Process - Playtesting

In this video I discuss playtesting as a process and illustrate how a single playtest with an undesirable outcome can be misleading.

[@kirillkrymskiy1739]

Thank you for this video. Videos like this are so important, because they show the potential of game engine/mechanics. Simple casual playthroughs are not always able to convey or highlight such things, and if we as players can't see the potential of the game we can easily pass on a great game. Please do more videos like this if it's ok with you=)

[@bluebotic2327]

Thanks. I'm glad you appreciate this kind of examination of the game.

[@Darthus]

Thanks for this video! Really great to see the callout to some officially rules for True Solo, and of course the cool showing of how the rogue would approach the scenario. I hear what you're saying of if you hear feedback that is frustrated or even have a hard time playtesting yourself, there can be a desire to tweak the entire structure of the game, which can be an endless (and not helpful loop). I do really appreciate these videos that show the variety of the game as I think that's one of its strengths as opposed to just a particular more straightforward play with a singular outcome. Thanks again for sharing all this with us. I saw your other comment about how the rogue might be not be able to take out the boss, which is of course a little sad, but I also understand what a mountain it is to balance the game not only for different party compositions, but also for true solo with all heroes. In the end I guess it's usually the case that a single mode has to be the "main" one and others are semi-supported variants.

[@bluebotic2327]

Thanks for your interest in LOW. I really appreciate it. I do think True Solo will be more robust with a few minor changes I'm making. In the beginning, LOW was going to be only true solo. Then I added multi-hero but still assumed the game was solitaire. Then played some games with friends and decided: okay it's 1-4 heroes, 1-4 players. I sort of like that not all heroes can do everything and get all the XP in every Quest. The Cleric really shines in Quest 2 with all the undead and her amulet which turns undead. The Mage is crucial in Quest 3 with his high knowledge and ability to dicypher the Dark Tome. The Warrior with a great Sword can tackle the Old Wyrm in Quest 1. The Rogue's bomb is also handy for such things. I would love to write more Quests after v1.0 ships that focus on single heroes. Right now I'm just trying to get the game engine stable enough for the 3 core quests to function as intended. But I hope to write more nuanced class-specific quests at some point. That would be a lot fun.

[@gabrielwannes9220]

Please, please put up a crowdsale for this. It makes the hit us people in europe (and other countries) less painful to take. Every $ saved does make a difference. Would buy this in a second. Looks awesome!

[@bluebotic2327]

I will definitely attempt to learn how to attempt a crowd sale :) I want my friends across the pond to purchase this game without breaking the bank. I've heard anecdotal reports from Germany that shipping isn't too bad from GameCrafter. But, I've experienced other situations that do not instil confidence in shipping to Europe. One of my RC1 testing copies is still stuck in Customs in Denmark right now....so there's that.

[@cerealmad]

Nice walk-through

[@janzurek3384]

Very nice video, I liked the concept of showing different ways how to handle the situation. Seems like the easiest and safest way is to sneak around the enemy, but you have to be rogue, of course. Could be interesting to see true solo mode for a rogue character from the beginning to the very end, since the sneak action generally looks like a peace of cake for him, but the question is, how to handle the Old Wyrm. I am looking forward to see you playing solo longplay. 😊

[@bluebotic2327]

Yeah, honestly I’m not sure the rogue can defeat the Old Wyrm true solo. His dagger is not long enough to penetrate the Wyrm’s thick skin. He’d have to have the Saboteur upgrade and set a bomb with a fuse. And hope the bomb does 3 damage (it’s a 1d3 in giant monsters). So it’s possible, but hard. But completing every objective is not required in order to continue. I do think true solo standard protocol should be 1 starting upgrade.

[@kirkyoung4147]

The more I watch the more I realize this plays like some of my favorite rogue-like videogames

[@bluebotic2327]

I played quite a bit of Rogue and Moria back in the day. And Brogue more recently. And I got pretty far writing my own rogue-like in Python a few years back. Fun stuff. This game takes some inspiration from the genre.

[@kirkyoung4147]

@bluebotic2327 Brogue in particular is my favorite! So many good games in the genre. I can definitely feel the inspiration :)

[@allluckyseven]

I hadn't really thought about how the least amount of spaces you move, the more likely it is that you will be able to sneak through those spaces (and avoid LoS & alerting monsters). But the Thief (or Rogue) can walk through 3 spaces every time without alerting any monster because of his Stealth 5 + the minimum of 1 he's going to roll on a die. Which of course isn't bad for the game or the player, but I wonder if that would be the usual strategy. Advancing 3 spaces every turn (or to take a very low risk of advancing 4) if you're playing with that character.

[@johnmiddleton4291]

I mostly risk a few more unless solo. The alerts in a party soon come from other heroes and solo, you can't really risk any alerting at all.

[@bluebotic2327]

Yeah, the Rogue will rely on Sneaking a lot to stay alive. As one would. But John's right, others will be clanking and sneezing at the wrong time. And some Warning Icons may be placed in such a way that the Warning has LoS the moment the tile is placed, instantly Alerting it. Kind of a surprise attack.

[@johnmiddleton4291]

@@bluebotic2327 I had a thought about the plate armor and making it a choice for captain between that and chainmail. Maybe plate negates sneaking entirely? Granted the warrior sucks at it already but it would make chain a sort of option.

[@bluebotic2327]

@@johnmiddleton4291 Makes sense. I'll add it to the notes.

[@IAcePTI]

Dont know the rules, but for solo dodge the enemie and run thru them can be an option, expetialy if you need to do that again if theres only one exit and if you need to run out using that exit.

[@ironartur]

The crystal ball is super original and fun item...

[@bluebotic2327]

That used to be the lamest items of all, but now it's maybe one of the most dynamic and useful.

[@nightbirdgames]

It seemed unfair to take as much damage as you did from the Psycho Rats that you had killed in combat. I'd recommend that any enemies you kill on your attack roll would not count towards the Hit (+#) value of your enemies attack., and only the remaining enemies in the stack/group attack. Even with the sword master upgrade you barely survived. If you are playing solo or with one other hero you barely have a chance to survive more than 2-3 encounters. If you were concerned a bit about the strength of the Psycho Rats, I think a simple number change from (+3) to (+2) would balance that enemy a little bit.

[@bluebotic2327]

Yeah for sure. We've been having these same discussions. I think the group bonus is too high. But it was never really balanced for 6 members. So I probably need to cap the max stack to 3, as John Middleton suggested, tweek the HIT and DMG member bonuses, or as you say (and I've considered while testing) remove killed members before calculating their HIT and DMG. This last idea would actually make the mental math easier too. Less setting parts of the stack aside but still adding them in. It's a bit messy.

[@johnmiddleton4291]

@@bluebotic2327 You could make the hero attacks on their activation remove kills first and then survivors hit. And on the monster phase attack it's simultaneous as normal? Maybe that would be tough to remember with the switching about from phase to phase?

[@bluebotic2327]

​@@johnmiddleton4291 Yeah I had this exact same note in my notes. OR, each monster could have an initiative/speed value, and if it's lower than the hero's Agility/Move, defeated members are removed first, otherwise members are removed after calculations. An 'initiative system'.

[@simeonlawler6128]

Are there rules for enemies in range of each other rolling a conflict roll? If so, you could run back to the tentacle tile, bait the rats into range, use defend to minimise your own damage. Then run back, baiting them to fall into the pit on the previous tile

[@bluebotic2327]

Sadly, monsters don't fight monsters (at least in 1st edition). Early in development, I made that decision and moved from simulation to hero-focused play. Monsters would eat monsters but it's not modeled in these rules. But it could be cool to have a special rule for tentacle: they can grab one small or human sized monster in lashing range and pull them down. That would actually be cool. You can push rats into pits though. Small monsters cannot jump over or climb out of gaps.

[@mikewice3608]

I think having the Fade and Knock spells in the Mage spellbook kind of takes away a big part of what makes the Rogue cool. Neat game though otherwise.

[@bluebotic2327]

Yeah it’s a tough call. These spells are intended to make true solo possible as a Mage. When I played multiplayer with my friends, we almost always sent the rogue to pick locks and do the sneaking so the Mage could save his vitals for other magic. I think a mage would have some lock manipulation skills. And probably some illusory magic that aids in sneaking. But I think you make a fair point. This overlap of skills would only occur in games containing both the rogue and the mage.

[@jtjames79]

Difficulty steps bro. Also we are all niche gamers we know how to home rule. I prefer seeing the losing games. I learn a lot more from failing than succeeding. Nobody likes watching those 40K channel's where the space Marines always win.

[@jtjames79]

I should have watched it first before commenting. Also first, well second, I forgot to first in my first post. Does that mean nobody is first? It does mean I'm high and it's very very late.

[@bluebotic2327]

I 100% agree. The failed games are just as interesting as the wins for me. In fact, I starting enjoying gaming a lot more once I stopped trying to win all the time. This is true for solitaire gaming but also multiplayer.

[@johnmiddleton4291]

I hesitate to type this, and maybe we can delete it and msg, but anyways... The real issue is that a single fight is not the game. There is a whole dungeon to deal with and in most of these fights the heroes are seriously depleted for the next encounter. In the example shown there is a tentacle room that the heroes are leaving, so what about that? It's a major thing just to get through that room normally. Once you defeat that stack of rats, they all recycle to the third space on the Quest Card where any roll for Rats will pull the whole stack back out again, over and over. So every single rat spawn is 6. The same thing holds for the Cultists. I think full stacks is too much to deal with when you take into account that there is a whole dungeon to go through and not just a single room. What happens when the solo hero gets to the Old Wyrm? Can they even win that fight? Set up a Wyrm fight Inner Sanctum with Cultists and two Villagers and a solo hero at half health and try it. There is merit to a game being difficult but it doesn't have to be the bike level of Battletoads with a glitchy controller. I've yet to get more than 8 tiles in even with larger parties. The constantly dwindling health becomes a sort of timer and is exacerbated with the mage and cleric, where it is both a timer and their primary resource for actions. I think stacks sizes need to limit to 3, and recycle refills the whole chart again once all creatures are dead and not just the third space. I might also add that the leader is absent for the first cycle through the card and is only added in during the second cycle refill. Maybe? I also am starting to think that the mage and priest need some sort of spell points and then can fall back on vital stats once those are gone. Maybe mage in knowledge and will/2 and cleric is knowledge and sanity/2 ?

[@bluebotic2327]

I don't disagree with your thoughts on GROUP stacks. I am having many of the same questions as I continue to playtest. This exercise was just to see if a group with 6 members can even be defeated by a single hero. But you're right about the Recycle stack just filling right back up to 6, and that's not sustainable. So maybe the notion of a leader spawning ALL members (only the Rat King does this) needs to go. Maybe certain Group monsters don't recycle at all? Cultists need ot recycle, but Psycho rats don't really. Or like you said, cap the R slot at 3. My advice is: play some sessions with your house rules and see how it goes. I do some testing with and R slot cap of 3 at some point. I'm reluctant to add spell points. Spending Vitals to cast spells has always felt good to me.

[@johnmiddleton4291]

@@bluebotic2327 I did a full play this evening at work because yet another press went down and I was there forever. I got all the way through the Temple with a warrior and mage combo. The mage was mostly useless because casting in unsustainable past three or so spells. It's also really easy to pull off and I wonder if the difficulties need to be adjusted, maybe on a spell by spell basis rather than as full levels. The mage also lost his arm very early on to an infection from the feral child bite which really raised some questions about casting and potions etc. The end game was weird and I found a hole in how it triggers. The warrior with hammer and shield can't even hit the old wyrm, so he was useless, and that would really suck going in blind and solo. The only hope was for mage to hit him with a fireball, roll only 1 point of extra damage to avoid incapacitating the mage (again), successfully cast it (pretty easy), and then roll a 5-6 for the 1d3 to do the full three points. Didn't work out and the warrior left the crippled, bleeding out mage to his own devices and left. He got the power star, which needs better stats as it's pretty useless right now, and lots of treasure plus all three villagers out. They were found earlier and it's a good idea to be able to drop them off....great change. The leader was one of the cultists randomly drawn for sacrifice and I went with it because it isn't against the rules There were things I sort of had to house-rule in every tile. I had 15 pages of scrawl on a legal pad of notes and questions. There are lots and lots of holes that need solid answers, or each game is far too hand wavy, imo, right now. Lots of by the rules it says this but it's really wonky or gamey, not good gamey. Everything needs to be more solid or things will get worse with higher power levels and expac stuff, I'm sure. It does tell a great and crazy story though. The full temple is really, really long. I think this might just be a really long game or really short if you get unlucky or make bad calls. It's quite variable so far but I think it will tend long after a few learning games. We'll see. \ The write up will take a bit....and I still have the other notes too.

[@bluebotic2327]

@@johnmiddleton4291 Cool, I look forward to your notes. Yeah, this is going to be one of those games with lots of corner cases and errata. I will try to make everything more watertight, but it may lose some of its gonzo charm and appeal. I've found a hand full of holes in the rules but almost everything I've found so far can be fixed with a one line fix. But you're right, player's shouldn't have to house rule every tile.

[@johnmiddleton4291]

@@bluebotic2327 Issues on corner cases is one thing, but loads of it is not a good thing. we haven't even gotten to crazy combos and powerful heroes yet. Hell, I've not even tried a full campaign with xp and advancement and how that creates weird things. I really think this needs to be way tighter than you anticipate in order for it to work as a published game. I have the creeping feeling the rulebook might need a few pages added back in just to add clarity in many spots. Locking down interactions doesn't hurt playability at all. It makes it better. The amount of little things that I missed in the rules after reading all of this several times is pretty large. Splitting lots of things out on to the ref cards helps in gameplay, for sure, but it's not ideal for reading to learn the game without lots of trial and error. Hunting for rules seems like an actual hunt at times.

[@bluebotic2327]

@@johnmiddleton4291 I can include all the reference cards in the rulebook but it seems redundant. It takes me multiple playthroughs to learn any game. I spent a month learning Magic Realm and I still don't fully understand it. I spent a week reading and re-reading Sword & Sorcery and it still took several playthroughs to actually start to play the game correctly. I've read and processed all of your notes from you long playthrough, and I really do believe the vast majority are one line fixes. That's sort of the goal with this round of testing. Find and squash bugs. I think we're both sort of saying the same thing here. I'm just fiercely optimistic about the issues and the fixes and the timeline.