While designing my latest game, called OverStock, which is basically a shipping and receiving game (although I prefer to think that it's more pure chaos than anything) I was thinking about the mechanics that are in it and this is what I've been thinking about.
The mechanics of this game I've used before, but I've changed a small little thing in them to make it fit the game. The turn order is very similar to my last game I made, but still somewhat different, and it uses VP like my first game. If I studied them all harder, I could probably think of some other things (well, another thing I think of is the fact that I'm using another mechanic that deals with colors, which is something I did with Nova which was on the GDW, and I'm also using colors in the next game I'm making as well.)
OK, I've rambled on without a point up to now, but here's my point:
Is recyclying your own somewhat unique mechanics (i say somewhat cause I doubt any mechanic is unique) seem like bad form? Or is this what helps us recognize those great designers?
To me even though they are almost the same, the games all play different. To me that's what matters. But I wanted to see what everyone elses opinion is on this.
Thanks for reading and commenting in advance.
-Steve
Thank you guys for the quick responses. Basically what you both said is how I feel. I wasn't too worried about copying my own mechaincs (i do not like copying others if I don't have to or am doing it ignorantly.)
I don't own enough games to know if this is a common thing or not, but I feel that it could be. I've heard about Reiner Knizia (correct me if I spelled that wrong) and his auction games (the Egyptian ones i am thinking of) and how they are similar but different. I guess it didn't hurt him any. (Although I wish Spy was as interesting as those games sound. Everyone that I've played with hasn't gotten into it, which is a shame, it's got some good stuff going for it, but not enough.)
-Steve