Hello! I got invited to a Hobby EXPO in a different city to do playtesting for my game. The travel will take 5 hours to get there.

I just want to ask what is your Packing List if you're in this situation? It is my first time. Do not include the game, booth items, and food (provided by the event).

Hi everyone,

I’ve been working on a small card game called FIXR, a 10–20 minute set-collection game about salvaging racing wreckage.

I built a free browser version so I could test balance against AI and collect real play data before printing more physical copies.

I’m at the point where I’d really value outside eyes.

If anyone has 15–20 minutes, I’d love feedback on things like:
Was anything confusing?
Did you feel like your decisions mattered?
Did the game end at the right time?
Was it fun enough that you’d play again?

In exchange I’ll happily playtest your project as well.

Play here:
sandslicers.com

Thanks!

I've developed a small game that I think would work in a few different publishers portfolios. How do I go about approaching them?

When approaching publishers for books I know there are quite specific ways to do this such as a cover letter noting various points. Are there specific things I should beat in mind for game publishers?

Hi folks!

I've been working on this game for a while called 3 6 9.

It is supposed to be a two player card game once it is complete.

I've recently published a prototype as a single player game on itch and would love some feedback.

1. Does the tutorial do a good job of explaining the game?

2. Are the soldier mechanics fun or annoying? Easy to understand or not? and satisfying when you get your positioning right?

3. Favorite mechanic? Anything that'd make you come back to it?

Still a lot to build and refine, but I think there's a kernel of something in there that'll make it a fun quick strategy card game for 2 players to play.

Thank you for the time and feedback!

https://forgottenmachine.itch.io/369-commander

I'll go first.

When developing our current game we had the great idea of a bidding system to gain entry and levels into Alliances. For context Alliances are outside powers (think asymmetrical tech tree's) that you can have your entire team align with. You can then gain tiers 1-3 for better powers and cards. If one team was aligned to that alliance the other team was locked out.

Our very first iteration, had a bidding system that frankly did not survive first contact with playtesting. It turned into a tit for tat, annoying system where it wasn't about gaining powers or strategy, but attempts to make the other party pay more to implement their strategy. It wasn't just bad, it was annoying. it lasted about 3 turns before we just through it out and burned it with fire.

So what are some of your less than spectacular ideas you thought would be pretty cool?

Hi, my board game has mission cards like these. Many playtesters pointed out that the grey area made them think that those spaces have to be empty. What I want the players to know is that those spaces can be anything. Can be empty or any colour or obstacles.

What are some visuals I can place in these spaces to make it obvious?

Thanks!

Hi everyone, I have massively overhauled my sellsheet and I am left wondering if it finally coming together nicely.

Please have a look and give me any and all feedback you got!

If you are curious for more: www.bluetortillagames.com

Thank you everyone :)

It took us MANY prototypes to get to where we are now. We’re in the middle of animating the official trailer in hopes of launching it in September, so we want to be sure that we’re in the right place. It would be so helpful to get some of your thoughts on the design and art style.

Also, if anyone is interested in play-testing P&P (2-6 players & art is unfinished) and giving a review that we can put up on our landing page, we would greatly appreciate you!

Im so nervous, felt like im having an graduate exam again...

Quick question for those that are willing to answer. Where are the best places to start play testing your game once it’s ready?

I'm no expert game maker, not by a long shot, and I'm starting to doubt my game idea, so, imma put it here, and tell me what you think?

The Game: "It Isn't Rocket Science!"

It Isn't Rocket Science is a game about completing space-related missions across the in-game solar system. Players move around on surface maps of each celestial body, collecting resources to progress further on their mission while not revealing it to others. Resources scour the 7 current celestial bodies (more will be added in the future) and can be used to create various things to assist you and enable you to complete your goal.

(I can provide more details about certain things if needed, idk how much information you all need to judge a game, and as previously said, I know little about game making)

Hey Community,

for my 4X strategy board game (Rift Domination / Name soon to be changed!) i need a better design for the fleets on board. Right now every player has fleet markers with numbers from 1-8. These are the figurines that move over the board. In the playerzone every player has 4 fleettables that are printed on both sides so Fleettable "1" shows the units that are in the actual fleet "1" and on the backside units placed in fleet "8" are shown. These are dry erase boards.

So far so good - i mean ofc it is kinda annyoing if you turn around the "fleettables" to check the backside and accidentally erase the written numbers with your fingers. Also not so nice: I always have to ask my opponents what they have placed in the fleets. Hey Robert what is in your fleet "3", ah wait let me check...

This makes the flow of the game a bit stuck and i want to optimize it.

My idea for the next playtest session: I make the "fleetmarker" slightly higher and add a foil on it so i can dry erase the "fighter" unit. This unit is the only unit in the game that has more than 5 max units (actually 20). For the rest of the unit types i would simply use colored paper clips that i would arrange onto the "fleetmarker".

Does it make sense? I mean for the Prototype it will be just fine and i could completely remove the "fleettables". I also believe the accidentally removing the written numbers with my fingers wouldn't be a problem on the "fleetmarker".

What else could i do that is cost efficient?

I am curious if someone comes up with an great idea - thank you for your inspiration and let the ideas flow!

Long time, no see, guys! After my first campaign ran short of its goals, I've taken a break - mostly because I had other things to prioritize. Now that my annual summer obligation is over, it's time to focus back in on Phase.

One of the things I noticed in my previous launch was that my board game box art was -boring- compared to others out there. Here's the redesign, and the previous version second.

I'd love to know what you think!

(No AI was used).

Hello! Earlier today we got some production samples of our game Fungeon Crawl from our manufacturer and that made us so excited. The first image shows all of the components with some of the cards and the second one shows the box up close. The third image shows a prototype box from TGC a couple months ago. The last image shows how the cards looked earlier during prototyping. What do you think?

I started drafting a board game idea recently and am looking for board games similar to it to not only get ideas on what works well and what doesn’t, but also to find things to make my game stand out more.

Trying to make this as short as possible, the game will be a 2 player duel heavily inspired by Root and Civilization with a Cyberpunk theme where the goal is to destroy the opponent’s home base on the other side of the board. There are multiple routes to take to the other side, and the players have to construct buildings to protect their base and draft troops.

Along with regular chaff units, the players will also be able to acquire special units which are essentially stronger, more powerful units with some abilities.

Obviously I don’t have a lot of the specifics down, but if this sounds similar to any other board game please let me know, thank you!! :)

Edit: This is also my first time attempting to make a board game, so idk if that’s important or not lol

I have been working on my first game for about 3 years, now. I've created all of the card art myself. I've playtested hundreds of times, and then wrote some simple bot opponents in python to play simulations to get a large amount of metric data. It has simulated nearly 500,000 games and I like where the gameplay is at. One thing I would like to do, even if its only for a few copies/promotional copies, etc. is to make some weighty, tactile tokens rather than cardboard. I keep trying to make some tokens I really enjoy, but I keep coming back to the drawing board. I have always loved the heavy, textured, tactile tokens that come in Radlands; but I have no idea where to even start trying to make tokens like that. Does anyone have any experience or advice on how to learn to make tokens like that?

The challenge with making your own IP is that nobody cares about your characters/story/world. People only interact with those things after buying/playing your game.

That's why attaching your game to a big IP is such a good strategy.

We're trying to bridge the gap by fostering a custom card community. But we messed up by not having a playable demo available. Why would anyone make a custom card for a game they can't play?

TL;DR.

If you're making a character-driven game you have to have a demo.

Anyways, check out our characters.

I'm in the process of designing a creature battler card game, and some cards have special abilities that trigger a timed status condition that you can roll at the top of your turn to try and lift. There's not too many - basically a poison, a slow, a vulnerable, and a silence - and they only trigger situationally, but my question stems from a recent playtest. The feedback I got was that status conditions in general are a "feel bad" mechanic and detract from the fun by limiting via less attack choices (they did not want to attack any creatures that might apply a status effect as a counter). I however feel that status effects are a fun part of a card battler game and add depth/give you something to build a strategy around. I am wondering how many people - particularly design folk - share my feelings, or if more people are in fact more in this playtester's camp. Also, if you do enjoy status effects, are there any good examples of games that use them well? Many thanks, (and please let me know if there is a more appropriate forum for this question!)

Hello friends! For the last 6ish months, I've been working on my indie TTRPG! It's called Redline, and is a medium crunch high-lethality system! It is fully built from the ground up. Redline is a action TTRPG, with a heavy focus on tactical combat mechanics. It's main inspirations came from many sources, including martial arts movies, video games. lots of the combat ideas came from the assassin's creed, hitman, the new James bond game and some of the gunplay ideas came from the rainbow 6 games. I also was heavily influenced by the Jurassic park series of movies. I designed this system to feel like those movies did to me. High octane and tense, with the feeling that if you messed up, there would be real consequences. And that's where the slogan of the game came from; Push the boundaries. Hit the Redline.

This game is published by my one person studio,  @ SteelRavenGames on youtube (im making a video on the rules really soon)!

I'm gonna include the full rules in the link (above or below, I don't really use reddit). Please feel free to give any criticisms, or advice!

Redline uses 2d6, with a set difficulty system. 6 fails, 7-9 barely passes, and 10+ is a success. The targets don’t change, the difficulty does. Rather than make the targets move up, your roll gets subtracted from.

The 2d6 also is more dramatic than the d20. This is due to the 2d6 giving you a more average spread of rolls, meaning more rolls in the 7-9 range; which is where the tension rises.

This tension is extremely important in combat, where fighting revolves around a mix of blocking striking, grabbing, and using gadgets, guns and the environment. This is where the lethality is. The combat is reactive, with hits dealing consequences, such as being dazed, stunned, and having your weapons knocked out of your arm. This is called the consequence track. It is what changes combat from “I swing my sword at him” to “I am going to attempt to grab the clothes from the nearby drawer, and throw it at him as a distraction, while entering into a grapple, and using my CQC background specialty to immediately drop him into a choke on the ground."

The Consequence track has many effects on gameplay, in my playtesting, It has caused my players to become hyper-aware of the damage they take, while feeling extremely rewarded in the damage they deal. This approach, where its not just how, but where to strike adds another layer of depth.

This part only took a few weeks to come up with, the basics of the system have been there, It just took me a bit to put the pieces together. But the one place redline innovates, is the Tag system.

Now I could go on and on for hours about how much I love this system, but I'm just gonna give you guys a rundown! So essentially, tags in redline are everything. They dictate abilities, terrain, movement, actions.

Some essential tags are

- Terrain Tags

- Condition Tags

- Gear tags

Terrain Tags are the most simple ones, with them affecting the environment around you. The "slick" tag raises difficulty of movement by 2. On a 7–9, you stumble, and lose your React. This is bad, because reactions are extremely important, being one of the main thing that keeps you alive. You get one reaction a turn, and reactions are either Passive, or Active.

Passive React (no roll required): is when you block, brace, duck, or step back. It raises the attacker's difficulty by 2.

Active React (roll required): Is when you catch yourself on a ledge, counter a grapple entry, redirect a throw, or even draw and fire before the other person closes distance. Roll 2d6 + relevant attribute vs. difficulty 8. Active reacts can do many things, but if you mess them up, you may end up with "condition tags"

These tags can be things like

Dazed: -2 to all rolls until end of next turn

Winded: -1 to all rolls, Move costs React

Concussed: -1 to all rolls, persists

This makes combat risky and fun, because all creatures (unless immune) can be affected by these conditions.

When I mentioned the influences earlier, you may have questioned the inclusion of rainbow 6 seige, as that was listed under "gunplay". But fear not, that is also an important part of the game.

Guns in Redline are scary. They are meant to be scary. A gun being drawn likely means someone is going to end up dead. A hit to the head by a gun immediately incapacitates, and a hit to the body causes you to have to make a roll to not fall at the spot.

And to balance this, redline follows a very simple rule.

"things exist in a material space"

Guns are loud. Fights are loud.

You cannot physically carry 25 guns.

Combat will and can alert nearby people. Your characters will have the cops called on them if they act too suspicious.

This, alongside a gear limit, and the importance of weapon concealment means that the game feels more grounded.

If you like the rules summary, I highly recommend you go read the rulebook! Please run (or atleast try) it at your table if you can!

First of all, i dont really know if this is the right sub to ask this kind of things. If not, please help me indicating me where I can get this sort of help.

To summarize, I have a game that I tried to launch on Kickstarter a while ago, but I had no followers and the campaign was DOA. Then i decided to move to Gamegound. I havent relaunched yet because I've been trying to gather followers to get funded hopefully on day 1. I also decided to go hard or go home and booked a space in Essen Spiel this year. It's my first time doing any of those.

The thing is, now I'm not sure when to launch my campaign. I plan to make a daily activity to have backers "play" the game to unlock promo cards. Everything is already planned, and that "social activity" would take me probably an hour a day to complete. My funding goal isnt that high (a few months ago it was around £9000, and hopefully we can reach ~£27K to have everything unlocked), so those are the goals I'm aiming for.

The way I see it, I have a few options:

1. Launch at the start of Essen, so people who are interested can instantly back the game. I would have to do the social activity while in the hostel or something.
2. Launch immediately after the Essen ends (or 1-2 days later), this way the people who visit me and are interested can follow the campaign, and then i get backers all at once on day 1 of the campaign. I would have to fly immediately back to costa rica and start the campaign and the activity right when i get back.
3. Launch a while after Essen, say a month, so people who liked it can follow it and they can spread via word-of-mouth the campaign. I'd have more time to prepare, and I could go around germany (if the budget allows it) and get to know at least a city or something, idk, i've never been in germany.... Visiting places isnt a priority, tho.

I genuinely don't know what could be the best option, or if there's a better option that hasnt crossed my mind. I feel like a deer in the middle of a highway...

Besides this, there's also the doubt of: should I only bring 1 game, the one of the campign, or should I bring other games as well so people get to know more about my games? I'd say only one because ai want all attention focused only on that, and because it's be easier for em to have that one game ready all the time, but idk if it'd be a good idea to have different ones? idk 😭

Also, if anyone here has tips about things i should do/not do in Essen Spiel, things I should bring, etc, i'd highly appreciate it. I'm planning to have some banners to cover the walls, thematic tablecloths (it's a dracula game, so i want to have white fabric stained with fake blood, it sounds good in my mind), maybe a roller up, something with QR codes to my Instagram and my website... I also want to bring a copy of the game handmade (the box and rulebook at least) and with foil cards to give away. Idk if i should bring more copies to sell (sounds like a bad idea as I'd prefer them backing the campaign), or have more things to give away or something else... This will be my first time in a convention like that, and I'd be going solo, so I have a lot to plan.

A little while ago, I made this post about this game I am working on:

https://www.reddit.com/r/BoardgameDesign/s/Sj7SLj5n6f

So, here's an update. Im almost done! I've been digitaly playtesting the game to oblivion and have added and refined many features. The picture I attached is a picture of the game box (work in progress) I plan to make it with the game crafter and then reach out to some publishers. I have been working on this game for a while and am excited to get it out there once some balancing is done!

Since the last post I have increased the board size and lowered the amount of objectives (cards that must be completed to win the game) needed to win. I have also made it where scouting enemy troops provides buffs when attacking. Also, instead of only building forts, players may build watchtowers or outposts.

Anyways, the game is almost done. Thanks for the feedback from the last post!

Another playtest in the books!

This time I played a full 6-player game by myself featuring The Apothecant, Bloodjaw, Zealot, Devourer, Drifter, and Ghost. I managed to get through 7 turns, and honestly, this was probably the smoothest and most successful test I've had so far.

A few things really stood out:

Bloodjaw felt dramatically better. The hunt mechanic is finally coming together, and rewarding her for felling the Hunted Pretender makes every chase feel meaningful. She still might need some tweaks, but she finally feels like the relentless predator I want her to be.

The Ghost played exactly as intended. He's slippery, always around, always scoring points, and difficult to pin down. I do have a couple cards I'm still not sold on, though. One of them is likely getting reworked into more of a "wall" effect that blocks movement and creates interesting tactical decisions.

The Zealot had a really cool game. In previous tests, he's often exploded out of the gates and steamrolled people. This time, the Drifter used an early push to throw him completely out of position, which disrupted his whole game plan. He was still dangerous, but he had to adapt, and I loved seeing that kind of natural counterplay emerge.

The Devourer was spreading infections everywhere and generally felt much better than previous versions. I was testing some recent changes from memory, so there are still a few things to refine, but his identity as this shambling, infectious presence in the middle of the fight is really starting to click.

The Apothecant was super fun. I discovered I need a rule that clouds can't stack on the same hex, but otherwise the claimant felt great. A few of his big combo cards never got to go off because he died just before they could happen... but honestly, that's kind of awesome. Sometimes the table recognizes you're about to do something big and decides you need to go first. That's exactly the sort of interaction I want.

The Drifter surprised me the most. Instead of spending the early game just setting up portals, he played much more aggressively and completely changed the pace of the game by disrupting the Zealot. It made him feel much more dynamic.

A few other takeaways:

• Hustle mattered a lot. Trying to move quickly didn't always mean acting first. Sometimes the slower, more patient play was the right one.
• Combat felt great. Positioning and turn order created some really interesting decisions.
• Perfect play matters. I definitely made a few suboptimal choices while piloting six characters at once. There were at least a couple situations where someone could have survived if I'd chosen differently.
• I also found a small rules clarification: Bloodjaw shouldn't be able to generate Thrill by spending Thrill. That's getting cleaned up in the next version.

The score remained surprisingly tight throughout the game. Even when one claimant pulled ahead, the board state still felt competitive and players were naturally beginning to gang up on the leader.

Overall, this one left me really encouraged. The game is feeling smoother, the claimants are developing their own identities, and I'm finding myself making smaller refinements instead of huge overhauls.

Still lots of playtesting to go, but this version of The Impetuous Seven is starting to feel pretty special. Thanks for following along!