Game design is a series of universal theories that can be applied to any facet of play, yet most people think the disparity between video games and tabletop games is too large to broach. Rather than seeing these concepts as a dividing line, let's take a look at some concepts often speculated to be solely digital and bring them into the tabletop environment. 

The phrase “The Devil is in the details” refers to a catch, or a mysterious element that exists within the detail of a set of information, be that visual or otherwise. Within that, if one is to remove all of “The Details”, they are simply left with “The Devil”.

So leads to the concept of horror vacui, a Latin expression meaning “Fear of emptiness/empty space”. In design, as well as in visual art, horror vacui is a tendency to favor filling blank spaces with objects and elements over leaving the same spaces blank or empty.

Universally in concepts of design, there is a prevalence to strip away the unnecessary elements. Cutting back from the noise of non-useful elements will lead to a more functional and sleek design, oozing with purpose and importance. Within that horror vacui is a strange and compelling phenomenon to add instead of take away for fear of the absence of elements.

For this, I would again like to bring up the differences between the horrifying elements of a game like Silent Hill 2 versus the fear elements of Resident Evil 5. I have chosen these two examples for prevalence among game consumers as well as exemplary depictions of both concepts.

Silent Hill 2, as a concept, largely attempts to isolate the player and make them feel alone, from both interactivity and suspicion, to the point of tensions leaping from the unknowing fog at any time. It is a lack of stimulus that drives the fear of the game, as the player feels constant disconnection from a town that should otherwise be active.


On top of that, there is an unsettling fascination with things that should be but simply are not. While the monsters are certainly scary in Silent Hill 2 for fear of their deadliness and the imminent failure-state that they represent to the player, the people of Silent Hill 2 are unsettling and disturbing in a different way, representing something that is simply wrong, from the way that others talk to the titular moment of the phrase "There was a hole here. It's gone now."

Resident Evil 5 approaches a more active role in the fear that it tries to promote, in that the game begins with Chris “Refrigerator Arms” Redfield and Sheva entering a strange town filled with uncomfortable sights, such as leaking sacks and general unrest amongst the locals. Shortly thereafter, a fight breaks out, and the pair must maneuver their way through using the weapons available to them. That fight then continues for the duration of the game, moving from one action set piece to the next.

Silent Hill 2 strips away the potential for a player to interact within the world, which in turn makes the world more terrifying. The villains are vaguely human, but not enough to discern real characteristics. The town is empty, but the player constantly feels as if danger is right around the corner. In that, the emptiness of the game is the direct proponent for the psychological tension that is derived from the opening scenes.

Let me stress this fact, if the above was not clear: There is nothing more unsettling to a player than not knowing what to do next, or not having a clear idea of their immediate threat. If the player is never able to correctly identify the threat, they maintain in a state of hypervigilance, leading to a constant machination of tension.

Horror vacui, in a less interesting manner, can be used to promote the value of one option over another.
In theory, this practice of adding value by subtracting other perceived value. The lack of options causes one to focus more heavily on the options at hand. This can also be used to inspire importance to specific options when leading through narrative. If the players have one-hundred places to visit, each place loses intrinsic value.

Tell a player that they need to cross through a park to find a MacGuffin on the other side. Then, as they travel through the park, emphasize that they lose awareness of how far they have traveled and how far they must further travel. 

Something they understand (a park) has now created new and strange dimensions (emptiness) which leads to a sense of aimlessness and feeling lost. Push this too far and it will turn to frustration, but keep it correctly balanced and the player will hold their tension for the whole game.

Have you run a horror game lately? Do you find the genre interesting or boring? What is the best horror experience you've ever had in gaming? Let us know in the comments!

Enjoy our content? Have something to add? Join the forums and let us know! We also have positions available for contributors and writers. Inquire within to become a StrMod contributor today! 

Game design is a series of universal theories that can be applied to any facet of play, yet most people think the disparity between video games and tabletop games is too large to broach. Rather than seeing these concepts as a dividing line, let's take a look at some concepts often speculated to be solely digital and bring them into the tabletop environment. 


Games are often declared as methods for escapism, relinquishing reality in the aspects of gaining fantasy. However, this notion excludes an entirely different type of experience, where the player leaves their reality to operate within another setting, a representational reality. In that concept is Simulation, a procedural representation of reality in a fictional setting.

Warren Robinett, designer and programmer best known for the Atari 2600 game Adventure, is particularly fascinated with the concept of simulation as a play experience. In his book Inventing The Adventure Game, he defines simulation as the following:

In that sentiment, Robinett proposes that games, particularly video games in his example, are not real life; they are simply a metaphor for what real life can represent, based on simulation. In Robinett’s definition, as a game is simply a metaphor, it would call that all games are a simulation, regardless of physics or laws of the universe, and simulated entirely based on the rules-as-written by the code that presents the game in its form.

Eric Addinall, Henry Ellington, and Fred Percival further define the concept of a simulation in their collaborative work A Handbook of Game Design, with the following definition:

It is important, the definition above adapted from the definition of these authors, that simulation changes from “representing reality” to “representing central features of reality”, allowing the game itself to move away from what would be considered “real events” and allowing creative freedom, simply representing a reality rather than adhering towards a reality. In that, the authors agree with Robinett, that a game is a metaphor for reality, concepts that could be considered real events, rather than a straight simulation of reality itself.

By identifying that a simulation must constitute an on-going process, a simulation then requires something to differentiate itself from that of a series of moving pictures to become a simulation to the user rather than a viewer of content. In this example, the on-going process is “play”, and the ludic experience derived from that state of play.

The largest divide between “simulationist play” and other forms of play, when discussing tabletop, would be the concept that simluationist play directly represents reality in the rules that the type of play inhabits.  This is the difference between recovering hit-points through drinking a potion, and disinfecting a wound before applying stitching or cauterization to seal it. However, I do not believe these two experiences necessitate mutual exclusivity.

While it is easily stated that there are games that can be considered far more “simulation” for the aspect of appealing to a certain kind of play, it is important to note that not all simulation must mean laws as applied to reality, but simply a representation of that reality. When designing a game to have “real effect” or “real consequence”, consider that a simulation is as concrete as necessary to deliver the experience. Degrees of exaggerated suspension of belief are necessary to establish either experience.

Essentially, a simulation is as much of a simulation as the designer would like it to be at the inception of the design; however, due to the procedural nature of games themselves, simulation has the ability to adapt itself to more fantastic situations.

Do you prefer simulation games, either on the tabletop or in video games? Is there a satisfaction from ruthlessly realizing real concepts in fantasy settings? Do you have zero interest in simulation? Let us know in the comment section!

Enjoy our content? Have something to add? Join the forums and let us know! We also have positions available for contributors and writers. Inquire within to become a StrMod contributor today! 

The Immersive Fallacy is the idea that pleasure of a media experience lies in its ability to sensually transport the participant into an illusory, simulated reality. The immersive fallacy also proposes that the new reality is so complete that the frame falls away, and the player believes they are part of an imaginary world. Salen and Zimmerman criticize this concept of immersion, as it is less a matter of experiencing a game, and more of joining the game in play through interaction.

Game designer and programmer François Dominic Laramée wrote the following on the concept of immersion in his essay, Immersion:

These comments are pointedly exaggerated to influence conversation, but propose the future of immersive entertainment becoming a full virtual-reality simulation where the user experiences the interaction with the media through sight, sound, smell, taste, and touch, until they are completely encapsulated in the new reality, stripped from their own.

More frighteningly, is this something the modern consumer would be looking for in their entertainment, as a complete escape from the world they occupy into a new experience of immersion?

Elena Gorfinkel, a film studies scholar, responded to Spector’s comments with the following criticism:

Gorfinkel here postulates that immersion is not a trait of media that can be aestheticized, but a concept that is wholly and entirely produced through the interaction of the game and the consumer of the game.  Gorfinkel also moves to state that immersion is not a matter of graphics or details of the aesthetic quality, but a method in which a game interacts with its player, as well as the depth of that interaction.

Often, I will hear about GMs attempting to immerse their players in a variety of ways at the table. A large component of these theories is adding something externally to the game outside of the game to better position the players in the setting, such as music. This is a concept I usually balk at, as music can be helpful but often adds another element of the gameplay that the players cannot interact with, nor was designed specifically for the game.

The immersive experience must come from the play itself, being the experience that the players are obtaining through the adventures they take within the game. Rather than spending time finding a music sting or ambience that could generate a feeling in the game, that feeling could be generated by more efficiently designing the play rather than the external.

I’ve put both theories of immersion into this article, as I would like you to draw your own conclusion, be that from immersion through aesthetic or immersion through play. Regardless of choice, the end result should always be creating immersive experiences for the player. 

Do you have any experience with immersive events? Have you, as a player or as a GM, ever found yourself drifting into another world as you play? Does all of this sound completely silly? Let us know in the comment section, we would love to hear your opinions and stories!

Enjoy our content? Have something to add? Join the forums and let us know! We also have positions available for contributors and writers. Inquire within to become a StrMod contributor today! 

At the core of any game is something called a “Game Loop”, which is a term for a series of actions that the players take part in again and again as the core series of actions within the game. While that may seem repetitive and boring, on paper, the greatest game loops allow for players to constantly repeat enjoyable actions while never knowing that their actions are repetitive loops. In Game Design, this is known as “Entrainment”.

Entrainment comes from the French word “entrainer” and has two meanings: to carry along, and to trap. Entrainment has been commonly used to describe physical and natural phenomenon, such as circadian sleep rhythms to thunderstorms. Game Designer Brian Moriarty uses entrainment to refer to rhythmic pleasure, a process of falling into a patterned activity and continuing to enjoy the experience. In 1998, Moriarty gave a talk at the Game Developers conference about entrainment and game design:

Entrainment is the experience of “same-but-different”. From the experience of firing the same series of weapons in the same matches of Call of Duty to grinding experience in a Final Fantasy, entrainment is the concurrent pattern of repeating actions but enjoying the actions while in repetition.

Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 was able to inspire this kind of pleasure, while theoretically less interactive with the players in the fight. There were not a dozen abilities of use at any given time for each player, but the players were able to find a comfortable routine within the combats, knowing their specific abilities, as well as the potential outcomes for each action. It finds a rhythm in combat that later iterations simply lack: the flow and focus of slowly dissecting an enemy without necessitating more options.

When examining gameplay, as well as pacing for a game or even a session, a GM could establish a point of which the players will be allowed to set into their respective rhythm. By crafting a point in the game of which players are allowed to systematically enjoy their abilities and actions based on the actions they have chosen as characters, the game will naturally create this gameplay loop, and potentially inspire entrainment, the same-but-different gameplay leading towards the experience of entrainment.

It is less of a trick, and more of a phenomenon of perception. By allowing players to experience something they are comfortable doing, while repeating the action, a natural state of enjoyment comes from breaking down a conflict through repetition. This comfortable, enticing loop of gameplay is the crux of design, whether in systems created or homebrewed, and should be the focus of creation for all mechanically focused systems.

Have you ever had a notably entrained game? Is there a point of which you realize you, as a player, or the players before you are falling into a comfortable rhythm? Is there an event you typically introduce to encourage this kind of gameplay? Let us know in the comments, we would love to hear your opinion!

Until next time, stay rhythmic!

-CP

Enjoy our content? Have something to add? Join the forums and let us know! We also have positions available for contributors and writers. Inquire within to become a StrMod contributor today!

 

In design, the greatest tool for improving a game is iteration. There are very few games that are completely, objectively perfect, if any at all. Iteration is vital to improving upon an existing game, from the smallest parts to entirely new editions and systems; however, this concept can be equally staggering as it is interesting. It’s dangerous to go alone, take this guide and make the first steps of evolving yourself from player to designer.

One of the greatest parts of homebrewing, adapting, or modifying games in general, is the ability to change as much or as little as one would want to change. Part of the reason that modifying a system is far more enticing than creating an entirely new system all-together is that it is the same effect as adding a radio to an existing car rather than attempting to build a car from scratch.

Then again, that assumes that you’re going to be building that radio from scratch. Rather than attempt to undertake a large project, potentially ruining the wiring of the system you’re modifying, you can simply install a new piece that works within the system without too much trouble, adapting that portion into your new, fully functioning machine. Before this analogy gets too far, the crux of the statement lies within adaptation and iteration.

Adaptation is taking a piece of a different system and bringing it into the system you’re currently playing. Iteration is taking an existing system and refining an aspect, portion, or entire section, and then bringing it into the game. Adaptation is the easier portion; you can take a part of a game that works and should work universally, and place it into your game. Iteration is slightly harder; you would have to correctly identify a part of a system that can be improved and then improve upon it in a meaningful way.

In Exalted, there is a mechanic called “Stunting”.  The world that Exalted takes place in, known as Creation, inherently loves a good story. Therefore, all of the players in the world of Creation gain otherworldly support when they are in the process of making a good story within the universe. Stunting is a mechanic that allows a player to gain more dice to roll, equating to more potential success on their action, by simply describing whatever it is they are doing in a flowery or colorful fashion.

Stunting is an adaptation that can come into literally any system. It is a mechanical benefit for good roleplaying, and small enough to not break any system or inherently ruin any scenario, as the benefit gained is entirely judged by the person running the game. Inasmuch, it is a simple mechanic adapted from Exalted and placed into any other game to potentially great result.

In Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition, there was a mechanic known as “Action Points”, which allowed players to take a second standard action, allowing them to perform two “main” actions in their turn. As it progressed, it was rather hard to gain more Action Points in a single session, and the result of gaining more was massive. Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition instead allows for a mechanic known as “Inspiration”, which will also grant a small mechanical benefit, for playing in such a manner that suits their character or potentially placing themselves into a precarious situation on purpose.

Iterating upon the concept of “Action Points”, where a player would either need to rest fully or perform an insanely grand action to achieve, “Inspiration” gains a quick and useful currency that can be given to players more often (much like Stunting), and even passed from player to player, allowing the entire table to celebrate the successful play of another. This iteration took a mechanic that was seldom and very powerful and created a smaller, but more interactive and narrative mechanic that can be used by the entire group, which better serves play.

Overall, do not be afraid to take a mechanic that works from another system and attempt to adapt it into your current play. Mechanics that serve narratively are always easier to implement, but there is certainly room for more structural and mechanical implementation of options for the players. Rather than building a car, just buy a new radio. It will be music to your ears.

Have a story of adaptation or implementation of new mechanics into your systems? Have you gone full-force in creating an entirely new system of play? Do you believe there is benefit or lack thereof regarding adapting mechanics? Let us know in the comment section! 

Enjoy our content? Have something to add? Join the forums and let us know! We also have positions available for contributors and writers. Inquire within to become a StrMod contributor today!