- Can new players understand the game after one explanation? Our game has a lot of moving elements: hidden roles, hidden quests, role deduction, acting, bluffing, judging, timed turns, and points. So I am worried that if they don’t understand the fundamentals, it’s easy for the fun concept to be confusing or frustrating. I would make a paper prototype of the rules flow with a one-page rules sheet, sample role cards, sample quest cards, and a single test round with 4–6 players. My guess is that players will understand the broad idea of roleplaying and guessing roles, but they will get confused about when to focus on story-building versus when to focus on scoring.
- Do hidden roles and personal quests create fun roleplay, or would people rather create their own characters? This is important because our game relies on players enjoying the process of stepping into a role, pursuing a hidden quest, and shaping the story through that perspective. If the generated roles do not feel compelling, players may feel boxed in rather than inspired, which could make the roleplay feel awkward or less fun. Since hidden roles and personal quests are central to the game, this question helps us test whether those mechanics actually create engagement or whether players would prefer more freedom to create their own characters. To test this, I would create two low fidelity prototypes. In one version, players will receive hidden roles and personal quests created by the designers. In another version, players will be given a loose theme and allowed to create their own characters. We will run a short playtest of both versions and compare which one leads to more natural, engaged, and fun roleplay.
- Would a point system help the game, or does it distract from the story and the “magic circle”?
Our game wants to avoid elimination and use points instead so that everyone stays involved, but there is also a risk that players start optimizing for points rather than engaging with the story and roleplay. Since our game seems to want both playful immersion and strategic reward, we should test whether scoring strengthens that balance or breaks it. I would make an A/B prototype where one group plays with full points and judging, and another group plays with a light scoring and only one person is the one keeping score. My guess is that a heavy point system will make players more calculating and less imaginative, while a lighter point system will probably preserve the social and story-building energy better.
