| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Work with all your cloud files (Drive, Dropbox, and Slack and Gmail attachments) and documents (Google Docs, Sheets, and Notion) in one place. Try Dokkio (from the makers of PBworks) for free. Now available on the web, Mac, Windows, and as a Chrome extension!

View
 

Organica

Page history last edited by fabriziomarcotulli@gmail.com 12 years, 1 month ago

The title just feels right at the moment. Rules and board are below. If you show some interest in being one of my "blindtesters", please inform me about what game you are making via a PM on the forums so I can try it over the weekend (on saturday, to be more specific). This way everyone wins. Also, I have a few questions about the blindtest, which you´ll find below.

 

Components: For my previous sessions, 10 risk infantry and 4 sorry avatars were used per side, but you can also use pieces from a chessboard or any other game you own. You can also use different sized stones or even take a more symbolic approach and draw 10 Ps and 4 Ls of each color on pieces of paper

 

Rules: Rules are posted chronologically from oldest to newest, so the newes ruleset is at the bottom of the list. This was meant to show changes during development.

ORGANICA RULES 14-08-09.pdf

ORGANICA RULES 18-08-09.pdf

BoardORGANICA board

 

 

 

Blind test questions.

 

Is the game fair to all participants? (i.e. no one has a clear advantage right?)

What are your thoughts on the lenght of the game? too short? too long? 

What, in your opinion, makes the game so short/long/just right?

Were the rules clear to you? did you find any clear gaps that needed to be explained?

What do you think could be done to make learning how to play easier?

Was the size of the board ok? Would it adequately serve more than 2 players? please elaborate

What is the best aspect of the game?

What is the worst aspect of the game?

 

What game(s) does this remind you of?

Name one thing you would change or addto the game (other than the name, as we are focusing on finetuning gameplay)

 

I realize this is not very scientific, but I think it addresses my main concerns with the game. Feel free to use these questions for your own purposes.

 

I am adding a couple of links to pictures of the prototype, just to show what a finished game looks like.

 

http://i837.photobucket.com/albums/zz296/Tulliboy/Organica/IMG00047.jpg

 

http://i837.photobucket.com/albums/zz296/Tulliboy/Organica/IMG00048.jpg

 

http://i837.photobucket.com/albums/zz296/Tulliboy/Organica/IMG00046.jpg

Comments (5)

Eve Woodman said

at 10:43 am on Aug 15, 2009

Hey,
Well don't worry about whther anyone will playtest or not, I think a lot of us are behind on it. It is going at a fast pace, but we must just try and catch up while going at our own pace. Or by having a couple of groups testing at once, meaning that while yu finish off your own tests, get designers to test, as they test get non-deisgners to test and so on.

Anyways I have looked at your game, and my comments are as follow:

At a first glance reminds me of a game called 'Nine Mens Morris' you may have not heard of it, as it is quite an old game, but I love it. Anyways that's about moving pieces once placed on the board and capturing your opponents peices.

But as your read your instructions they deterred from this idea, as you have groups. And to move they must be in a group. Now onto this group thing, one thing that confused me was the mention of "Basic level of a group is 2" then you went onto say, they can only move in a group that is at least 3 pawns. While reading your instructions step by step, I thought, "oh so i can move any 2 pieces or more, as they are a group. When in actual fact that's wrong, it's when they are a group of 3. What I am trying to say is that mentioning the basic level of a group is not needed, as it dose not effect the gameplay. Once I figured that out, I just fogot about that piece of information. So just try and beware of what is actually necessary, do the players need to know this or will it just end up confusing them.

Another thing I noticed is that you keep using the word adjacent, okay I know what it means, but its always a word which sure would trip me up. I just wondered whho is your Target Audience? And would they know what it means?

Eve Woodman said

at 10:44 am on Aug 15, 2009

Continued:

Instructions need to be simple, so that even an idiot can understand them. But that doesn't mean you have to keep repeating yourself throughout the instructions, once it has been said, it should be enough. Trust your players. Now onto your "Other things to know". On your forth point it seems as if you have forgotten to finish the sentence. It ends with "and they..." What is a fusion and what happens? Also you've already spoken of the fifth point earlier in the instructions.
But on a positive side of things your explanation about Captures was great. It was simple to read, and I understood exactly how to capture an opponent’s pawns.

Onto the actual Game play.
Thoughts that came into mind were; When you place a pawn or leader do you have to make a group or can they be separate to then start to make a new group? And can pawns capture the opponent’s pawns?
Otherwise, it seems quite a nice game to play, the Hexagon board offers the players to move in any direction, a friendly looking board, in that it doesn't scare the players away from just a first look.

But I also wondered where did this idea originate from? Is there any sort of story-line connected to these pieces? Why are the pieces called Pawns and Leaders?

:) Good luck with the game - I'm intrigued to see how it turns out.

fabriziomarcotulli@gmail.com said

at 12:31 pm on Aug 16, 2009

Thanks for the comments. I´ll try answer every comment in order.

I can see how the "size 2 group" issue could be confusing, but at the time I thought that saying "pieces that are together form groups" was too vague. I know now that it works the simple way.

My target audience is people in their teens and older who have a decent understanding of games like chess, as well as people familiar with newer games, like Hive (which I strongly recommend you check out at BGG). However, I can see how the word could be a problem. I will post newer rules by tuesday that should be both shorter and easier to grasp.

A fusion occurs when you moved a piece so that it links to a piece that does not belong to the group you chose to move. when you do this the linked pieces are now part of your group, which means that you can now move them as well. However, the new pieces do not add to your movement capacity. I should have been more careful in proofreading what I put up on the wiki, but I guess that´s the purpose of having others try your game.

(continues next post)

fabriziomarcotulli@gmail.com said

at 12:59 pm on Aug 16, 2009

You can place your pieces wherever you want to with no need to form groups in the process. The only requirement is that you place the piece in an empty hex. I know that it sound like it leads to a blind choice (because "why would I want to NOT make a group grow?", but I thought it may encourage people to try to make two groups that are far apart as a strategy).

the next answer is a corollary of sorts to the previous one. Yes, you can create new groups as you place your pieces. I probably should add a section to the rules that mentions this, maybe a "basic strategy" section?

pawns can´t capture opponents´pawns. Only leaders can do that. Pawns, however, can be used to capture opposing leaders by completely surrounding them (though you can use leaders while surrounding as well). I´ll make sure that doesn´t escape my new draft of the rules.

To answer your last question I´ll just say that I was inspired by the game Hive initially because of the way all the pieces involved form a big cluster and define what pieces a player can use and how (you really need to see it to fully understand it). At first I just moved risk infantry around a hex grid to try to emulate movement patterns in hive (which, BTW, has no board) and to see the potential game space (how long it could take a computer to figure every possible move combination; the bigger it is the harder it is for the computer to be invincible at it gives a glimpse at game depth). Then I realized that I needed more than one type of piece to make things interesting, so I came up with the leader concept: bigger pieces in fewer quantities that could capture pawns. This brought its own challenges later, but solo testing got rid of most of that (I hope). So to answer your question, there is no real story here, just a need to name pieces differently because they did different things. In fact, I was more interested in the M and D of MDA, but I think the A made its way into the design.

Eve Woodman said

at 3:26 pm on Aug 16, 2009

Well thank you, that's certainly cleared up most of my queries. Yes I would create a section could "Basic Strategy" just to help the players it the right direction, as thats something I would choose to do, start up a new group away from the original group and try to close in from various directions.

Right, think I'll have a look at this game "Hive". And I only asked about the story, as you named the peices pawns and leaders, but this way because when I was looking at the game i thought up my own little story for it. So if theres anyone else like me, gives them that freedom to come up with their own. :)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.