Frustration Part VI

And here is the final Frustration rule set.

Frustration

The goal in Frustration is to get to get the last seat on your flight. Each

player moves around the board while trying to hinder and obstruct other players from making it there first. Whoever makes it to their flight first wins!

Inventory:

53 cards: playing cards

Obstruction pieces: single colored glass beads

Game board

Player tokens: multi-colored glass beads

Rules

• This game is to be played with 3 to 5 players
• Players may designate a first player; play proceeds in clockwise order.” Players place their chosen token on the start and begin the game.
• Players shuffle the playing cards and place the deck next to the board.
• A player draws a playing card at the beginning of each of their turn and places it face up in a discard pile, which will be placed next to the unused playing card deck.
• Each card has a movement value and either an obstruction or a hindering move that the player must complete as follows:
• Move: This part of the card allows the player to move the amount of spaces indicated by the number on the card. Each player can only move forward or to the side; they cannot move backward or diagonally, nor may they move onto the same space more than once (no backtracking). Players may move through spaces occupied by other players; this counts as one space. . If a player ends his movement on an opposing player, the opposing player is moved backwards one space. This can trickle back and multiple players may move backwards as a result. A player must end their move when landing on an obstruct piece (see “Obstruction”).
• Hinder: This action is used in conjunction with the move action. The player must complete his movement prior to using this action. Players may hinder any other single player on the board other than themselves – this is defined by moving a player’s token backwards on the board the number of spaces that matches the number following “Hinder” on his drawn card. The player may move single opposing player in any direction, as long as the opposing player’s token is moved further away from the goal. Just like normal movement, the hindered token may not land on the same space more than once during the hindering move. In the event that there are obstructions left on the board during a hinder, and the player hindering desires to move the opposing player’s token onto an obstruction, the player moves to that space, ceases movement, and the obstruction is removed. If a player hinders a player and forces them to land on one or more players, they all are moved back in a follow-the-leader fashion, just like normal movement.
• Obstruction: This action, like hindering, is used in conjunction with the move action. Obstructions place a barrier piece (the single-colored glass beads) to block the flow of movement through the intended space, forcing a player to end his movement on the obstruction’s space if he attempts to move through or onto the obstruction. Obstruction pieces can be placed anywhere on the board – so long as the space is not occupied by a player, a previously placed obstruction piece, a car in the parking area, or the plane itself
• Everyone Move Back 5: Once drawn, this action forces every player to move backwards five spaces on the board. The player who drew the card must move first, followed by the other players in clockwise order. If there are obstructions completely blocking a player’s path then they stop on the obstruction. If the path is not completely blocked, players are forced to move around the obstruction.
• Switch with First: Once drawn, the holder of this card may switch their player with the player currently in first (this is determined by the player that is the least amount of spaces away from the plane). In the event that the player who drew this card is already first, nothing changes and the turn ends.
• Switch with Last: Once drawn, the holder of this card must switch their player with the player currently in last (this is determined by the player who is the most amount of spaces away from the plane). In the event that the player who drew this card is already last, nothing changes and the turn ends.

• When the deck is exhausted, the players shuffle the discard pile. This discard deck will be used as the new drawing deck, with a new discard pile next to it. Players will then resume the game.
• Exit Ramp: The exit ramp (shortcut) can only be used if a player lands exactly on the exit square. When a player lands on the exit ramp, immediately move them forward one space so that they are not blocking the exit square.
• Airport: The airport is distinguished by burgundy squares. A player in the parking area or exit ramp must make it completely to the farthest two entrance squares before entering the airport (a player may not move through a black line)
• Winning: The game is over when one player is declared the winner by getting the last seat on the flight. This is simply done by landing on the airplane space.

Frustration Part V

Today could easily have been the make it/break it day for our group: we play tested with a group that knew very little about games. It only took about 2 minutes to successfully explain the rules, and we took notes as rule questions came up, so we could make sure to address any uncertainties. The only change between today’s game and yesterday’s were the changing of the “switch spots” cards, which I mentioned in my last post, and a decision we made about the shortcut. We decided that when a player lands on the shortcut space, they are moved one space ahead, sealing them in on the shortcut so they aren’t so easily hindered out of it. The game played, once again, very similarly to our many previous tests. One player pulled ahead, but the other players ganged up on her until everyone caught up. The game was neck-and-neck, with the occasional happening of one player being much closer to the finish than the rest. There were a few questions regarding the obstructions and how to move through them, but it was easily answered.

When the players got to the parking section, we questioned our decision of forcing the player to park in order to progress. This presented a few problems:
1) When a player is hindered to the point in which they are moved out of the parking section, after having parked, do they have to park again?
2) What is in play to make the player choose one parking space over the other?
3) When you park in a space, what is to keep the other players from landing on the same place?
4) Can obstructions be placed on parking spaces?

We all agreed that the parking was a mechanic that didn’t really add anything or any enjoyment to the game. Because of this, we removed the parking rule. Players no longer needed to end a turn on a parking space, and could now move right through the parking lot. The parked cars that we originally for pure aesthetic were now turned into permanent obstructions, which players could not pass through.

The game moved a bit faster than our previous tests, only taking about 45 minutes, which was a pleasant surprise. The players literally ended the game with a back-to-back line one space away from the finish (see the picture below). They seemed to love this part, and the last 15 or so minutes of the game, because it was such a close call. They were frustrated, but were enjoying it: exactly what we were going for. When we asked if there were any changes they would like to be made, only one had a slight concern. This player pointed out that although the beginning of the game was fun, the second half was more enjoyable. When we talked about this in the open, we all, including the player with the point, came to the conclusion that as the game progresses, players get more and more sucked in and attached, making the game more enjoyable and more frustrating because of acts for or against the player’s piece. We decided to keep things as they were, as there were no out-right complaints, and that we concluded that the game becoming more enjoyable as the players play was simply due to the players getting sucked into the game – not because the first half is boring. The new cards worked well, as well, and the players got a kick out of the leader being moved to the back of the board more than once.

With the testing complete, we only needed to finish our designs and type a formal rules sheet. Once that’s done, I’ll be sure to post some images and the rules themselves.

Until next time
-Connor

Frustration Part IV

Today (Tuesday) we had our first play test with people outside of our group. I played along and took note on a game involving myself and four other game designers. The test could not have been better. The game played very similarly to the previous tests: the players were all very close and the winning player changed constantly. The players had a bit of trouble with the short cut and how to use it, but I was able to explain it so everyone did understand – but we now know to make sure and address it in our rules.

Some things I questioned during the testing were:
1. Does the “move back 5 spaces” card cause too much frustration?
2. Do the players feel the game progresses too slowly or too quickly?
3. How do the players feel about the close proximity of the players during most of the game?
4. What do the players think of the switching first place and last place cards?

The players had very positive feedback. They felt the “move back five spaces” card was a fun mechanic and agreed that 7 spaces would have been too much and the 5 fits well. All the players thought that the game progressed at a steady and even pace, and that it wasn’t too fast or too slow. Their feedback showed me that the progression of the game was frustrating in the way it was intended: your position in the game could change any minute, the players are each so close to each other, obstructions could have an enormous impact on the board, and a player’s fate isn’t always directly in his hand. The only change they said they would make involved the “switch first and last” cards. They felt experienced players could use the card to their advantage and strategically stay in last until the card is drawn, and they concluded that it would be unfair to new players to keep the cards. They also didn’t like the idea of the card not affecting the person who drew it, and that it was basically a “skip turn” card, which they found annoying.

The test concluded right around the hour mark, including set up, reflection, and instruction. I reported the good feedback to the rest of the group, and we decided to remedy the “switch first and last” card. These two cards would be replaced by two new cards: one had the player who draws the card switch places with the player in the lead, while the other had the drawer switch with the player furthest from the goal. As we found out in later testing, these new cards fit in great with the rest of the deck, and, most importantly, the players liked them.

Later on in the day we met again to begin designing the board, cards, and pieces, as well as write out the rules. We planned one more test before solidifying the game – this time, with non-gamers.

I’ll post the happenings in my next post.

Until then,
-Connor

Frustration Part III

Meeting three of our group really solidified our design. Over the night, we had a completed board with all the spaces and sections well laid out – the first true production prototype. The board was built taking into consideration the last day’s tests and what we thought would be an appropriately lengthy board.

When we first got together, we discussed the idea of adding a few special cards that could dramatically affect game play. This led to two new cards: one would move every player back 7 spaces and the other would force the player in the lead to switch places with the player furthest from the end. Another new idea, that radically changed the game, changed the rules concerning the obstruction places. Whereas they originally were permanent and could not fully block off a path, they were now the complete opposite. Obstructions could be placed on any space, even if they block off a path. Now, a player could actually land on an obstruction. When you come to an obstruction, you may move on top of it. Doing this would force you to end your movement on that place, but it would remove the obstruction from the board.

With our recent amendments, we drew up the cards and sat to play. Within a few minutes of beginning to play, we all decided that the first section (the road) was far too long. We cut out about 1/3 of the spaces and started the game over. For the most part, everything went smoothly. The new rules regarding the obstructions proved to be a very wise move. Where before a player couldn’t block a path, this game, full walls were constructed, making it, well, very frustrating – but not the bad kind. This created new strategies, such as blocking off spaces behind one’s self, screwing over the player in the “short cut” (which proved to make a very balanced game), or simply frustrating another player by hindering them for the hell of it. Progression was still slow, but it was steady. The new cards were a nice addition, as they could change the game on the fly. We did decide, however, that moving all the players back 7 spaces was too much, so we cut it back to 5 (which seemed to work much better).

We did find a way to end the game. At the end of the board were three spaces labeled 1^st, 2^nd, and 3^rd. These represented three different flights, and could frustrate the players who might have to move backwards to secure a place in the top 3. We tested the game a total of three times this day, and we’re very happy with our game’s direction. It was now ready for others to play, which I will comment on in my next post.

Heres a few shots of our illustrious board and our testing attached.

Until then,
-Connor

Frustration Part II

Our second meeting established most of our ideas in the game. We were originally going to create a separate deck of cards for each stage in the game, but after some careful thought decided that that was an element that was redundant and unnecessary. Where we first thought we would represent different types of obstruction (such as the traffic jam), we decided to simplify it by reducing it to simply an “obstruction.” We created a deck of 50 cards, distributing 1-6 onto each card (your movement amount – like a card version of dice). We staggered the numbers like this:

1: 5 cards

2: 8 cards

3: 15 cards

4: 12 cards

5: 6 cards

6: 4 cards

This, as we found out during testing, was an extremely well balanced deck. We then split the deck 50/50 and added an “X” on 25 cards (obstruction) and an “H” (hinder) on the other 25. Lastly, 10 cards were given a star, representing a combo card. We had our basic rules ready to be tested:

Each player draws a hand of three cards prior to beginning the game. On a turn, a player first draws a single card. Secondly, the player selects a card and plays it. With each card, the player may do one of the following:

1. Use the number values on the card to move that many spaces.

2. Use the hinder part of the card (H) to move a player backwards half of the number value (rounded down – this we will actually put on the final cards, we were just too lazy to write them in on a prototype).

3. Use the obstruction part of the card (X) to place an obstruction, which no player may move through, on any space – so long as it never fully blocks a path.

4. If a combo card is drawn, you may use both parts of your card.

If the player uses the movement value of his card, he may move that number of spaces, but may not land on the same place more than once. If the player lands on a place with another player, the player who moved the piece moves the other player backwards. This does have a trickling effect, as this could force multiple players to move backwards. Whoever moves his piece to the end of the game board first, wins.

We added what looked like appropriately sized spaces on our board, and made our player pieces. We tested our game. About halfway through, we noticed that we rarely used the hinder or obstruction of our cards, unless it was on a combo card. As this was our primary mode of frustration, we knew this needed to be fixed. We stopped the game and made a few amendments. One of us had the idea to make cards with multiple obstruction pieces, so we did. We also decided to make all of the cards combo cards. Our last revision had the “H” of a car equal to the number on the card (as opposed to halving it). The hand of three cards was thrown out, and we decided the player would have to use the card he draws each turn.

Within 10 minutes we knew we had made some mistakes. Our pieces were all clumped together, only about 6 spaces away from the start and there were more spaces with obstructions that without. We ended the game. We instantly got rid of the multiple obstruction cards and returned the hindering value to half rounded down of the movement value.

We played that game again. Something we all noticed early on is that the players are always close to each other and the hindering and obstructions were actively changing the game and being quite useful to frustrate the other players. At first we were worried, but noticed that being so close to each other is in and of itself frustrating, as anyone could be the winner. We ended the game when we got to where our board had stopped, as we hadn’t decided what to do about multiple terminals in the game. We called it a night, but not until we discussed our feelings of the last game. First, it was way too long, especially in the road section which lasted at least 15 minutes by itself. And secondly, we felt overall that it wasn’t quite frustrating enough; so we would spend the next day thinking of how to add more frustration without changing too much of the game play. Getting rid of the hand of cards proved wise; this added another random element and something that could ultimately be frustrating – in a good way. Until next time,

-Connor

Frustration

So the group of us (me, Spencer, Caesar, Johnathan, and Nate) are going to make ourselves a board game. The aesthetic model we've chosen, and hope the players feel, is frustration. At our first meeting we threw out a few possible designs based on what things in our lives that we find frustrating. We came to an agreement on one major idea: getting on a plane at the airport. We quickly came to the decision that we would make a true board game, utilizing a board, player pieces, and cards. It didn't take long until we figured the board would represent a series of stages taken to get on your plane. The player would start in the car, on their way to the airport. The next stage is finding parking, followed by check-in, security, the tram, and the gates. Sticking with frustration, we wanted a key element of game play to allow each player to screw up his fellow players, thus making them frustrated. Players would do this by drawing 'hindering' cards, which would allow the player to 'hinder' the others. We threw out the ideas of traffic jams, security checks, car accidents, little kids at the airport, and a few others. With our general theme and idea ready, we planned on a day to meet to come up with a prototype and test it like nobody's business. Stay tuned for more.