On the matter of maps...
almost 2 years ago
– Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 10:54:34 PM
Greetings! There has been great interest in Armello: The Board Game Designer, Rob Heinsoo's design notes so we asked him for more! In this update Rob gives us an insight into the thought process behind the layout of the map boards.
Making Maps for Armello
People have been wondering if we could make modular maps for Armello. It turns out to be an interesting question.
I’m going to start by touching on a few things about the Armello map boards that make a fully modular approach both challenging and (probably) undesirable.
Quest Necessities
Instead of sending heroes to specific quest locations like the digital game, our quests send heroes to a specific terrain type in a specified region. If you’re headed to a Forest in the South East (SE), either Forest will do.
Consequently, each region must contain at least one example of each of the seven terrain types. The four terrain types with the most impact—Dungeons, Settlements, Swamps, and Stone Circles—show up once in each region on the two maps we’ve done so far. Other terrain may show up more than once in each region.
Fair Set-Up
Our two maps aim to create somewhat different play dynamics and most importantly, fair starting conditions. Both those goals become harder to reach when pieces of the map are replaced with modular bits or add-ons. Let’s look at arrangements for a couple of terrain types.
Map A
Map B
Settlements: Our first two maps are defined by the distance between the Clan Grounds and the Settlement. Map A has two spaces between the spots where heroes start play and the first Settlement. Map B has three spaces. Player Heroes setting up in any region have the same distance to travel to claim their first Settlement. The 3-space map makes it more likely that a Hero will skip claiming a Settlement to focus on moving towards their Quest destination.
That’s a choice that each player gets to make, and their choices are roughly equal. A map that makes one or two starting positions nearer, or further, from the hero’s first chance to claim a Settlement introduces the type of early-game bias we’re aiming to avoid.
I note that it might be OK for starting positions and distances to get weird later in a game, especially since slain Heroes come back in random clan grounds, instead of being able to choose the most advantageous location.
Mountains: Another issue with randomized terrain surfaces is when Mountains bump up against each other. One of our maps puts a couple Mountains together, justifying the move by putting Settlements and Stone Circles in close proximity. But as a rule, when Mountains cluster, most Heroes have difficulty moving through the cluster and a piece of the board gets ignored. That’s not usually great for the game—it’s usually more fun if there are multiple sensible routes. An add-on or modular approach would need to try to avoid Mountain clusters if it was intended to be something that people would play with often.
Other terrain: There are somewhat similar issues with Dungeons and Stone Circles, but not quite as significant, so let’s skip on to the physical bits.
The Physicalities
Part of the reason the maps look so good is that the shadows are right! The art reads in one direction. The base of the forest is South and down, the trees and mountains and houses go up. If we ever try to make a truly modular game piece, it’s going to look different than the rest of the board. I know I’m not excited about telling Greg & Dann of Quillsilver that they need to find a way to make pieces turn in all directions! Game designers are justly famous for trampling on aesthetics with gameplay desires, but so far there aren’t many gains from making map bits that read in all directions.
Stay tuned for Rob's next update where he'll be talking all about ROT!
