Self-Restricting design by components

Sounds like one of the many processes that should be undertaken when considering a design and revisited if one gets in a rut. I personally am a bit too broad at first, and I am sure this process will be of use to me.

I'm sure it won't fit every game, but it will definitely benefit others.

Well, some considerable time ago, I ran a GDS contest in which I gave a list of bits and the sole condition was that the game had to use all of them in some fashion, including paper money, counters, cubes and some nice oddities like a set of wooden elephants. (Has that idea been used again in more recent contests?)
There were some fantastically creative ideas - one I remember used the paper money as the Start Player mechanic (throw the money up in the air and see who catches the highest value note!)

So yeah, sometimes having the components helps concentrate the mind.
One of my most fun design projects of the last few years involved designing a set of three games, all of which used the same board, cards and component set but which felt completely different to one another. (I did cheat, and allowed myself to have a very few "unique" components for each game but not very many.) I genuinely don't recommend it as a project to anyone else though - it didn't feel like designing three games it felt more like designing about six. At once. :)

Stonehenge was that new attempt at that... here's the components and 5 games were made around it (with expansion for 5 more games + bunches of internet games posted).

It was supposed to be the deck of cards for board games.

Some designs were good, but mostly they weren't well thought of... games are just such creatures that very few can operate from the same component list. While many have similarities, they just need to be given their own voice and path that must be followed. Once you find the voice, it might be a good idea to stay within your singing range... by restricting the components.

I remember the Sri Lankan competition earlier and was inspired by the stories of the history and the odd looking components to make a game, so I felt I had to come up with something. It wasn't an ideal game, but one that translated the heart of the game I would like to make had I not been restricted to the components. I am grateful for that opportunity to test my design skills... but that competition had to get extended because there was only 1 entry initially. I was pressed for time and threw my ideas into form to be the second.

That's my only GDS victory - a 2 person competition with restricted components. I think it says a bunch about game designers because we generally have very specific ideas about what they want their components to do... but that's what's great about the GDS and wish I competed more often. It truly does stretch your design capabilities and every month it will restrict some facet of the design process.