by Mattie Schraeder
Years ago, I wrote a blog post complaining about rule books for board games, and how they need to be play tested better. Now, having written my own rule book for a published game, I fully understand how difficult that process is and can be. I want to make it easier on everyone, the players at the end of a published game, the playtesters trying a game on behalf of the designer, and the designer themself.
I’ve participated in many playtests at conventions, friendly local game stores, and basically anywhere I can get my hands on a new prototype. I love playtesting, and unfortunately have seen unguided playtesting done poorly far more often than I’ve seen it done well.
Unguided playtests are special. An unguided playtest is a test of what your game would do in the wild. To test how someone who buys your game off the shelf at their friendly local game store will experience your game for the first time. Once they’ve experienced the game, whether it was through a guided or unguided playtest, they can’t go in unguided ever again.
This might make you want to treat every new set of players as a potential unguided playtest, but I strongly caution against that. Not every group is right for unguided playtesting. Not every playtest event is right for unguided playtesting.
Designers, hear me out, the first step to unguided playtesting, is to not unguided playtest. You might be eager to get your design and rules in front of players and see what happens, but in the interest of respecting everyone’s time and energy, don’t. I know, I know, I’m telling you to not run an unguided playtest in a blog post about unguided playtesting. Don’t ruin your chance at good unguided playtests by not being ready. Do everything in your power to make sure every unguided playtest gets you the best feedback you can possibly get. In fact, I would argue that an unguided playtest shouldn’t even be done on a game until it’s ready to pitch to publishers. The unguided playtest is the final piece of the puzzle prior to the pitch.
So, if you’re not ready for an unguided playtest, how do you get ready?
The first step is to have your rule book tested. It’s easy to conflate the two, because an unguided playtest is also testing the rule book. There is an important difference between the two. A rule book can be tested without a full group sitting around a table. A rule book can be tested as easily as sharing a PDF with comments enabled on it. Google Drive, for example, supports comments on PDFs as well as Google Docs without allowing users to actually edit the content of the document themselves. If your rules haven’t been read and revised by multiple potential players, you’re not ready for an unguided playtest.
A great way to test a rule book is to have a one-on-one session with a potential player. Have them read the rule book, and then teach you the game as if you’re about to play it for the first time. You don’t even need to actually play the game. Just understanding how a player who read your rule book would regurgitate it to other potential players is an excellent way to test your rule book.
You might be afraid that a rule book reader is a unguided playtester that you’re losing by having them read the rules in advance, and I get that worry, but there’s a really good chance that the people who you get to read your rules in advance of a unguided playtest, will not be the actual people doing a unguided playtest. The beauty of Break My Game is that our community of over 3,000 people from all over the world can help you. They want to help you. They might not even actually ever play your game, but would be more than happy to read the rules despite that. You can (and should!) even repay the favor, by reading rules and providing feedback to them or others who might be asking for a rules reading.
I truly believe that 90% of your rule book testing should be done this way. Players should not need to have a physical copy of the game in front of them in order to learn to play. Sure, that might help, but the rule book should stand on its own. Break My Game has so many talented rules editors, and they can read and help you with your rules without either of you ever leaving the comfort of your own computer.
Think about how your final product’s players are going to be playing and learning your game. Think about how your local group plays games. Think about how you’ve best learned to play a game. I would argue that the best way to learn to play a board game is from someone else who already knows how to play that specific game.
This is why board game how to play videos have gotten so popular on YouTube. There are entire channels dedicated to teaching people how to play games specifically so they don’t have to look at the rules themselves. I know some groups expect players to come prepared for the scheduled game, and the homework expected is to watch a how to play video so that everyone can come prepared.
You should also think about how most games are taught via word of mouth. This is why Monopoly and Uno are famous for having “house rules” that seemingly everyone uses. Did you know that getting money for landing on free parking is not a thing? Did you know that you can’t play a draw four on top of another draw four to make the next player draw eight? These are common rules that are not in the actual rules for the games in question, but have become prevalent simply because everyone plays that way, because they were taught by people who played that way, who were in turn taught by people who played that way.
This is exactly why rule books need to be as tested and thought out as possible. Players are going to play your game wrong. It is inevitable. The rule book is there as a guide, to make that happen as infrequently as possible, and the reason unguided playtesting is important is because you want the game to be fun even if players are playing it objectively wrong. Is Monopoly a better game when you actually play by the official rules? Yes. Is that going to stop people from house ruling for the worse? No. Not a chance.
Another thing to note, is that rules are a reference more than anything. If a player was taught a rule, and they think something is being played incorrectly, they need to be able to reference the rules and read it for themselves. It is very infrequent that a player will read the rules back to back. They might do that once, ever, to learn the game for the first time. If you’re lucky enough to have them read the rules at all.
There’s a very specific person that will read the rule book front to back. Your best case scenario is that one player per your player count will read the rules. If your game plays up to 4 players, that means that 25% of your audience will never even look at the rule book. Your rule book needs to be perfect, because right off the bat you only have a 25% chance that someone is going to read it. The more players your game supports, the smaller that number gets. Your audience, as a rule book author, is the less than 25% of the player base that will actually read them. That 25% needs to regurgitate those rules to the rest of the 75%.
So then, who is the rule book reader? Odds are the person who bought the game will be the person to learn the game. That person will break the shrink, organize the components, and read the rules. Another option is that the same person reads and learns every game, to teach to a specific group of people.
Regardless of who that person is, they will take the game to their game group, and teach it. It is very unlikely they will teach it from the rules. They will teach it from their memory of the rules, using the rules as a reference as needed. Once again, being a reference is the most important aspect of a good set of rules. These heroes, the rules readers, are who you are writing your rule book for. They’re the target audience. You are writing a set of rules, for someone else to learn to teach your game to others. Odds are, that person likes reading rules, and is good at teaching games to others.
Now that we’ve found a target audience, we can start thinking about how to test the rules for that specific target audience. Do you really want to sit four random strangers at a table, with a game they have literally no experience with, and have them fight over one rule book? Do you really want to have three people sit patiently while one person reads the rules, and then teaches the game for you? Do you really want to suffer through someone attempting to read a rule book out loud to the table? I don’t know about you, but this is a nightmare scenario to me. I’ve tried it so many times. It isn’t fun for the people who don’t have the rule book in front of them. It provides a terrible experience to learn the game.
Post your rules where people who are good at reading and revising rules can find them. At the same time, offer your own time to read someone else’s rule book in return. This is something that can be done in the comfort of your own home, without requiring the time of anyone but yourself. Let your rules be tested without the game even physically present. Let players learn your game at their own pace, and in a way that benefits the player more than it benefits you.
Once your rules have been thoroughly tested, to the point that a new rules reader has few comments or questions that you have to correct, only then should you be thinking about an unguided playtest.
Now that you’re actually ready for an unguided playtest, there are a few tips to make the most out of your limited unguided playtest experience.
- Get consent of all the players. Explain to them what an unguided playtest is, and what your expectations are for them. Allow them to opt out. If someone at the table is not comfortable with the concept, don’t force them. You can always switch to a guided playtest.
- Find out how those players like to learn. If one player usually reads the rules and teaches, let that player do what they like doing, and allow the other players to learn from that one player.
- Provide easy ways for players to provide you with feedback. I usually give them full permission to mark up the rules as I provided to them, and use those rules for notes to take throughout the game. You can even provide a short questionnaire to have the players fill out after the playtest is complete.
If you’re going to be present for the unguided playtest, do not interact with the players, interrupt the players, or correct the players. Just be a fly on the wall of their experience and take ample notes. Listen to how the game is taught. Listen to how players react to the teaching. Pay attention to mistakes players make, but allow those mistakes to play out naturally throughout the test. You might be surprised at how the players course correct without your help.
This is why I, for one, don’t even like being present for an unguided playtest. The experience I am testing for is what happens when I can’t be there to run the game. If I’m there, I’ve changed the experience. I don’t trust myself to not interfere. I don’t trust myself to not want to correct problems and make the best playtest possible. I don’t trust myself to not involve myself in strategy and meta discussions. I also feel like my presence puts undue pressure on the players. I want them to feel free to discuss the rules and the game without feeling like they’re going to hurt my feelings. I feel like truly unbiased feedback can only be given without the designer there.
What I want is for my players to have a great experience, and to mimic the experience they would have if they found the game on a shelf at their friendly local game store and bought it. If I can replicate that experience in a playtest, I’ve done my job.