Skip to Content
 

My Basic Eurogame Principles

8 replies [Last post]
Yort
Offline
Joined: 11/24/2009

My Ideas on Successful Euro Game Design. Let me know what you think. Expand if you like.

The BIG 3 elements in game design

1) Clear Objective: Each player must have a good understanding of what they are trying to accomplish. Winning, or even “Points” are much too broad of terms to be useful. The task that the player wants to engage in to get the points and win must be clear. Also avoid real-world thinking that can’t be directly translated into an action. For example, instead of thinking of your objective as building a city (Real world term) as in the game “Advanced Civilization”, your actual game-term goal is moving enough settlers into one region to replace them with a city token.

2) Simple Game Core: This core is a simple activity that could almost work as a stand-alone game, and involves making choices. Bidding, trading, managing resources are a few simple game cores that appear in many Eurogames. There are many more cores and many subtypes of each that can be explored.

3) The Means: This is how the players may use the simple game core to reach the objective. This is usually where the real work is in designing, and where the individuality of your game will be created. For example, in “Medici”, your objective is to fill your boat with the best numbers and combination of goods that you can. The simple core “Game” aspect of this is bidding on lots of items. The means of doing this are the rules involved in how the bid items are selected, how many times players can bid, method of payment on the bids, etc.

Hints:

Avoid exceptions in the rules: Games start to lose their Euro dynamic once rules are added to avoid abuse or deal with unusual situations. This is what’s called a “fiddly” game. A good Eurogame should be fairly naturally balanced, welcoming creative use of the rules, while making the game very hard to “Break”.

pelle
pelle's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/11/2008
euro?

Why do you think you need to limit this list to euro games? Why would exceptions or lack of strong core-rules be good for any kind of game?

The only thing I disagree with is avoiding real-life thinking. I think connecting actions to real-world events help you understand and remember (and teach) the rules of a game, and also makes for a stronger theme, which imo helps a lot making the game more fun and interesting to play (and for some non-euro games the theme is more important than anything else, but still your other rules applies).

Yort
Offline
Joined: 11/24/2009
Yes but...

pelle wrote:
1) The only thing I disagree with is avoiding real-life thinking. I think connecting actions to real-world events help you understand and remember (and teach) the rules of a game, and also makes for a stronger theme, which imo helps a lot making the game more fun and interesting to play 2) (and for some non-euro games the theme is more important than anything else, but still your other rules applies).

I stuck with Eurogames, because that is what I like, and they tend to be the least simulation-like amongst boardgames.

1) Real-world thinking can really get in MY way of creating mechanics that are good for the game (see last sentence in this paragraph) rather than good for the theme. Practicing mental fluidity (which is very challenging) rather than using fixed ideas about something help me immensely, and I practice on letting certain "Self-evident" assumptions go. The theme can usually adjust, or the assumption may be less important that you imagined. For me player interaction is the first thing I strive for, the rest is icing on the cake.

2) Which is why I named my principles "Eurogame Principals".

Clearly, for some games theme IS the object of the game and everything else is secondary. I generally find these low on replayability, perhaps partly because I sadly have never found myself a "Fan" or "Into" something.

lewpuls
lewpuls's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/04/2009
You could rename this "abstract game principles"

You could rename this "abstract game principles". If you're making a model of reality - which most Eurogames emphatically are NOT - then you will likely NEED exceptions to rules. In abstract games you don't need exceptions because you're not modeling anything.

There are games called "Euros" that model some reality, but at some point we get into the whole question of what is a Euro game and what isn't. My take from more than six years ago on that is at: http://www.thegamesjournal.com/articles/Essence.shtml

Yort
Offline
Joined: 11/24/2009
Like Water

I like your list from your article. You are right I can think of exceptions to just about each one of your criteria, so it may be more that Euros tend to hover around a number of these features and occasionally break some. A little like Europe itself. It is an overlap of geographical, cultural and religious commonalities.

I wouldn't call it "Abstract" principles just for the fact that most people, me included, categorize abstract as having no theme. I played Trajan last week, it is themed, but it also has this mancala thingie mechanic that doesn't pretend to represent anything in the real world. Still a Euro in my book.

Thanks for your insight.

Robinson
Offline
Joined: 08/27/2012
expanding means

Interesting post, and I wholeheartedly agree with your first statement on clarity. In terms of your third point about means, I think that an important aspect of a good Eurogame is having multiple pathways to victory, which probably falls into this category, but perhaps is important enough to have its own bullet in that section. The option of playing to maximize ship points in Medici vs points on the board for ranking provides an interesting tradeoff, though relatively limited. A central aspect of a game like Agricola is needing to periodically "feed" your family, but this can be approached from several angles such as herding animals, farming/baking, or using actions to retrieve food on the board. This allows players to explore and strive to perfect several different strategies and increases the replay value of the game because people can be pursuing multiple viable strategies.

As an aside, many games offer what you might call exceptions or modifications of the rules that are not really that fiddly. For example, in St Petersburg you can purchase a card that gives you a discount on future purchases of a specific type of card. Using items like that can be an important tactical choice and the availability of these "exceptions" can be an interesting strategy modifier that improves the replay value of a game. Taken too far or applied to liberally, your point is certainly valid, but stringing together particular exceptions to make an interesting strategy is key to a game like Dominion where many of the cards are basically breaking the initial "rule" of 1 action, 1 buy, 5 cards in hand only.

Yort
Offline
Joined: 11/24/2009
Pathways & Fiddlyness

Robinson wrote:
I think that an important aspect of a good Eurogame is having multiple pathways to victory, which probably falls into this category, but perhaps is important enough to have its own bullet in that section.

As an aside, many games offer what you might call exceptions or modifications of the rules that are not really that fiddly. For example, in St Petersburg you can purchase a card that gives you a discount on future purchases of a specific type of card.

I was thinking about your multiple paths to victory comment. I like games which feature that, but I'm thinking that in some of my favorites where you are all basically doing the same thing to win. e.g. El Grande: You are all trying to maximize points scored in the regions (with the least amount of overkill), what action you choose really can change each turn depending on the situation you feel yourself in. I suppose you can rely on the tower more or less, but it seems the game would work without it almost as well. Tikal, seems like the same case to me. You can't really do any ONE thing and expect to win. Perhaps multiple paths to victory has to be better defined for me.

I like St. Petersburg, it doesn't feel fiddly to me, neither does Cosmic Encounter (except for the abused powers) which is an entire game of exceptions. I guess maybe what irks me are the rules put in place to stifle someone taking advantage of a broader rule. I like the game Egizia, but there is something about the final spot where I was really going to press my advantage and put someone on the ropes, when the owner of the game says "No, it says here you can't do that action if you are the last piece on the board" (that wasn't it but something like that). Rules like that stick out like sore thumbs.

Thanks for your and everyone's comments.

pelle
pelle's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/11/2008
exceptions

I never heard anyone refer to cards (or things like cosmic encounter alien special powers) as "exceptions". Real (bad) exceptions (for any kind of game) are ones you find in the rulebook and have to memorize (especially bad when learning to play a game). Having special abilities because of having some card, and the ability is described fully on that card, is just following a simple rule about being allowed to use abilities from cards and that they override other rules.

pelle
pelle's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/11/2008
euros/simulations

Regarding my first command and euros/simulations, my point was that with a small modification the list would be more generically applicable to game design, instead of trying to cover only a specific (and not well-defined) subset of games.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut