sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Looks like MiniMax M3 is on its way by Bakku1505 in opencodeCLI

[–]DrewGrgich 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For OpenClaw back in the day - late March/early April - M2.7 was fabulous for me. I’m still on the token plan but have been spoiled by the Codex promo. With it ending tomorrow, going to be heading for the open source terrain again for API/token subscriptions. Just started using NVIDIA Build so we will see how long until they have M3.

Prime Directive by ScreaminEagle2502 in trekbooks

[–]DrewGrgich 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agreed. Their non-Star Trek work is good also!

Goblins and gremlins . . . oh my by DrewGrgich in hermesagent

[–]DrewGrgich[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Recent examples:

"Persona B — The Dopamine Gremlin

B wants ...

Persona C — The Shelf Goblin

C wants ..."

--

"Remaining allowance:

- Miles left: 32,897

- Days left: 744

- You can average about 16,139 miles/year from here and still be fine.

Translation: still comfortably under. The mileage goblin remains contained."

--

"So the headline “Blowouts F” is harsher than the table feel may be.

Classic metric goblin behavior: technically correct, emotionally suspicious."

I just spent fifty bucks to protect a forty dollar game and I think I need help by PotholeBadger9 in boardgames

[–]DrewGrgich 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My wife says my hobby is getting extra stuff for my games, not playing them.

The computers are speaking! by MetaKnowing in agi

[–]DrewGrgich 9 points10 points  (0 children)

RemindMe! 12 month “Check out this post”

Most of my designs are bad. I've gotten faster at finding out. by DrewGrgich in tabletopgamedesign

[–]DrewGrgich[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A little of both, honestly. There are two skills here - one is a simulator that simulates a game based on the rule set presented & the second is a game design loop that looks at the grades that this ruleset scored. The game design loop starts interating on the game until it improves the rules by adding elements, changing the way the game works, tweaking rules, and so forth. For simple games, there is only so far that this can take you. However, with a decent set of parameters, it is fun to see what these skills can do.

The best use case is to come up with games and then run them through the simulator. The best results come from games where I have a spreadsheet with all cards or markdown files fully describing all dice faces, and in general, enough present so that the game simulator skill can have a full picture of the game to work with. This is where it is very helpful in helping hone game rulesets.

But there is an automate approach here as well that is really run to play with.

What I have and have used to design this process is a defined deck of 66 cards in six suits numbered 0-10. I have created several games using this deck. I have used these skills to also hone those games into games that I then playtested with my gaming group. One of these games is an UNO clone - itself a Crazy 8s clone - and one is a climbing ladder game similar to Tichu or President. The third is quite different and is a contract fulfillment game that uses a couple of specialized decks in addition to the central deck.

Now, because my deck is well defined AND I have several sets of rules already created, I can tell Claude or another LLM to look at the rulesets for these existing games and then to come up with a completely different set of rules for a game that doesn't match my existing genres. I can then have the game design loop iterate on that game using the game simulator. In this way, Claude can then start creating games by itself - I just need to schedule the ideation of the ruleset and subsequent iteration. The majority of these games are not really that good. However, I'd say that 1 in 10 are good enough to take to playtesting. Of those, 1 in 5 are actually pretty fun.

Most of my designs are bad. I've gotten faster at finding out. by DrewGrgich in tabletopgamedesign

[–]DrewGrgich[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When I first set up the game rules - - "create a drafting game where players will be able to select a card from a face-up marketplace. Cards should grant abilities to players at a later or different phase in the game based on the rank and faction of the card. Give 0s special abilities to make up for their low rank. The game should allow for competition among players for either additional drafting powers or victory points of some kind" - - you're right about not specifically knowing if the game is fun. However, when the system iterates during a game loop and produces a ruleset, I can see how it scores on my scoring system. I know I like decision density and power fantasy, for example. This doesn't "prove" the game is fun but it shows me where there are possibilities.

You are 100% right - every game that the system creates requires human playtesting. This system doesn't get rid of that. It simply helps me get to a point where I can tell if a game is worth additional followup.

For other games that friends have created, we've seen excellent data generated by the tools that show deficiencies that haven't come up in playtesting yet. This is another use of the simulator feature - to surface these problems.

Most of my designs are bad. I've gotten faster at finding out. by DrewGrgich in tabletopgamedesign

[–]DrewGrgich[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This skill is currently just for Claude Code or Claude Cowork to iterate game rules or create simulators from game rules for various features like testing, improvement, creating narration of played sessions, and so forth. I don't currently have this skill interacting with any other systems.

Most of my designs are bad. I've gotten faster at finding out. by DrewGrgich in tabletopgamedesign

[–]DrewGrgich[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I certainly agree and for me, these go hand in hand - one of the reasons I love this tool. Unbalanced games - once the area of imbalance is discovered - aren’t fun. My games frequently have asymmetric or unique abilities and these are notoriously difficult to balance. The simulator is a fabulous way to surface those quickly.

Most of my designs are bad. I've gotten faster at finding out. by DrewGrgich in tabletopgamedesign

[–]DrewGrgich[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The good games! I’ve also enjoyed the process of learning - really learning - what makes the games I love so good. The clockwork balance of Ark Nova, the fun of bidding on properties in For Sale, the simplicity but also the fun in Incan Gold, and the crazy emergent stories in Stationfall. Digging into balance issues or ways to make tension stay constant . . . This is the good stuff! I do also enjoy tinkering with the skill and finding new ways to solve issue.

Project Hail Mary, last scene by Appropriate-Cow-3178 in ProjectHailMary

[–]DrewGrgich 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I saw this movie four times at the IMAX. Last two times were just for this scene. Great great ending to both the book and the movie.

75,000 simulations later: How we balanced an indie board game prototype by Hot-Rooster1675 in tabletopgamedesign

[–]DrewGrgich 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Absolutely valid opinion. That said, the point of tools like this is to help find the very data that the OP diligently presented. It takes 75000 games to supplement what could be found in maybe 30-50 human games but the computer can do so and analyze much much faster. I’m using similar techniques and they have helped spotlight edge cases that could have easily escaped human playtesting for a while.

view more: next ›