particularly physical things with texture & visual interest you can look at and hold and move around -- helps concentration. It has intrinsic aesthetic value. It also gives a feeling of control. It gives you something to do during down moments. And it’s something traditional software usually lacks.\n
  • #11Β There are some examples. Random number generation my wiggling the mouse -- strangely satisfying. Totally equivalent to rolling dice, maybe not quite as much fun as that. Mobile devices are a better fit for this -- any app that you need to shake, wave, wiggle, or whatever, is a god fit. Think about incorporating twitchy movement into your designs.\n
  • #12Β Those are a good start. But they’re missing two things. 1. Ongoing, idle manipulation while doing other tasks. 2. Texture. When we start seeing more touch UIs with feedback (video games have been doing this here and there) we me have something.\n
  • #13Β Here’s Gary Gygax. “A DM only rolls the dice because of the noise they make.” What’s he saying? Obviously dice have a functional purpose (creating randomness). But sometimes -- and maybe in some sense every time -- a DM rolls the dice, it’s also to build tension. Especially when the DM doesn’t tell you why she’s rolling it. That’s showmanship.\n
  • #14Β So I talked about dice as something to fiddle with. But there’s another reason for all the stuff -- miniatures, dice, screens, etc. A good DM can use these to enhance the experience. Brenda Laurel has talked about computers as theater in a theoretical sense, but I think we can learn from the tricks of theater. The cheats. Showmanship.\n
  • #15Β  This is basically UI fanciness territory, but specifically the UI fanciness that adds drama. Let’s talk about Etsy. I love Etsy. But the newsletter was a little too frequent. So I unsubscribed. Sad kitty. Sad kitty builds tension. \n
  • #16Β And when you DO unsubscribe, you get Paul Young. Every time you go away, you take a piece of me with you. That’s drama! Well, at least pathos. But they key is if you want to embrace showmanship, you can’t be afraid of being a little silly.\n
  • #17Β So, dice again. What are they for? In a basic sense, resolving actions that have a chance to succeed, just like in any game of chance. But that’s in some ways the least interesting use of chance in role-playing games.\n
  • #18Β This is the famous Harlot Table. [Explain Harlot Table.] So, this is iconic and hilarious, but it’s also representative of a core concept -- using the dice to generate story. Obviously a story with a brazen strumpet wandering into it will be different from a story with a aged madam. \n
  • #19Β Maybe a better example is the rumor table from B2: Keep on the Borderlands. This was explicitly a training module for new GMs and players. Are it suggests that you arm the players with a random selection of rumors before they start. Some of the rumors are true, some false. Depending on what you roll, the characters may react very differently ...\n
  • #20Β So, software? I don’t have a lot of examples, but here’s one idea. A lot of sites that involve user-created content give folks cues or hints to get them started. Adding a visibly random element might be entertaining. This table was posted by Zak Smith to get other folks started writing blog posts. Now, this is a D&D context, but you can imagine ...\n
  • #21Β Minigames. All roleplaying games basically have subgames -- sometimes clearly defined as such, sometimes more fuzzy -- that you can play.\n
  • #22Β Traveller is great here. Character generation is it’s own game. Your character can die before you’re “really” playing! Trading is a game. Different kinds of combat (starships, on planet, mass) are games. World creation is a game.\n
  • #23Β 37 Signals had a bit in their iPhone app where there was a setup delay. So they let you play Tic-Tac-Toe. Now, that’s cute, but it’s not really related to the larger goal. The first mini-games in RPGs are usually character generation, so it makes sense that the closest cousins in our domains are usually signup & portfolio creation.\n
  • #24Β Sandboxes games and railroad games. These are concepts that span all sorts of games, they come up a lot in video games. But that can get hung up on technical limitations, so let’s stick with pen & paper. \n
  • #25Β Sandboxes. The game designer creates an area to explore, and maybe some mild motivation. The players choose what to do first and how to do it. Plot emerges from play. \nRailroad. There is an overarching plot. The players make choices within that, but the game designer makes sure they experience the main points and usually in a set order.\n
  • #26Β This one is less a pronouncement than an analytical framework. Think about what you’re designing and break it into sandboxes and railroads. Take e-commerce. Someone is browsing -- they may have a vague idea what they want to buy, but they’re more than happy to look at other things, comparison shop, research, get distracted. Sandbox!\n
  • #27Β But eventually they’ve got some items in their shopping cart and want to check out. Boom! Railroad the crap out of them. Lead them by the nose. Eliminate distractions. It’s not just about efficiency -- you have a narrative (in this case “you are happy with your purchases and trust us to ship them to you”) and you’re going to give them that story.\n
  • #28Β OK. So the thing about the old-school games is that they were originally built by hobbyists for other hobbyists. It showed. There were mistakes, inconsistencies. Game balance was a concern but there wasn’t really any way to achieve it and in any case that never stood in the way \n
  • #29Β James Maliszewski wrote an essay called “Stop Making Sense.” He talked about how when he was first creating worlds, he strove for complete order, perfection, explaining everything. Leave no holes. But he’s found that the holes and the things that didn’t quite make sense gave him room for continued creativity.\n\n
  • #30Β Expand that from a single person creating to a community and I think it holds. If we, as designers, leave some features out (for a while), leave some messiness and inconsistency, it gives our users room to co-create with us. That’s how we got hashtags and retweeting. You can always go back and fix, but sometimes you don’t need to.\n
  • #31Β This one is kind of hard to explain now, because D&D (and its successor like WoW) have been such a cultural force over the past few decades that a lot of these things have been diffused. But at the time, this stuff was a complete hodge podge of Tolkien, Burroughs, Leiber, adventure movies, actual medieval history, mythology. Total mishmash.\n
  • #32Β This is similar to the “leave gaps” point, but it’s not just cramming things in. It’s putting in seemingly disparate elements and watching them gel, like magic. This is why I’m not really persuaded by the metaphor purists -- I find it kind of charming when real-world metaphors mix with purely digital ones. As long as it works, throw it in.\n
  • #33Β So it’s really important that characters can die. Some games have other kinds of risk, but in old school RPGS, death is usually the big one. Characters die. That adds spice, it gives the stories meaning, it makes for legendary action. Game I remember the best was a Star Wars game. One shot. My Han Solo-ish character heroically sacrificed himself to save the group. \n
  • #34Β Now, in design, some sorts of risk are unacceptable. It’s not acceptable to lose your users’ data. Or expose it to other people w/out permission. But without ANY risk, sterility. So, how do you as a designer, expose your users to “good” (fun, narrative building) risk, but not “bad” (unfun, cynicism building) risk? I haven’t the foggiest. I’m working on this one. :)\n
  • #35Β So, here are my 8 points. If you want to start using them in your work, obviously the thing to do is get a D8 and rolle to see where to start.\n
  • #36Β Thanks to everyone who helped me put this together, and special thanks to Gary and all the other creators who have inspired me.\n
  • #37Β \n