During playtesting in the weekend, I realised that cognitive load is a big problem for some players. This isn’t exactly news, of course – right from the start I’ve been trying to minimise it, especially for expansion content. But it’s one thing to be aware of this idea, and another to see it demonstrated in front of you. Fortunately, there’s a way to cope with this.
As you might have gathered, I’m talking about the idea of a gradient in the cognitive load being applied – a sort of slope of increasing complexity, where people can choose the point at which they feel comfortable.
As an example, let’s talk about the heavy weapons I’m working on for Close Encounters. The first point on the gradient would be something which operates exactly like the weapons that are already in the game, it just does more of it. You roll 3 dice instead of 1, get a bigger bonus but to the same things… you get the idea. Someone who doesn’t want to deal with more complexity can choose this and still be on the same playing field as the other players. The machine gun heavy weapon fits this description.
At a similar point on the gradient would be a weapon which does something different, but only does one thing. Maybe you roll a different type of dice, for example, but there are no other aspects to consider. Again, this is a fairly low level of complexity to deal with, but it still makes a difference in gameplay. The sniper rifle heavy weapon operates like this.
By now we’re out of the lower levels of the gradient, so we’re getting to things which involve more complexity. We might be talking about something which does familiar things (even if more of them), but also does a new thing or imposes a new restriction. There are three examples I’m thinking of here: the flamethrower, the rocket launcher, and the autocannon. All of them have a primary effect based on familiar mechanics, but they each also add a new mechanic to the game – forced retreats, ongoing effects, and so on. If you take one of these, you’re taking on a higher level of cognitive load when thinking about how to use them or resolve their effects, although there’s room for debate about which of them is easier to deal with (players seem to love the flamethrower, for example, despite its complexity).
Finally, up at the top of the gradient we have things which do new stuff, in new ways, with new restrictions. An example of this is a laser weapon I’m thinking about including: you have to pay attention to how much heat you’re building up, allocate the damage dice you roll, and evaluate the risks caused by continued firing. I suspect it may be too much (either in terms of cognitive load or power level!), but in any case it’s a whole new kettle of fish-shaped objects to deal with.
I guess the point of all this is to illustrate that a gradient can be a good way to deal with adding complexity to a game. By including multiple options and allowing the players to choose where they feel comfortable on that gradient, you let everyone enjoy the cool new stuff but avoid overloading them. It’s quite a neat solution, and I’ll try to incorporate it in other things as I work on them.
Encounter Table Games 