RPG Design Tips #4 – Mechanics Design Pitfalls

Here’s my list of the most common mechanics design problems I see when reviewing manuscripts as an editor or developer:

1. Not working with the system. If your system is one that doesn’t grant large static bonuses to rolls, don’t do that in your mechanics. If it’s one in which rules subsystems are few and far between, don’t introduce lots of new ones. If it has a prescribed list of conditions, don’t introduce lots of new ones. Innovation doesn’t mean adding lots of new stuff; it means finding new ways to use what’s already in the system.

2. Ignoring the prime user. Who is the target for the mechanic? If it’s meant to benefit the fighter, did you design in a way such that just about anyone would benefit from it more than the fighter? That’s a problem. Make it so the fighter actually wants it.

3. Feat taxes. Is the mechanic so good that the character almost is required to take it? If so, it should probably be part of the core design, not an optional add-on.

4. Nothing burgers. Is the mechanic so dinky, underpowered, or unflavored that it’s unlikely anyone would take it. Or worse, is it clearly a mistake to take it? Or even worse, is it a mechanic that “grants” a benefit the character already has by default? That’s a problem.

5. Imbalance. Is the mechanic vastly more (or less) powerful than similar mechanics? It’s OK if not every mechanic is equally good, but it’s a problem if a mechanic is so obviously over or underpowered that readers wonder if it was even workshopped.

6. Overlapping or uncooperative mechanics. Does the mechanic overlap with another in an unsatisfying way? For example, is the player playing the archer going to be annoyed because half of two feats they want do the same thing? Or is the player going to be frustrated because the game actively punishes certain combinations that are otherwise thematically interesting by giving them uncooperative mechanics.

7. Ambiguous wordings. If 100 people read the mechanic, will the significant majority of them interpret it the same way? If there are nearly as many interpretations as there are readers, your mechanic has a problem.

8. Unintuitive mechanics. It doesn’t matter if the mechanic is working as intended if it’s inherently confusing. If you see players misinterpreting a particular rule over and over again, the problem is not the players; it’s the rule.

9. House rule culture. People will always house rule games, but if your game (or your mechanic) is one in which people have no choice but to house rule it because it’s incomprehensible, nonfunctional, or otherwise frustrating, you have a core design problem.

10. Mathapalooza. Do players (and GMs) have to do a ton of arithmetic mid-game (or mid-combat) to resolve your mechanic. A bit is fine, but if people are remarking on how much math there is, that’s a sign that there might be too much. Of course, that might be what your game is shooting for, but if it’s not, rethink your mechanic(s). The same is true for complex geometry in your spell or power design.

11. Disorganized mechanics. If your mechanic references another mechanic that references another book that is dependent on a mechanic in another part of that book or that is never defined in that book …. you get the picture. Generally, everything someone needs to understand the basics of a mechanic should appear on the page(s) where the mechanic appears.

12. Isolating rules. Does your mechanic isolate a single character (and by extension, their player)? Does your hacker end up spending hours in-game doing stuff that no one else can be involved with? Does your mage perform lots of long, complicated rituals that no one else understands or can help with? Does your system give no (or insufficient) benefit to characters working together, causing them to go off on their own? Does it lead to most of the players at the game table having nothing to do for hours? You don’t want this.

13. Flavor/rules disagreements. Does the flavor text disagree with the rules, or vice versa? Don’t leave the reader wondering if the mechanic does more (or less) than the text seems to indicate.

14. Vibe violations. Is your mechanic unfun? Punitive? Unnecessarily arbitrary? Does it disrespect the time and emotions of the players? Whether this is OK or not depends on the game. If you have a pulls-no-punches, expect-to-die sort of vibe, it’s fine. But if your game is happy-go-lucky, slow-burn, and character-focused, then suddenly a single failed roll in an adventure leads to character death, you have a problem.

15. Designer/audience mismatch. Did your customers tell you they liked or disliked something? Did they tell you something was confusing? Did they say they wanted more or less of a particular kind of mechanic or story direction? If you have feedback from your customers, listen to it. It’s fine to go with your creative gut from time to time to make a decision that disagrees with your customers, but generally, you should listen to what your fans and players are telling you, and design accordingly.