Metatopia 2013

After finishing the digital prototype for Decoys, I thought I could just sit back and wait for the feedback to roll in. It never came, and with no leads on what to work on, Decoys again fell into stagnation. Luckily, I had something to look forward to - Metatopia 2013 - and it was guaranteed to leave me with plenty to chew on.

Well, it sure as hell did.



While the various panels and lectures I attended were interesting, the most inspiring parts of the conference came from the five playtests of Decoys I ran over the weekend. Each session illuminated a particular aspect of the game, and watching people from all walks of life play my game and enjoy it in different ways nearly brought tears to my eyes at times.

Yet even though most people genuinely enjoyed the game, everyone agreed there was something missing, but couldn't put their finger on what. I've felt this since the beginning, and have been searching for a way to add some texture to the otherwise dry mechanics. The Bonus Cards don't quite fill the gap, and until Metatopia I didn't know what direction to go in.

One session in particular, my "High-Test" with professionals Todd Greenwood and James Ernest, pointed me there. They played one round and weren't impressed. In the remaining 45 minutes or so, we had a deep discussion about why they didn't like the game, what my intentions for game flow are, and how we could achieve those goals while making the game better.

They remarked on how simple the design was, how usually when they try to 'fix' a game they cut out parts of it, but there was nothing to do with this game other than add complexity - with the exception of one system; movement points.

Basically, they wanted to take out the movement system entirely, let players move one piece on their turn to any point on the board. While a dramatic change, it cuts to the core of Decoys as an experience by making each move an integral part of your strategy as opposed to a smaller part of a grander strategy. The negative side is that it makes perceiving your opponent's strategy almost impossible. So instead of letting them move anywhere on the board, we cut out all the squares between the important bits, leaving only the objective points, an exit, and the starting squares. This condensed board places greater emphasis on each move while retaining the ability to parse your opponent's strategies. But still, that didn't quite solve my problem.

James suggested the use of Objective Type cards in place of standard Objective Points. There would be separate stacks for each shape that you shuffle together and distribute face-down amongst the objective points. This initially was just for the sake of randomness in objective point layout, but it sparked a whole new game.

We didn't quite flesh it out in that session, but I've since been turning it over, trying to make it all come together. I don't want to get into it yet as the specifics are not finalized, but rest assured that I'll have something soon. With pretty pictures and everything!! It's so very different from the Decoys you know and love, yet hopefully it will retain the same heart and soul I set out to systematize.