Dear all,
Christopher Bünte, who entered this year's Windhammer contest with his excellent entry,
Curse of the Snake Queen, will be doing a Kickstarter for Curse of the Snake Queen on the 29th August.
Here is the Kickstarter page: The Curse of the Snake Queen – A Solo Fantasy Gamebook by Christopher Bünte — Kickstarter
Keep your eyes peeled!
Hello all! I hope you are well! I am planning on doing another Lindenbaum competition this year. IT will be announced in November.
If you would like to enter it, then I thought that I would write down some lesson's learnt from this year's excellent batch of entries.
The lessons below are present as they were recurring themes from the judges' and players' feedback. They are something to take on board for next year's competition.
Frustration trumps everything
There were lots of cool ideas in the Lindenbaum competition. However, the trouble is that anyone has several ideas that sound cool in their heads, but, when they get out to their readers, they find that the idea wasn't as good in their head. This leads to frustration, which will cover up any good points that the idea ever had.
I am guilty of this. My most memorable example comes from my Tin Man Games entry, Asuria Awakens.
I decided to have an encounter where the way to move on is to run from a monster. If you defeat a monster, then another turns up. If you kill that one, a third one turns up. If you kill the third one, it cycles back to the first one. This was a homage to Creature of Havoc where you can get trapped in an infinite loop where you have to fight chaos warriors one after another. However, the people who played the game did not appreciate the homage. They just got frustrated by the infinite loop.
Make your rules as simple as possible
Linking in with the theme of having a brain full of ideas, this can also extend to rules. I know that there are lots of cool rules that do cool things.
However, remember that the gamebook is only 100 sections, maximum and it is important to ask yourself if the rule(s) will add to the playing experience. Also, rules have a cost for the player in terms of time or cognitive load from managing something or dealing with the complexity. If the rule is cool, but has very little impact for the work, it won't be seen as good.
So, even if a rule or mechanic might be amazing, you need to ask yourself whether it is necessary.
I did this with my book Rulers of the NOW. Part of the reason it took about 12 years to complete was because I wanted it to be my magnum opus and have everything I've ever thought of in it. I wanted it to have the same system as SCRAWL along with an epic story that spans the entire solar system. Part of the reason why I never managed to finish it was because it was too much. The story did not need a large system, so I stripped the game system down to simply what it needed. That made it much easier to write and also kept the focus on the themes I wanted to explore.
In a choice between working on the system and the story, work on the story
It seems that people get more impact from the gamebook experience from the story, rather than the system. So, if you feel that your gamebook is lacking something, add to the plot or create some interesting characters or some choices that are difficult from a story point of view.
For example, from this year, Operation Dead Dawn (spoiler alert) has a decision near the end where you have to choose between sacrificing one of your team to fulfil the mission or saving your team member to jepardise the mission.
I didn't intend to do an example from my writing for each lesson, but it looks like it's happening. My 2008 Windhammer competition entry used a Fighting Fantasy system and had a simple story. It did not win. In 2009, I tried to make the system as balanced and as tight as possible. The system worked, but it still didn't win. In 2010, I decided to focus on story and made an anarchic pirate themed book with a diceless, minimalist system. It won.
Proofreading matters
Some people are very good at spotting proofing errors and some people are also very bothered by proofing errors, even if they don't change the overall meaning of the text.
And then some proofing errors do change the meaning of the text, which can ruin the whole experience.
People notice what is wrong more than what is right
This is a lesson that everyone who works in news knows. If it bleeds, it leads and, working in a similar area, if there is something clearly wrong with the gamebook, it will have a bigger impact than all the right stuff you did. It reminds me of this video from The Day Today.
Conclusion
Most of the above lessons are more about not doing things than doing things. They are about avoiding certain things.
If you make a gamebook with no proofing errors, an easy to understand system and a good story, it will probably be in the top 50% of entrants.
