Skip to main content

Further Amberlodge Playtest Post-Mortem

Today I thought I’d look more closely at one of the things I gleaned from my recent build-as-I-go playtest of Amberlodge.  Specifically, the input parameters for Processor cards, and how I need to tailor those to the outputs of the Producer cards.  My confirmation bias had me looking at the cards and continually returning a faulty confirmation of bad logic.


The big picture takeaway is that because I was thinking about the resource conversion chain from the standpoint of Ratios, I forgot that you need to divide out the common factors to get the least common denominator, because concentrating a solution (9Water1Sugar) only removes excess (Water), it doesn’t add the target resource (Sugar).  And, consequently, that I need to tailor the input requirements of the Processors, because I’d set them up based on that faulty logic.  A fermentation card that accepts water with a higher sugar concentration shouldn’t be set up to accept 10 units of a solution to which sugar has somehow been added (8Water2Sugar) but 5 units of a solution where water has been removed (4Water1Sugar).  That’s not to say there can’t be a large fermentor that for some reason accepts two 5-unit batches of (4Water1Sugar), but that can’t be the default, otherwise you can’t start fermenting until you have distilled two batches of Maple Sap.  Again, maybe I want to inject that challenge, but for proof of concept, that’s counter-effective.


This has also sparked a couple of other possibilities for me.  One is how these resources are tracked.  I’ve been loathe to reduce the granularity of resources, but I shouldn’t rule out lots as cards, perhaps with clips since they’ll move around so often.  So a maple tree produces a card that starts out with clips at the 1 hashmark for sugar, and the 9 hashmark for water.  Since I dislike clips in tabletop, I could also go bolder: Have each Lot be represented by A) a card in a fixed location, where tokens can be placed on tracks to indicate amounts and B) A token tied to that Lot which moves from card to card to represent that Lot’s progress in processing.  Worth examining, could greatly cut down on the number of components, even if it doesn’t chop down cost.


One last thought on Amberlodge I want to get out of my brain: Something I keep wishing for in Stardew is the ability to improve the things I build.  I loooooove that you can fertilize the soil for planting, and that your hives produce different kinds of honey based on what flowers they’re near.  But I’d also love to be able to improve or alter all the other resource converters in the game.  So why not build that into Amberlodge? I should look at actions that better automate the Processor cards, or change their output, or that improve/change the yield for Producer cards.  Go beyond the source material.


That’s enough words for now.  Until 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