Group H-ello

Mario Kart: Trailblazer

Do-It-Yourself Mario Kart

IAT312 / December 3, 2015

Instructor: Chris Shaw
TA: Servet Ulas
D101 /
Gary Chi
Madison Sim
Ashley Tsang
Esther Young

GAME OVERVIEW
Mario Kart: Trailblazer is a board game version of the various Mario Kart video games. It is a two to
four-player game where players create the track with hex tiles as they go and race to complete three
laps first by rolling die for movement. The hex tiles have different properties that interact with the
player, such as tiles that give items, and tiles with obstacles that hinder progression. Item cards can
give players a boost, add new obstacles on the track, such as bananas, or hinder the player himself.
Players also interact with players through bumping and action cards. When one character passes
another on the track, the passing player may bump the other by drawing an action card and
performing the instructions on the card.

DRIVING
For the purposes of the board game, the core mechanic of driving will work simultaneously alongside
track building as well as interacting with objects on the tiles. This differs greatly from the Mario Kart
video games which are always set on prebuilt tracks. For the purposes of our board game, we have
altered the driving process and included the track building mechanic so that players can enjoy the
variety of driving on ever changing race tracks.
During the first lap of the race (out of a total three), players build their track by placing hex tiles to
create a looping trail back to the finish line. Players each hold three hex tiles - drawing more as
necessary - and choose which of those tiles to place at the start of their turn. Two players must use
between 15 to 20 hex tiles to complete the track, and three or more players must use 25 to 30.
Through the process of the building and racing along the track for the first lap, the player whose turn it
is to build the road can potentially sabotage players ahead of them by building disadvantageous routes
like u-turns in front of them. Areas like this where the main track splits into different roads changes
how the tracks are driven on the second and third laps, since players will have to roll the die to
determine which track they will be able to take.
Rolling the die will also determine how quickly players accelerate along the track. Players will be able
to move the same number of spaces as the they number roll on the die. The die will be used as the
main element of our board game that will heavily impact the amount of uncertainty. If a player is three
entire hexagonal pieces behind they will gain an extra die and roll with two dice until they are within at
least one tile of their closest opponent. This rule was introduced to help ensure balance so that the
player in last place will have a greater opportunity to catch up if they are falling far behind.
Once the racetrack is built and players are on their second lap, some tiles may have a fork. Rolling a
die adds uncertainty to the directional movement of the player, whether they will be going left or right
when situated on a fork.

VEHICULAR COMBAT
Players can bump other opponents during racing, corresponding to that mechanic in the video games.
If one player passes another, the passing player can bump the opponent back by performing the
instructions on the action card. These range from imitations of Mario Kart characters or answering
trivia questions. Failure to win the challenge or choosing not to perform the instructions on the card
result in the player with the card stopping in their tracks.
We included these action cards to add variety and a more social component to racing. Through
playtesting, feedback was the dryness of just moving pieces with the only interaction through item
cards and bumping. The video games are immersive in the driving aspect which the board game
cannot emulate, therefore, we include greater aspects of social interaction.
One mechanic we did not map from the video games is the difference between characters; heavier
characters accelerate slower but are more powerful while lighter characters move faster but are more
susceptible to obstacles and attacks. Implementing into the board game was an extra complication
that was confusing and as we changed the process to bump, it was not entirely applicable anymore.

ITEM BOXES
Items will be represented by cards in the board-game version, and are attained when the player enters
an item box tile. Though players can only have one item card in hand at-a-time, they may discard the
one in hand if they would like to draw a new one when passing an item box tile.
To maintain the item distribution balance, item boxes will have different colours corresponding to
'levels' of items with their corresponding colours. First level items (red) are least advantageous, such as
Bananas; second level items (blue) are more advantageous, such as Red Shells, et cetera, until the third
level (green), which will include Thunderbolts and Stars. The first player draws from the red card pile. If
there are only two players, the second player draws from the blue pile; or, if more than two players,
the middle players draw from the blue pile as well. The last player draws from the green pile. Players
in the lead will, thus, never get very powerful items, while players behind have a chance to catch up.

Top row: red cards are the least powerful items. Middle row: medium powered items. Bottom row: most powerful

OBSTACLES
Obstacle tiles specify what type of obstacle resides on them, which
are Goombas (red), Boos(dark turquoise), or Chomps (purple). When a
player first enters the obstacle tile, he must roll the obstacle cubes; if
any cube lands with a face up, then the player has hit the obstacle,
losing all remaining moves as well as losing a turn. The different
obstacles have differing probabilities of hitting the player.

PLAYTESTING CHANGES
We conducted the following playtests:
PLAYTEST 1
We conducted our first playtest in our lab on November 20. Our playtesters were composed of three
casual gamers and game designers from class. We verbally explained the rules as the testers played,
and they could ask us questions and give feedback freely during the course of testing. With the class
limitation, our first playtest lasted for thirty minutes where they were able to compete the first lap of
the game.
The main issues during this playtest was the track
building aspect of the game. For instance, players
wanted to finish building the track right away within 6 or
7 tiles, which defeats the purpose of the game so we
need to find a way to control that aspect. Playtesters
also felt that there were too many regular hex tiles
while there was a lack of interesting hex tiles (for
example, hex tiles with item boxes). Furthermore, we
observed that there were too much uncertainty within
our game, where most of our mechanics relied on the roll of a die. For instance, obtaining item cards
was based on chance. Playtesters during this game often did not get a chance to obtain item cards. As
a result, we were unable to identify how balanced our game was.

PLAYTEST 2
Our second playtest was conducted at home in November 25 which includes 2 playtesters, one
experienced gamer, one a casual gamer. No verbal explanation of rules were given to test the clarity of
the rulebook, and the observer did not involve much in the execution of the game. Players gave
feedback at the end of completing the game. The playtesters read the rules and completed all three
laps (completed the game) within 40-50 minutes.
To further observe the rolling of a die mechanic, we wanted to prioritize this aspect during the second
playtest. Additionally, to address the initial hex tiles issues, we implemented a limit on the number of
required tiles for track creation, which turned out well. However, we found that playtesters were too
constrained since they draw one hex tile at a time to build the track. We also learned that the game
was too balanced, therefore, playtesters found the game was not very fun. One of the reasons behind
this is that, playtesters could not feel they can get ahead, or catch up against the odds since the item
cards were very conservative. Testers also felt that there was a lack of interactions between the
players. Although, players did not feel that there were the rolling of the die was too repetitive , we
observed that because of the too much rolling of a die, there was too much uncertainty within our
game. For instance, in order to obtain an item card, players had to rely to on a roll of a die.
PLAYTEST 3

The third playtest was held in our lab on November 27. Our playtesters were once again composed of
three playtesters, who are all casual gamers and game designers from class. Playtesters read the rule
books and completed all three laps (completed the game) within 90 minutes.
To address the issues during the second playtest, we allowed players to have three hex tiles at a time,
which gives them more freedom to strategize. Additionally, we adjusted the varying abilities of each
item card to be more impactful during the gameplay. We also made the item box static so that every
player are more likely to have an item card on their hand, increasing the interaction between the
players while simultaneously, decreasing the roll of a die mechanic. Further, we also added a new
mechanic of drawing an action card when choosing to bump players, adding a social aspect to the
gameplay. Unfortunately during this playtest, playtesters were very hesitant to use the item cards,
therefore, we were unable to fully playtest our new mechanics.

PLAYTEST 4
Our fourth playtest was held at home on November 27, which included
three playtesters who are all casual gamers. No verbal explanation of rules
to test the clarity of the rulebook, observer did were involved to assure
players that they understood the mechanics correctly, players gave
feedback at the end of completing the game. The playtesters read the rules
and completed all three laps (completed the game) within 75 minutes. In
contrast to our third playtest, the three testers this time were more than
happy to use the item cards and action cards.

We learned that the drastic changes we

made to the abilities of the item cards were
balanced. The feedback loops, in which first
player gets weaker item cards while last
player gets a very powerful card, were much
more effective due to the changes we made.
The boardified game, therefore, resonates
more with the original video game.
Additionally, the action cards further
increased the social interaction of the gameplay, however, testers felt that there was not enough risk
involved in the action cards. They felt this way because when a player chooses to bump another player
and draws an action card, there was no consequence if they choose not to do the action. We are
hoping to address this issue for the next iteration by implementing the bump mechanic as
mandatory and if a player chooses not to perform the action cards, then they will be penalized by
having to stop, losing any further movement that turn.

Overall, our playtests were able to meet our game end conditions. The issues that came up were

mainly from the core and satellite mechanics of the game, which we have addressed in this iterative
process.

A RETROSPECT
Feedback from the final playtest has been very positive and fun. The competition between players
works much better after our various changes and amendments. Adding the social aspect of action
cards makes for a more interactive and enjoyable version of the games. If we were to iterate further,
the next version of the game could perhaps include features that promote even more social interaction
between players. Since amending the rules further and allowing the players to hold three hex tiles at a
time while building the track, the main issue of dead end roads was resolved we have not encountered
any other major issues.
It was a fun experience transforming a video game into a board game version. Translating mechanics
between the two mediums was extremely challenging to get our desired aesthetic of fast-paced
competition, but was highly rewarding as our iterations kept giving better and better feedback from
playtesters. As mentioned above, we would further develop the social interaction through more direct
means, such as currently with the action cards, because these mechanics are only possible through the
board game medium. Adding more of these would add to the novelty of a boardified Mario Kart.
Overall the game has been enjoyable to make and to play.