Make a Boardgame

I can see the point other anons are making, but I think OP's friend could have been less opposed to errata'ing the game mid-test if it was something as simple as a missing word as OP said.

Another option would be to halt the test, fix the card, and then start a new test. It could bother your playtesters, especially if they're doing it as a favor for you, but if you really think you don't want the data from how the game would work with this mistake, or it's a game-breaking bug, this would have been a better option.

>being ok with inflexibility and advocating for timewasting for what appears to be a minor oversight
>being this retarded

yeah i can see why ops lifeforce is draining, I lost some just reading this.

A decent person can just accept that in testing there will be bugs, and not make a huge fuss over something so little. Its not like the purpose of the test is to see who wins or loses its to see the interactions of the mechanics as intended. But I wouldnt expect an advocate for this behavior to recognize it as the problem.

This shit is basic and its the least Id do for my friends if they asked me to help them, instead of instantly try to argue with them about a typo in the rules that he made. Its petty and douchey, and OPs greatest mistake was conceding to it.

If it's you standard Veeky Forums board game, there is an amount of strategy involved. If you make moves under the assumption that something works like it says, it makes sense you would have a problem with someone else pulling the old "as intended".

During testing, you also don't want to pull that shit because suddenly you're left wondering if you're playing Calvin ball.

Then why not just stop the game? If you have a card which you understand to work a certain way, then you'll play the game based on that. Which means all your actions have been tainted by that card. So you've already fouled the results of the playtest completely. Why not take it, call a redo, and start again?

Or just keep it and see how it works. Worst case, you're right, you fix it, and you try again. Best case, you get an idea for what you could do instead of what you did. Imagine what would have happened if Donald Vaccarino had snatched the Chapel as soon as someone trashed Estates with it and said "that's not how it works!"

>During testing, you also don't want to pull that shit because suddenly you're left wondering if you're playing Calvin ball.
This. I would just straight up bail on the game if it became clear that the rules were being made up on the fly.

Pasta, pizza, giochi da tavolo. Good luck, compatriota!
Try to not change the rule during the game, next time, it's beta testing after all

>I want to make a game!
>I don't want to do boring, repetitive statistical analysis!
Pick one and only one.

I fail to see the problem here, why not jist continue? You're not here to win the game, you're here to test how it goes, if you outright change the effect of a card/rules on the fly then the tester is now under the impression that everything can be changed on the fly, poisoning the well. Unless a game takes more than 20 minutes or so then just continue the test, no big deal, you might even get the added benefit of seeing the game going in a way you never anticipated before or spotting other similar mistakes in one go.

Remember, they're doing you a favor, not the other way around. You don't get to throw a fit over something so small and not look like a buffoon right after.

Don't say shit about the game itself during beta tests, just take notes and fix it once the game is over. Preferably after the entire testing session is completed. Be sure to listen to your beta-testers comments.

This was betatest, you found a bug, you fix it, you guys should have retconned for a bit and replayed last section if that was crucial

>Don't be such a fucking amateur.
Nigga, we're all fucking amateurs, we aren't being paid for this bullshit, we do this for fun.
> You don't change the parameters of the test while you are testing.
It serves nobody any good to conduct the test based on a minor grammatical error that makes the rules interact in a way that isn't what was originally intended. If you sign up to help playtest a game, the focus should be on how the rules interact as intended, not based on the rules as written.

Except rules aren't being made up on the fly, a typo is being corrected. Is this such a critical error that the creator has to burn his time out appeasing your interpretation of the typoed, clearly busted rules? Maybe you might have some sort of obligation to tell him that his mechanic is busted instead.

I say stopping the game is the best middle ground choice, but the worst one by far is just letting it continue if the creator doesn't want to play on broken rules. If the game has to be stopped because the tester planned strategy around it that couldn't be backtracked, then yeah its perfectly acceptable.

But so far it looks like OP is right, souless rules lawyering against the actual creator of the game who is correcting his own rules. If you're truly trying to compete with the creator, who likely isn't trying to win his own game in any competitive sense, and you're willing to assume he's changing rules on the fly to beat you then you're likely mistaken.

But then again this arguement could be completely resolved and both parties satisfied if the game simply ended on the spot, even if I think the tester is being a cunt , if they both agreed to this there wouldn't be a problem and both would be satisfied.

It's people like you who end up ruining games and making people hate an otherwise serviceable system.

If a friend asks you to playtest his game and he tells you that the rules were meant to do X but they end up doing Y because of a spelling/grammatical error, the correct thing to do is accept that and move along with the game.

What exactly do you hope to accomplish by arguing RAW against the dude who made the game? What purpose is there to winning the game at all, when the focus should be on helping your friend discover and fix bugs that affect how the rules are meant to interact with one another?

He recognized a glaring problem immediately, there's no need to continue playing when the problem has been identified.

Also it appears that at the very least, the person testing was causing an equal if not greater shitfest.

>Fixing a grammatical error is the same as statistical analysis
Are you an American?

Easy, make a game. Theres no statistics involved in just correcting an error, and not playing the mistake'd version of the game out to the finish. Saves time to just fix it on the spot or restart if necessary. It's not all fun, sometimes there's gonna be errors on both sides, especially the creators and its sort of you're obligation to your buddy to not bust his balls for his mistakes, and just let the game be fixed one way or the other.

Besides in actual, more professional game creation there is actual boring statistic analysis. This isn't that.

I'd argue that a greentext story is biased enough for us not to judge the amount of shitflinging the other party responds with, but eh.

Anyway, my point is why make it a big deal? The guy is nice enough to do you a favour testing out your beta stuff, no need to get so upset to him over his certain peeve of strategizing according to how it was actually written. Sure, he might be rules-lawyering a tad too hard, but for all we know it might be the result of his decently-thought strategies over this specific card getting thrown out the window.

Consider, been, this alternate reading based on a less self-serving perspective:

>friend asks me to help him test a game he's designing
>agree
>get a really good card
>the card's effect is simple and self-explanatory
>tailor my gameplay around it for maximum advantage
>moment of victory
>"Sorry, user, that card doesn't work that way."
>but the rules are perfectly first right there on the card
>"Doesn't matter what the card says, it's my game and I say it's wrong."

>I'd argue that a greentext story is biased enough for us not to judge the amount of shitflinging the other party responds with
>Sure, he might be rules-lawyering a tad too hard
IF IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO JUDGE THEN WHY ARE YOU FUCKING JUDGING THE OTHER GUY? JESUS CHRIST!

It still sounds pretty fucked. Or is that your point?

The "might" bit might be of interest to you, user.

Consider from the other side of the fence.
>Ask friend to playtest a game I'm making
>He agrees
>Play around with it.
>Friend plays a card
>I notice that the RAW has a mistake on it and point it out.
>Friend becomes hostile
>We fight over it
>Decide to drop the issue and try to salvage the playtest as best I can.
The "friend" in this situation is an asshole who just wants to power game the system to make his dick hard and it's people like him that ultimately ruin games.

I am more curious about what your game looks/plays like, post some examples faggo.

If you're not certain then shut the fuck up you cunt!

You might want to sit down, make yourself some hot cocoa or whichever beverage you prefer to help you relax. Hope you have a good day, user.

>U mad LMAO
Welp, I guess now I know what sort of rapier wit I'm dealing with. Babby want a bottle?

t. autistic bugman

This seems closer to the truth of what the problem here is, its kind of hard to find a reason to fault OP that doesn't seem unnecessarily harsh. Other than the idea that he owes the tester his lifeblood just because the tester is doing something he agreed to do for the creator.

How's your day at work? Remember to always take some headache medication, even if you feel fine at the morning. It does get rather irritating if you happen to catch one and you have to shift through your day without any.

just fuck already

>not telling him in no uncertain terms that this is a playtest and that this is exactly the sort of shit you were playtesting to find and fix

That story seems more self serving actually.

Underrated. If you interrupt a game to change the rules you're going to get shitty results. Just play and see what happens. Maybe it goes catastrophically awry, maybe it won't be such a big deal. But you won't interrupt the flow of the play or potentially sour the person to the experience.

Let's turn the chessboard around: What are you losing by letting the game continue?

Yes. that was kind of an error. the game was all done and i was foolishly thinking that no problem would have arised. it was like the second official game.

Which made me realise that i was wrong and my friend was probably right. i should've put the game on stop as seen that he was biased by the errata.
Also i won't forget my friends if i'm ever gonna get a salary. at lest 10 rounds at the bar are on me.

Which make me remember that maybe i have another greentext story to tell:
>Be making an Alcoholic Pokémon game
>Made a card for almost any 1st and 2nd generation pokémon, any gym leader and Elite four.
>game is shaping up really well, not too hard for drunkards and with lots of things to drink
>feel ill and go to the doctor
>"Sir, your liver is fucked, you aren't allowed to touch alcohol with a 10 meters pole"
>finish the tabletop game anyway and have a little bit of sad fun when my friends play it while i do the referee.

And final one:
>Go to the sea with friends
>Bring my homeversion of Italian Mahjong (Called Magiongo)
>every night instead of going out we closed ourself to play for hours
>nobody wanna accept my proposal of playing with real moneys
>Muffled zawa zawa in the distance

You don't understand testing. You write all the issues you find, fix them and then play again. It's an iterative process not something you do on the run in one go.

Also, you don't play yourself on your game test. You want to know how other people play, you already know how it's supposed to work and play and will do it even if your intended play is not happening in a natural manner.

Sweetie, I have run playtests and been a part of playtesting and usually if there's a typo that affects the way that a rule works, we say "oh, my mistake" and move on with the game.

What sort of autist agrees to be a part of the playtest and then gets mad when someone tells him that the rules don't work like that? Obviously, the dude who made the game knows how it's supposed to work much more than you do and winning or losing should be secondary to helping your friend with their playtest.

A test is an experiment. You need to allow your experiments to fail. That's how you learn.

Tell me, would you have noticed you made the mistake if he hadn't tried to use the card as it was written, instead of as it was intended?
Likely, you would not.

The point of the test was to find problems, he found one. You should have thanked him for pointing out your amateur hour mistake, done what you were going to do after the game, and change the card, then tested it again to make sure the game was working as intended.

What the fuck is the point of playtesting if you're not actively looking for errors?

Why are you making a big deal about a grammatical error when you should be there to help your friend in the first place?

Running and doing test wrong a lot doesn't mean you are doing it right.

Besides telling the player how the game is supposed to work pollutes the results of the test, you want to test your game when you don't make any inputs to see how well it does what is supposed to do. If the mistake is minor there is no need to interrupt, if it is big enough to mention it the test needs to be continued as is to see what happens or restarted with the bug fixed.

>writing a card game in some nonsense language
???

You should have just played the game out with the mistake. this is how you discover helpful bugs. Maybe your intention is stupid and the new way is better.

It's for the Lore. You are supposed to learn Fiorentino before playing the game

>Running and doing test wrong a lot doesn't mean you are doing it right.
How are we doing it wrong? If the dude who made the game stops it and says "I'm sorry, I meant to write down 'target creature' instead of
'target permanent' I must've missed that when I was editing last night" the correct response is to say "oh okay, in that case I'll save this card for later," not "FUCK YOU DAVE, YOU LET ME USE THIS RULE AS WRITTEN OR I WALK!"

At the very least, you should be asking questions to make sure that the rules are working as intended, not just assuming everything will work out because you put ink to paper and treating it as sacred law when the game is still in development.

Not alot of people in this thread will agree with you, user. A good portion of it thinks its good to play a broken version of a game to completion instead of fix it on the spot or end the game on the spot, even though it is much more time consuming and stressful for the creator.

If it breaks the game that badly, then either the game is about to end, in which case who cares, or you're learning valuable information about how well your game's other mechanics work (namely, that they don't). And if it doesn't fuck it up that badly, then why not just continue play? You're still getting useful information.

>Not alot of people in this thread will agree with you, user.
Which is why the only person replying to me and the only one posing this retarded ultimatum. Believe me, if there's a weird interaction with the rules, the person who created will most likely notice it as it's happening, but there's no point in you making a big deal out of a minor error in the writing when the focus should be on the rules overall.

Then again, this is Veeky Forums, and if it's one thing that Veeky Forums loves to do is argue for hours on end while turning minor issues into big deals.

>post greentext story just vague enough to incite argument.
>backpedal and make excuses when asked for more data
Bravo op

>Have never made or playtested a game before

Yes.
"oh okay, in that case I'll save this card for later," is the answer reasonable people will give. Many people on Veeky Forums aren't reasonable.

>Many people on Veeky Forums aren't reasonable.
No kidding? It's no wonder we don't have a game design thread anymore, most of the spergs here don't know how to conduct themselves properly.

game design threads are fucking cancer though. Half the people want others to do their work for them and the other half just post something and never comment on anything other's posted

Speaking of spergs who don't know how to conduct themselves, how's it going mate?

>Have never made or playtested a game before
Then why are you commenting?

"aversario"

>the creator, who likely isn't trying to win his own game in any competitive sense
I'd like to have as much faith in humanity.

Did you explain to him it was a playtest though? Because you should have explained to him it was a playtest

Based off of the spergs ITT, even if OP hadn't explained that it was a playtest, it wouldn't have made that much of a difference.

Autism is a helluva drug.

Then I guess I was just speaking from my own perspective if its really that uncommon. Its what I do as a creator and what I do as a tester for my friends, and they appreciate it both ways. Hell I don't even think a creator should make a game with the intent to be good at it and beat his friends, thats just some dumb bs if you have to make a game up to be better than your friends at something which is why I assume people don't do it very often.

Nah dude, just escalate a typo until you put a gun to the creators head.

>testing game
>find fault
>instead of fixing fault continue playing as if it wasn't a fault
Yeah nobody does this champ, if my team did this while play testing we would get fucking nowhere.