Forest Oath

Making Solo RPGs ‘gamey’: Points of Interactions.

Games

On the very last day of November 2024, two months ago as of writing this, I attended Dragonmeet. There’s a lot I can say about the convention, and the great games I bought there and the pleasure of meeting some great designers (who have all inspired me), but this article began in my mind in a seminar on solo game design. In a panel held by solo RPG designers, it was something stated by Chris Bissette on that panel that began the gears in my head: That they created The Wretched because they found journaling games too similar to writing prompts, and wanted a solo RPG that felt more “Gamey”.

This idea of what makes a solo RPG gamey has occurred to me before, it's certainly an interesting question of when something feels a certain way, and we can’t just explain why. But I found a truth in Bissette’s words that struck me. I absolutely love The Wretched, it's one of my favourite solo RPGs and I have played a lot of them (I have played a lot of RPGs in general, I’m fairly obsessive about this entire hobby). Something I have always valued about The Wretched was how it felt ‘Gamey’, as i too often had difficulties with journaling games due to the fact that well I am a writer too and if I wanted to write I will (and do!). When I’m playing a game, I want to feel like I'm playing a game.

So that begs the question: what makes The Wretched ‘gamey’? What makes a solo RPG ‘gamey in general? Why would a solo RPG find it harder to be ‘gamey’ than a group RPG?

My answer: Interactions

The Wretched makes this fairly obvious: it adds two game pieces, A jeng… sorry, tumbling block tower, and playing cards. Instead of just rolling for prompts, it has you draw cards, and draw blocks. Then instead of writing, it has you record audio. - It changes its interactions, the way you engage with the game itself, compared to journaling games.

But this applies to other games too, even ones that represent more traditional RPGs, such as Ironsworn. This framework can also highlight how solo games carve a unique identity through its interactions, such as Lay On Hands, and also goes as far to explain why one journaling game did work for me: Quill.

First, what do we mean by a game? I’m not the biggest fan of definitions, especially since many definitions of games come across as reductive, or to particularly highlight them as “not art”, but across what I could find the best definition of a game is this: A piece of entertainment that is interactive and has a goal (or several).

For the sake of this article, we will focus on the interactive part and how it pertains to solo RPGs. (I may talk about Goals in reference to solo games in a part 2)

And when I refer to make a solo game feel ‘gamey’, while this is a subjective measurement I mean particularly in comparison to Journaling games, as Bissette used it. Neither is this an indictment of journaling games, and I will even go on to highlight one of my favourites. This article is not on what you should do, or what is better for games in general, just what to keep in mind when designing for a specific goal (particularly how it feels to play).

So my point is this: That by their very nature solo RPGs have fewer systems and therefore fewer interactions, with the removal of other players and the GM, and the means of verbal interaction. Fewer interactions reduce the “game feel” of a solo RPG, therefore to achieve a “gamey” solo RPG you need to create new varied points of interactions.

This matters because interactions between two systems create variety, and varied results, which push against the player's assumptions and control, akin to a group based game.

A system here is defined as something that provides a reaction when interacted with. The obvious one is a game system, the mechanics. When you roll the damage dice, you take that number of damage. But other players also serve as systems, when you interact with them (speaking to them) you get a reaction (they say something back). Then the fiction is interactive, but to get a response you need a system for the fiction: For some games this is the GM, for other’s it's the mechanics, or both. Story games, and even OSR/NSR games, often treat the fiction as a system unto itself. When you pick up the plant pot and smash it, it makes a noise which alerts the guards. Your interaction and the response stems entirely from the fiction, a unique quality of TTRPGs. You, the player, are also a system reacting to other systems interacting with you. If all systems flow into a series of reactions that lead to interactions, this creates a game engine (and is, In my opinion, the goal of good RPG game design.)

I've also used the term “points of interactions”. This is the main focus I want to spend time on. A point of interaction is the physical way you engage with an interaction at the tabletop. This matter’s because it goes a long way to the “game feel” of a game, especially in the ways solo games are limited by this. So it’s about how you inform the game to provide a reaction.

There are several types of points of interactions:

(Not an exhaustive list, there may be more)

A traditional group RPG has many points of interaction: To interact with the fiction is vocal. To interact with other players is also vocal. To roll dice is tactile. To record your character sheet, or take notes or make maps is written / drawn. Then the game system may have others such as using cards for initiative or poker chips to spend on points, which provides a new form of tactile interactions.

Journaling games make use primarily of writing as their primary point of interaction, with prompts being gained tactically through dice or other means, and prompts interacted with by writing.

So by being solo games, you have no other players, and no GM. There’s a reduction of at least two systems. Now in a solo game when a GM is not creating the reactions of the fiction, that either has to come in through mechanics, or the player. Mechanics are already a system being interacted with, and the player can not interact with themselves, so that's another system and point of interaction gone.

That last point goes to show why “making stuff up on your own” for as fun as it can be, never feels like a game, for the point of interaction is purely mental, not tactile, and does not provide meaningful varied reactions. Adding in a simple system of prompts, to push narratives in certain directions, introduces meaningful reactions, and then writing provides a meaningful form of interaction. Journaling games are still games, they are by their very nature more “gamey” than just imagining stuff on your own (and more game than writing, although I would argue even writing can be a game at times), we are just looking at how to get more “gamey” from journaling games.

It's also important to note that variety of points of interactions are also important. If every interaction, even between different systems, is written, then that doesn't feel like meaningful different interactions. In traditional group games, interacting with the environment, socialising with a NPC, and attacking with a weapon are all done via vocal points of interactions, and can often end up feeling the same and unsubstantial in their difference. This is a large reason why people like rolling dice. Tactility feels inherently “gamey”, especially for tabletop games; it’s a point even video games try to stress with haptic feedback and tactile triggers in the PS5 controllers. The tactility of rolling dice, and what dice rolled, also offers a substantial difference in tactility and feel, that makes fictional choices feel substantial too, far more than only vocal interactions can. Fundamentally, tactile interactions have more freedom of differing, and thus providing substantial change in game feel across interactions with different systems.

*as a side note, this is why OSR games that stress to roll ONLY when it's needed often hurt the game, as much as I do play these type of games. Informing players of a substantial form of tactile interaction with the game, only to state they can’t use it, comes across as not letting players play, or engage with the game. This also explains why some 5e players can ditch the ruleset and rely on just rolling a d20 - their understanding of a game is based around tactile interactions first and foremost.

*Okay, sidenote of a sidenote (fight me) but mechanical interactions are also points of interactions, but this happens between two mechanical systems. This is the core of any game that does not interact with fiction, such as say Magic the Gathering, which is entirely based on the differing reactions of different mechanical systems (individual card rules, the stack, damage, defence etc.) You see this plenty in RPGs too, however for the sake of this article I wanted to focus just on player interactions in so far as that matters to the feel of solo RPGs.

*Sidenote of a side note of a sidenote, Commander in Magic the gathering introduces a new system as a multiplayer format: a Social system in the form of politics. This can be meaningfully interacted with vocally, or mechanically, even without realisation too. (Hidden interactions?? Oh god, this is a rabbit hole.)
Anyway, fuck magic the gathering, fuck wizards of the coast, I'm just using it as an example because of its rules complexity.

[back to your usual programming]

So fundamentally for a solo game to feel gamey it needs to add new forms of interactions, and varied points of interactions, with tactile interactions being the best for this. (Are you sick of the word interaction yet? I am)

This is a lot of theory shit, so let's look at it all in context, with three very different solo RPGs and their points of interactions:

The Wretched, Chris Bissette: (Back to the game that started this all)

The Wretched introduces two new points of interaction by introducing new systems: First the playing card system, for the prompts, and the tumbling block tower as a punishment of a sort. The playing cards are tactile, as well as signalling the approach of the alien, and the tower is an incredibly tactile point of interaction actually being dexterity based, and which the gradual deterioration of represents the gradual decay of the ship. There’s something here to be said of how systems in games convey tone, atmosphere, and fictional elements, and utilising physical systems to keep them ever present in the mind (and reducing bookkeeping). A d6 also comes into play if one is so lucky to have access to the ship’s distress beacon, which means in all, The Wretched utilises 3 different points of tactile interactions. Then on top of this the game has you record your story through audio logs, a diegetic interaction where you do as your character does, and which emulates the vocal interactions of Social Game conversations, helping it to distinguish itself away from ‘just writing’.

Ironsworn, Shawn Tomkin:

Ironsworn plays like a more traditional group RPG, and even can be played that way, GMed or GMless. With regard to solo, it’s notable for having an efficient game engine that “runs itself”.
It has three main systems, the mechanics, the fiction and the player: the player interacts with the fiction, by either journaling, or note keeping. When certain fictional criteria are met it triggers the mechanics of moves (and thus is how the fiction alone can be a system, because it interacts upon another system). The point of interaction to the mechanics for the player is through dice rolls, a tactile system, then these provide a fictional and sometimes mechanical reaction, which then the player uses to move forward the fiction, interacting with moves again when they occur. Players also interact in a variety of other systems such as momentum, oracles (which lend support for the fiction, reducing ‘fiat’), and progress tracks (which also, in the vein of the other element of what defines a game, provides a core focus on ‘goals’). However, for as much as I love Ironsworn it’s solo mode is dampened by the fact it’s even more fun GMless, particularly with two players. This intrinsically adds another point of interaction, with another player providing new unprecedented reactions and interactions themselves, but also allows an interaction of the fiction to be vocal on top of the note-taking. The solo mode doesn’t so much as replace the systems lost by being solitary, just provides enough to function solo (and function well it does.) However, this does mean if you play Ironsworn GMless, you may later find the solo mode to feel lacking.

Lay On Hands, Alfred Valley:

Lay On Hands is an interesting game. It’s rather free form, and is more focused on tone of a narrative than a specific genre or setting. It also highlights a key understanding of the need for interesting interactions in a solo game, and it's fucking excellent. The primary way the player interacts with narrative is by four primary moves: Progress, Contend, Defy and Clash. Progress works by spinning a coin upon the oracle, matching the value against ‘spur’ and provides narrative change. This is a tactile point of interaction, and a rather unique one. Also, note how oracle and fictional moves are paired together, making one point of interaction serve multiple purpose, which helps towards a focused and streamlined game feel. In fact, whether the coin faces heads or tails is another piece of information, so from one interaction you receive 3 differing ‘reactions’.
However, the other three moves takes it even further: The coin now also acts as a timer, for interacting with these moves requires an attribute test, akin to other games, but here focused primarily on interaction. Like the tumbling block tower in The Wretched, Lay On Hands incorporates dexterity gaming elements into its solo RPG experience. Attributes are tested differently according to which you use: A separate sheet holds a maze of symbols. When using GRIT you colour in the hatched boxes fully (representing brute force), when using SLIP you draw a line through the clear boxes (representing speed), and when you use WITS you add connected numbers together (representing intelligence). This means there are three different points of interaction, each representing different character in-fiction interactions, in a semi-diegetic manner. The attribute tests themselves are not just a roll of the dice, but games unto themselves, completing a required number (according to your character sheet) before the coin stops. This also integrates an element of skill to the game, akin to The Wretched’s tower.

And now, for my favourite journaling game: Quill, Scott Malthouse

How does this lens of interaction help with analysing why I love Quill more than other Journalling games: Because its main form of interaction is Diegetic. You role-play as someone writing a letter while you write a letter, akin to The Wretched’s voice memos. (interestingly the most common form of diegetic interaction in role-playing games is role-playing conversations to NPCs, meaning bar Quill and The Wretched, diegetic interactions are intrinsically rarer in solo role-playing games)

I've rambled on at lengths, so here are some other intersecting idea’s I couldn’t fully integrate into this, which I think are worth ruminating on:

Open Interactions and Codified Interactions

Meta-interactions

“Tactileness” is not equal:

Optional Tactility:

But finally, remember “gameyness” is one axis of game feel, and may or may not be important to your design based on your attempted goals. TTRPGS are many hobbies pretending to be one, and the only right design is what works best for your game.

Links to the mentioned games: