Go Gawk at Crafts

I might be really behind on this one, but I just saw Craft Gawker for the first time today (thanks to Stephanie), and it is good stuff. Good, beautiful, possible stuff. Go look at it. Then pick something and do it.

Here’s a very Chloë-style craft that I saw on Craft Gawker (but which actually comes from How About Orange) for the pleasure of your eyes. (I have actually made similar things in past years….)

Read Full Post »

Math, Art, and Game Design, Part 4: The Initial Play Test

This is the fourth installment of a series by Brian Powers. To catch up, see these:

• Part 1: The Game Concept
• Part 2: The Game Mechanics
• Part 3: The Playable Prototype

***

Math, Art, and Game Design

A Series by Brian Powers

Part 4: The Initial Play Test

Game Design is a bit of a paradoxical form of art. Games are by their very nature social, yet the game design process can be quite a solitary activity. I’d bet most game designers get into this mess because they love playing games, yet they may spend ten times as long (maybe more!) in design mode as they do actually playing the games they design. But we eventually come to the moment: the first time we bring other people into the process – and hopefully bring some joy into their otherwise miserable lives.

Well, that’s an exaggeration, but I wouldn’t be lying if I said that play testing is my favorite part of the game development process. Ideally, when creating a new game, you’ll want to test the game yourself before bringing other people into the mix. This is when having dissociative identity disorder comes in really handy, because you have to jump from chair to chair, taking the turn of each player and trying to see things from his/her hypothetical point of view. Unfortunately I couldn’t do this with my game because at its core lie the decisions that players Red and Blue make (without knowledge of each other’s decisions). I needed some actual human beings. Fortunately, I know some of them!

Five of my friends came over this past Sunday afternoon and I showed them what I had been working on. After explaining the rules and the goal of the game, we played six rounds. How did it go?

Let me first go over the rules with you:

We set up the game board with a random assortment of red, blue, and green stones:

We next laid out the Reward Action cards and Modify Action cards, in this way (there are a few more Reward and Modify actions that I haven’t included here, but you should get the idea):

Reward Actions
Red Make Red XO decision and receive red reward	Blue Make Blue XO decision and receive blue reward	Green Receive green reward	X-Seller Take 1 point from each player who chooses “X”	O-Lover Receive 2 points for O or O, 5 points if both are played	Thief Take 1 point from a player of your choice

Modify Actions
Add 2 stones of any color(s) to the board	Remove any 2 stones from the board	Move 2 stones on the board	Add 1 stone of each color to the board	Remove 1 stone of each color from the board	Swap the positions of 2 stones on the board

To begin, one player is given the “Round Leader” card. This just symbolizes which player gets to choose first during the first round of the game. This card is passed clockwise after each round.

Then, starting with the Round Leader and continuing clockwise twice around the table, each player chooses and takes an action card from the table. Thus, each player gets to take two action cards. Each player must choose one Modify action and one Reward action, and the Red and Blue actions must be taken. So if all but two players have chosen their Reward actions and Red and Blue remain on the table, the last two players are forced to take these two cards.

After each player has two action cards, players exercise their Modify actions, beginning with the Round Leader and following clockwise. You can imagine that, at this point, players each have their own agendas, and they will hopefully be able to modify the board to set things up for themselves to receive a lot of points.

Finally, the two players who chose the Red and Blue actions each get a pair of cards, one with an “X” and one with an “O” (both in their respective color) which allows them each to secretly choose one. They simultaneously reveal their choices and points are awarded. Thus ends a round of the game!

Overall this was a tremendously fun experience for all of us. I was pleasantly surprised how quickly everybody got into the game, how easily they understood the rules – and yet the game was anything but simple. We felt like Fezzini and the Man in Black locked in a battle of wits.

This is exactly what I was going for, and to say I was pleased is putting it lightly.

We played for six rounds, like I said, because it became clear that certain aspects of the game weren’t quite balanced. For example, the “Thief” action allowed a player to take one point from an opponent, but this ended up being pretty weak compared to the other Reward actions. And the “neutral” Green player worked out well too, although I want to balance out the number of green stones on the board so they are more on-par with Red and Blue. Also, I realized that for six players I would want at least eight Modify and Reward actions, so that there are both more options and more opportunities for incentive points.

I would like to mention that, although I have successfully tackled the challenge of making the game fun for more than two players, this has opened up a new problem. Because it was so fun with a group of six, I’m not sure how to capture that same sense of strategy with only two players. We’ll see how this goes.

OK, so, enough about that. My next step is to do more testing! Tweak a few things and play with a new group of people. Test and tweak, test and tweak. This cycle will continue until I get a polished game design that doesn’t need any more changes. Along the way I will, ideally, bring this game to a board game Meetup here in Chicago and have some strangers play while I watch. This is an important step, especially to see how well I’ve written the instructions! I can also give them feedback questionnaires! Ooh, I’m getting all tingly just thinking about it.

I’ll try to get some more testing done soon so that I can come back with my next installment. It may be a few weeks, but I’ll be back as soon as possible, fellow artists! As Chloë would say: “Huzzah!”

(But I would never say that. Not ever.)

P.S. I would also like to mention that I lost pretty miserably. Of the six of us, I came in last with about 9 points.

***

Brian will be back with another installment later. Until then, cheerio!

Read Full Post »

Spirituality Café, an informal discussion group (in Vancouver)

If you live in Vancouver, and you’re available on Thursday evenings throughout the summer (of 2012), you’re invited to join us! (If you’re into meetups, here we are: meetup.com/VancouverSpirituality.)

Here’s what we’ve been doing: meeting at a coffee shop, reading a passage (~5–10 mins.) from a certain thought-provoking, uplifting book, and then discussing it and other things that come up with the friends present (usually about five people at this point; people are free to come once or as many times as they like, but there is a core group of regulars).

I designed a poster to help publicize our little event, for it is open to all, and we will be putting this up around the neighbourhood.

The book we’ve been reading passages from is called Paris Talks, for that is what it is: a series of short talks given in Paris in 1912 by ’Abdu’l-Bahá, the son of the Founder of the Bahá’í Faith. He traveled from the Middle East to Europe and North America to support early Bahá’í communities but also to meet with the public and discuss the purpose of religion, the role of religion in society, and the process of bettering society as well as ourselves as individuals.

(In fact, this year is the centenary of ’Abdu’l-Bahá’s journey, and an amazing social-media documentary called 239 Days is covering it. I recommend taking a look; learning about this inspiring figure is absolutely worthwhile, and the project is such an innovative way of bringing history to life!)

One of the most important aspects of this discussion group is the approach: everyone speaks with humility and respect for others; everyone is free to present their opinions; everyone makes the effort to listen and truly understand what others are saying. It has sometimes been difficult to maintain these attitudes, but for the most part we have, and it has been an enriching experience.

So far, we’ve discussed a number of interesting topics, trying to think about each at both the scale of the individual life and the life of society: the relationship between thoughts and actions; diversity, multiculturalism, and pluralism; the concept of divinity and God as an unknowable essence; and causes of war and strife and paths toward unity and peace.

If you’re interested in joining us, do!

If you’re interested in reading Paris Talks, it’s available online.

Cheers!

Read Full Post »

30 Days of Creativity 2012: “I’m Working on My Novel”

Last year at this time, I enumerated the creative efforts I made during 30 Days of Creativity (what’s that?). There won’t be a post like that this year, even though I did work on creative projects—well, one creative project—every day. Instead I’m just going to write a bit about that one project. Yeah, fine, I’m writing a novel. And right now, I’m loving it.

It’s possible to feel quite self-conscious about working on a novel—and this (hilarious) Twitter account certainly rubs it in—because actually finishing the novel in question and getting accepted by a publisher is nothing but a pipe dream for most would-be novelists. In this day of facilitated self-publishing, though, they may not be unattainable dreams (though doing it all yourself is difficult, and may not be worth it—don’t get me started).

I am such a good procrastinator that I can switch from working to procrastinating in a flash. A flash! It would be a skill if society rewarded such things. —my writing buddy

The point is that I took a stab, this month, at working on the novel I’ve been working on, off and on, since I was seventeen. That’s a decade (I was a little surprised to realize). Why did I take this stab at this time? Partially because I wanted to participate in #30D0C, partially because I have some pipe dreams, partially because I want to make myself finish this blasted thing, but mostly because I acquired an important writing tool: a buddy.

A writing buddy is a difficult thing to acquire, for exactly the reasons expressed by my new writing buddy:

I talk to other people about writing sometimes, but I’ve yet to find a really good writing partner. There’s a degree of trust that needs to be there, and a similar work technique. [I have other friends who] are good to talk to about ideas but not so good with motivating me to actually write. They are too lenient with my excuses. [Others are] good for motivation but I don’t think they have the same ideas about style, characterization, etc. as I do, so I can’t see them turning into mutually beneficial critique partnerships. We disagree a lot about human nature. … I think you and I have similar ideas. Which is funny because I don’t think we have similar reading tastes.

This is all to say: a writing buddy must have attitudes that mesh with your own—but what that means exactly can only be hashed out by you and your writing buddy. Here’s an example of me and my writing buddy hashing it out, and ultimately agreeing:

WB:The first rule of writing is to read a lot in your chosen genre!

Me: Yes. Although I also feel that reading widely, anything that you want, will help your writing. But yes, definitely if you are aiming for a specific genre, read it.

WB: Reading widely helps, yes. … I have a friend who likes action/adventure whereas I tend to like books about feeeeelings (I love ones that combine the two, but they’re more rare).

Me: Again I concur with you!

My creative-writing prof used to joke—but it’s true—that writers prefer to have written than to write. Having someone encourage you, though, can do wonders! (This is also true of such things as dieting and exercise, and all self-improvement projects.) I’m so glad that our ability to encourage one another in this way has developed, or emerged. She was there all along! Heck, we have been good friends since I was seventeen, which is the year I began writing this thing.

Me: I find i am a binge writer. If I have days of nothing and then a bit of a binge, it feels like progress. (This is why I’ve been working on this thing for ten years, I guess.)

Writing Buddy: Yeah. My evenings are just really short as it is. And I don’t feel like spending them working … which is no excuse, because once I get started it never feels that much like work.

My writing buddy has a word count goal. She recommended an article to me about how to increase your word count (check it out if you are the kind of writer who makes this goal). She also has a couple of blogs to keep up, about which she said a useful thing to me:

I find I blog more when I’m trying to write. I’ve heard people say that they feel blogging, etc. takes up energy that could be better used writing their next book, but I feel like it’s all exercise. And blogging helps me remember that i like writing.

My personal writing goal was less specific; I agreed to work on, in any way, or at least think and make decisions about my writing project every day. I agreed to report to my writing buddy about it, every day if possible. On the days when I couldn’t or didn’t write for some reason, I worked my way through Jack Hodgins’s A Passion for Narrative (still not finished), which is a great reservoir of encouragement and helpful advice. (My writing buddy’s book of choice right now is Debra Dixon’s Goal, Motivation & Conflict: The Building Blocks of Good Fiction.)

In addition to sharing small scenes from each of our projects with one another for feedback, we’ve had discussions about writing outlines, introspection vs. action, conflict (here is a funny conflict-generator tool I found), character development and motivation, plot development, writing style (tense, etc), details related to setting. Also we’ve been making up some fake band names, which has been a good time!

We’ve also discussed more philosophical issues, like whether or not to appropriate the voices/stories of others for your own purposes. On that last one, my writing buddy said a wise thing:

Who owns … experiences is strange to think of, but I do think we have a right to fictionalize our lives if we want to. After all, it doesn’t expose anyone as much as it exposes the author.

This is what Margaret Atwood says, and I can’t help agreeing with her:

Not only does [the view that writers have no right to tell stories from points of view that are not their own] condemn as thieves and imposters such writers as George Eliot, James Joyce, Emily Brontë, and William Faulkner … it is also inhibiting to the imagination in a fundamental way. It’s only a short step from saying we can’t write from the point of view of an “other” to saying we can’t read that way either, and from there to the position that no one can really understand anyone else, so we might as well stop trying … Surely the delight and the wonder come not from who tells the story but from what the story tells, and how. (from the Introduction to Best American Short Stories 1989)

But let’s get back to the point: so far, my writing project (my return to it, anyway) has gone really well. We’ve been in touch almost daily, and I’ve made more progress in the past month than in the past five years put together! (I have to give myself some credit, though: I am working with a strong foundation of bits and pieces that I’ve been writing since I was seventeen. I couldn’t have come this far without the work I’d already done, but it is coming together remarkably well. I’ve solved plot problems this month that I couldn’t sort out for years, and perhaps it’s simply because I sat myself down and made myself write.)

The only thing for me to do now is keep going. And my writing buddy and I have no plans to stop.

So, in the end (of this post), my writing advice is: use the buddy system (but be selective about your buddy).

[IRONY UPDATE:]

WB: Also, I’m cool with it, but I think it’s funny/ironic that we were talking about appropriation/permissions to use things and you used our chat without asking me first. (Seriously, that sounds like I’m not OK with it but I am.)

Plus, letters are letters. It’s your property as much as mine; by “sending” it to you I gave it over to you

Me: That is funny. Maybe I should add an update in which I quote the comment you just made, ha!

WB: Haha yeah, feel free.

Me: Awesome.

And another thing: this post got lots of comments when I posted it to my Facebook feed, but some people do not leave those comments on the actual blog. Here is some evidence (evidence that mostly proves I have some thoughtful, writer-ish friends, and I wanted to share their thoughtful, writer-ish comments here):

(Feel free to post your comments on my actual blog in future, for the benefit of the public! And THANK YOU to those who have commented below!)

Read Full Post »

Creative Freedom Within Limits

Heard of the book Eunoia by Christian Bök? It’s

a set of univocalics … which consists of chapters written using words limited to a single vowel. The book was published in 2001 by Coach House Books. […]

In the book’s main part, each chapter used just a single vowel, producing sentences such as this: “Hassan can, at a handclap, call a vassal at hand and ask that all staff plan a bacchanal”.^[1][…]

The author believes “his book proves that each vowel has its own personality, and demonstrates the flexibility of the English language.”^[1]

^(Wikipedia)

This book inspired plenty of talk in the English Dept. at the yooniversity I attended. Yet: why did I think of it today? And why did I write “yooniversity”, like a fool?

Well, the dear old iBook G4 that I type on has hit senility. It is six years old, and it has been with this girl across the world and back. The battery died eons ago, and I got a new one, which also died. The laptop was revived by a techy friend and given a clean OS last year. It has no free space left at all. And now I can’t type with certain keys. Which keys? I’d happily share that info except that doing so involves typing with those keys. I’ll copy and paste (tho only once, for it is a hassle!): 7, U, J, and M. Search this blog post; those letters will not appear in it anywhere else (except in copy-and-paste excerpts).

And that has been today’s creative challenge for yorz trooly. (Day 26!) As is evident, I’ve gone phonetic in a few places. On the whole, tho, I had to avoid those letters (and that digit) altogether. It’s been a challenge—especially since I’d like to get a point across as well (which lengthens things)—and I expect props for the the creative ways I avoided these letters in this post.

What’s the connection between these keys? I think there is probably a little wire that lets these keys work:

Why didn’t I write this post on the desktop? For one thing, its vast powers are presently being tapped by the ol’ ball and chain (forgive, please! I can’t type “hxsband”). For the toast part, tho, it is so that I can confront this bizarre challenge. See? Even rhy(x)e-based association works!

Therein lies the creativity. What does it lie in? It lies in the constraints. Constraints—and Eunoia likely began as a foray into constrained writing—force one to think on the opposite side of the inside of the box (see this blog for great, short pieces of constrained writing). In fact, let’s call writing pro(x)pts exactly what they are: constraints to begin with.

It is better to begin creative work with an idea or direction or inspiration than to begin with nothing. Other approaches have been explored, of coarse. I’d need a whole lot of the 4th broken key to get into that, tho. It is the opinion of this blogger that constraint is necessary in art.

I’ll end the speech here for now, with one last notion: when next yoo create, give yorself a constraint (above and beyond typical technical or strxctxral things) and see if it doesn’t get yoo to work harder. On the other hand, if a constraint doesn’t appeal, lose it; don’t sacrifice yor creative flow.

Cheers!

Read Full Post »