Skip to main content

Experience-First Approach: As a Playtester

Well, I let Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and most of Thursday go by without writing a blog post, and I have very dire doubts about my ability to get any writing done tomorrow.  Now, yes, I did knock out three posts last week, but I still don’t want to let a whole new week go by without keeping this up.  So let’s see if I can knock a meaningful post in less than an hour, and while typing on my phone.

Today I want to talk a little bit more about something that I’ve touched on before re:gaming and which I’ve adapted to be a big part of my philosophy on writing (specifically playwriting and how I teach it): the Experience-first approach.  I increasingly believe that talking about mechanics or theme (or characters or plot points) is a flawed lens through which to view the subject, as those are parts of a piece of a composition, not a view of the whole piece of art or its impact.  It seems trite but: talk about the feelings or journey or atmosphere that you wish to evoke for your audience, and then let every question of its component parts be: How does that serve the experience I’m trying to give the player/audience/actor/listener/viewer? Now, elements can indirectly serve the experience, this isn’t a reason to dumb down or flatten your design.  But for the creation of art and particularly especially for artists working with collaborators, an agreed-upon intended experience is an easier and fairer arbiter of what works and doesn’t work for a project.

So this week I tried the Experience-first approach from a new direction: I gave my playtest results in the form of Experience-first feedback.  It freed me immediately from the usual pitfall of “Well I would do it this way”, and was the playtester’s equivalent of when a couples counselor (in movies anyway) tells everyone to stick to I statements.  It also steered me towards what I suspect were much more useful, higher-level aspects of the playtest: the pace of the game, and overall strategy, and of the challenges and successes unique to different stages of the play.  It also helped to identify where I had either misinterpreted the rules, correctly read incorrect rules, and where there was room to talk bluntly about challenges and therefore freely about what led to them.

Long story short: I think I provided really good, productive feedback! And I truly believe that what helped me focus my feedback, and a useful path for me to return to whenever I/we meandered, was framing what I said as the experience I had.  I’m going to keep trying and refining this approach, both as a creator and as a consumer, and I’ll certainly write more about this.  I mean, if the world doesn’t end.  Who knows.  See you next week!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

TTRPG Tuesday: Three Means Of Resolving

Hi it’s another TTRPG Tuesday! First of the year.  Let’s get right into it. Saw a challenge on Twitter to make some resolution mechanics.  I can do those! Here we go: Hand to Hand The player performing the action and the person running the game or otherwise opposing the action both put their dominant fists toward one another, bounce them three times to get a rhythm, and reveal a number with their fingers, 0-5.  Sum the two numbers, and if the number is greater than 5, subtract six, so that the final number is always between 0 and 5.  On a 0, the action fails catastrophically, on a 1-2 it fails, 3-4 it succeeds, on a 5 it succeeds spectacularly.  The player taking the action starts the game with all five fingers up on their non-dominant hand; after an attempt, they may lower fingers on that hand to add to the sum of the attempt. Ex. Alice attempts to seduce Cat’s character over to the coup conspirators.  They put their dominant hands together (right for Alice, left for Cat) and thro
Post a Comment
Read more

TTRPG Tuesday: Beliefs as Roles

  Hello from high above the Rockies, as I make my way back to Chicago from Big Bad Con 2023.     This was my first con in five years, and only my second ever.     I had a better time at it than I did at GenCon, which I understand derives largely from this being an industry con vs a consumer show.     I made a modest number of purchases but it was easy to stick to the constraints of my limited luggage space, which was fine; shopping and new releases were not the attraction here.     Gaming, panels, and (as I soon learned) networking were. This con was certainly less overwhelming and I think my expectations were clearer and my FOMO much lighter, but I’ll readily admit that I had a lot to learn.    I misunderstood or made mistakes regarding almost every event I signed up for, including happy accidents like sitting in on the wrong panel only to learn a ton, or expecting a mending workshop to be about fixing one’s writing when the application was rather more literal, which was a fascinat
Post a Comment
Read more

TTRPG Tuesday: Minimum Viable Product for WWDW?

Hello and welcome back to TTRPG Tuesday! I’ve put together a barebones introductory document for We Won, Didn’t We? and, well, I think it speaks for itself.  Check it out HERE ! This introduces the skeleton of the game, as well as walking through the steps; I’d say next up is a rudimentary character sheet, and maybe I can bring this to a Playtest Zero session and see what folks think of character creation within one of the starting Bulbs.  I’ve opened the doc up for comments, so if you have thoughts dear reader, fire away.  Brain fried, go read the doc, til next time!
Post a Comment
Read more