Historically, we put our games through a gauntlet of local playtesting, development, blind playtesting, data analysis, copyediting, and proofreading, plus a few pre-production copy playtests (typically by coworker Joe and then me and my St. Louis coworkers). Most of these playtests focus on making the game as fun, functional, balanced, and intuitive as possible.

But over the last year or so, we’ve added two enhancements to this process: One, we often ask Panda to make a pre-PPC copy as soon as possible after the proofs are approved. This looks like a real copy of the game, or at least what the game could be. Two, when we get to the real PPC stage, we make 4 PPCs instead of 1, and each of them is reviewed and playtested by multiple people. Both of these help us playtest the game as a product and to increase the chances of finding anything critical that was missed during the oversight process.

This brings me to Wingspan Pocket.

In some ways, Wingspan Pocket is one of our smallest games. It’s only around 6x4x2 inches, it only takes 30 minutes to play, and it asks each player to manage only 1 row of bird cards. Yet by another metric it is our biggest game, as there are 175,000 units in the first English print run, by far the most in our 14-year history.

With that much at stake, we really, really needed to get it right.

At our January company retreat in Phoenix (the first time all 8 of us have ever been in the same place), I proudly presented to my coworkers the pre-PPC of Wingspan Pocket, the product I had carefully crafted over the last year with the designer (Elizabeth Hargrave), playtesters, proofreaders, and the graphic designer.

I say this with love, appreciation, and humility: My coworkers proceeded to tear apart every aspect of the product. Not the game design–that was fine. Rather, it was the product design (a major component of my job) that fell short of their expectations.

The following result of 3 days of conversations, playtests, and pages of notes was a vastly superior product to the pre-PPC, especially in terms of onboarding. Accessibility is important in any game, but it’s even more important when a major goal of the game is to invite anyone and everyone into the world of Wingspan.

Many of the initial discussions focused on the box itself. The original box was an awkward shape, kind of like a smaller Oceania expansion box. With 130+ cards and 60 egg tokens, we knew the game wasn’t literally going to fit in anyone’s pocket, but the box needed to fit a smaller space on a shelf (whether that shelf is yours or at a game store).

After the company retreat I actually visited Barnes & Noble to look at their small-box games to see if there was a size that felt right, displayed well, and would fit the components of Wingspan Pocket. The end result is a box that is roughly the size of my hand.

The art for the front of the box had some debate, but with the name “pocket,” I felt strongly that we should keep the illustration of the pouch nest while making the word “Wingspan” as big as possible. (Of course, we had already debated other game names like Wingspan Go, Wingspan Swift” and Wingspan Nest, but we ruled them out due to connections to Pokemon, the Wingspan swift-start pack, and the Wingspan Nesting Box.)

The back of the box also went through a number of revisions to convey the simplicity of the game. We landed on a method used by many publishers for streamlined games: Explain the game with an image and 3 short phrases.

As we played the pre-PPC, we found that the reference card needed a lot of work. My initial goal was that someone could play the game from the reference card alone and only use the rulebook for a deeper dive, but there’s still a key difference between referencing key elements of the game and actually understanding the entire game.

In revising the reference card multiple times, we also revisited the rulebook itself, especially the first page. We truly wanted Wingspan Pocket to be accessible to everyone, including those who might be daunted by a short hobby game rulebook, so right on the front page we talk about what you need for your first game and showcase a rules video QR code.

While most of the discussions focused on the product design, a few gameplay-related elements came up as well. Originally, after someone played their 6th bird, players each took an extra turn (after each player had taken the same number of turns in the game). While this didn’t bother previous playtesters, we found at higher player counts that it really didn’t feel necessary and could turn a 30-minute game into a 45-minute game. So I talked to Elizabeth about removing the extra set of turns, and she approved the change.

Also, the goal cards in the game (which score 1 VP per egg on specific types of birds) were previously the default way of playing, and the rules suggested that players remove the goals for their first game. Instead, we switched to the goals being excluded by default, and for “advanced play” you can add them. Wingspanners accustomed to goal tiles and bonus cards should have no issues adding these cards.

I don’t think we’ve ever had a product that went under the microscope to the extent of Wingspan Pocket. We collectively put our hearts and minds into this game as if it is the only game we make, and I hope the final result brings joy to your table.

I’m sure we are far from the first publisher to playtest both a pre-PPC and multiple PPCs to improve the design of a product. But I’m sharing this because maybe you aren’t aware that these are options to explore–granted, very expensive options on a per-unit basis–as you seek to increase the chances of success of your product and to reduce errors.

Also read:

• Results of the Stonemaier Company Retreat
• Our New Proofreading and Oversight Process

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

Yesterday we announced Wingspan Pocket, a new standalone 1-5 player game that distills the Wingspan experience down to a lighter, shorter, streamlined experience that has each player activate a single row of cards on each of their turns (even on the same turn you play a bird). The cards are all double sided: a food side and a bird side. Bird powers are primarily indicated by icons instead of text, and they include a new type of power, ongoing (green) benefits.

On Monday I will have an article about the in-depth pre-production copy testing process of Wingspan Pocket, but I haven’t posted the corresponding design diary entry yet, so today I have an interview about a completely different game from another publisher!

Gabe Barrett runs Best With 1 Games, and over the last few years I’ve seen him adapt a really interesting strategy for creating and launching games. With their latest game, Stonefall, in its final days on Gamefound, Gabe was kind to take some time to answer questions about his methods.

1. As far as I can tell, you’ve run solo-coop game campaigns once a month every month for several years now. Is that correct? How many games are we talking, and what are the biggest hits so far in terms of the campaign and retail?

That’s correct. Since January of 2024, I’ve run a solo game campaign every single month on Gamefound. Through those campaigns, I’ve shipped around 60,000 games so far with another 8,000 set to go out in the next few weeks.

The biggest hits have been Rome: Fate of an Empire, Radiance, and Small Time Heroes. 

2. Do you manufacture and ship each game independently, or do you have any overlapping production runs and fulfillment (i.e., so multi-campaign backers can pay shipping once for multiple products)?

Each game is sent to the factory independently, but there have been a few instances where the queue line got backed up to the point that several games were printed and shipped at the same time. However, I use a fulfillment company based in China that ships worldwide and charges by the gram, so there are no cost-savings in bundling. 

Games ship as soon as they’re completed, and there’s no crossover between campaigns from an admin level – every campaign is a separate spreadsheet.

3. How have you found the project management puzzle for juggling so many projects? Any key tips or tools that you’ve found work well? Is there something specific about solo games that enables you to have so many projects in the works?

I wish there was some secret or magical piece of software that I could share, but I’ve found that a basic checklist is the best tool overall. I’ve used Trello and other project management apps, but nothing works as well as a good, old fashioned checklist with every aspect of a game’s production broken into line items.

Then, you just work the list and check things off as they’re completed.

The “magic” comes from realizing the checklist needs improvement over and over and over again until you finally get something that works best. And when you run a campaign every single month, you get a lot of opportunities to make revisions.

Nothing about publishing solo games specifically makes things easier, but standardizing as much as possible helps a great deal. I only offer a couple different box sizes which makes designing, publishing, manufacturing, and shipping everything much simpler as I’ve removed all but a few variables. It also allows me to order certain things in bulk and get a better price – shipping boxes and foam, for example.

4. Are you happy with the current pursuit of 1 game per month, or have you considered spacing out campaigns (e.g., every 2-3 months)? I’m curious about what you view is the advantage of 1 game per month. 12 new games a year seems like a lot for you and for customers–what drives that quantity versus any other quantity of games per month/year? Is that based on what backers have told you they want, sheer momentum, company finances, etc?

“Solo Game of the Month” has a nice ring to it. “Solo game of the quarter” or “solo game of the fortnight” just doesn’t sound quite right.

But once the right systems are in place, and you find great people to work with, twelve games a year is really not that hard to get your arms around. We’ll probably end up doing around 20 new games this year in total. Most of those will be Gamefound campaigns, but others will be direct-to-retail.

However, these aren’t expensive games. Most are $25, and a lot of the “extra” games we’re working on in the background are $15. I don’t think it would be possible to do 12 traditional crowdfunding style games that are $100+ and contain boxes upon boxes of minis and content. The customer base would burn out quickly, most people’s monthly budgets can’t handle it, I would probably be speedrunning my time on this earth, and game shelves wouldn’t be able to support it.

But for the price of a couple meals at McDonald’s, you can get a box the size of a VHS case containing a fun game with great art that offers an excellent solo-gaming experience.

And at that price point, people are more likely to give a game a chance when they might not normally vibe with the theme or core mechanisms. Also, since I don’t print very many extras, a game is easy to sell on the second-hand market, if you don’t enjoy it.

Am I happy with the cadence of one a month? Absolutely. 12+ games a year means I can take some chances on games that might not have wide appeal. It means I get more opportunities to find hits. And it means consistent cashflow to grow a sustainable business.

5. Are most backers just picking and choosing a few of your games each year, or is there a significant percentage of people who back every Best With 1 campaign? If so, do you offer a subscription option for them? How has it been to work with Gamefound so consistently?

I have a core group of about 500 customers that buy basically everything, and around 40% of my customers have purchased more than one game, so I get a ton of repeat buyers. People often discover the series through a campaign and then purchase a bunch of the previous games.

And that’s by design. I started the company to create a home for solo gamers where everything would be tailored to a one-player experience. The games are all pretty different, but if you like one, you’ll probably like at least ten others.

As far as a subscription, I planned to have one before diving into things in 2024, but I got talked out of it by someone who was doing one. It’s not that they’re bad; they just don’t integrate very well with crowdfunding platforms, and they create a bunch of extra work and overhead. And since simplicity is one of the main pillars of my company, I opted not to go the subscription route.

However, I’m finding other ways to reward repeat customers. For example, a couple months ago, I sent a free game to all 500 of the core customers mentioned above.

And working with Gamefound has been great. I’ve had an awesome account manager named Luke who has been extremely helpful and pretty pivotal to my company’s success.

6. Last, I was excited to see a game (Stonefall) from Peter and Michael of the One Stop Co-op Shop as the latest Best With 1 campaign. For people who haven’t dived into the world of solo games, are there a few Best With 1 games you recommend they start with?

Yeah, Stonefall is a project I’ve been excited about for a while, and I’m really pleased with how it’s all come together!

As far as recommendations, if you like meaty Euro games, check out Rome: Fate of an Empire. If you like card-crafting and/or rogue-lites, check out Mech Bunny. If you like Slay the Spire and/or deckbuilding games, check out Small Time Heroes. If you like boss battlers, check out Storybook Saga and Witch Hunter.

But in general, if you’re a solo gamer, my catalogue probably has something you’ll enjoy.

And if anyone wants to sign up to be notified when new solo games launch, they can join the newsletter here: https://bestwith1.com/month/

Big thanks to Gabe for answering these questions! I’m curious to hear your thoughts and questions in the comments. If you want to check out other creator interviews and guest posts, here’s a list dating back to 2012!

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

A long time ago in a fulfillment center far, far away, Stonemaier Games offered a few ala carte options to webstore customers. Glass beads for Viticulture, plastic mechs for Scythe, metal coins for Charterstone…these were all included in their respective games, but sometimes people wanted more/extras.

Back in those days, we didn’t have many products, we only had one webstore, and we had lots of spare replacement parts. So we would have our replacement parts helper label a few cartons with a new SKU, and I would snap a few photos and add the ala carte item to our webstore. Typically we would also ship a few cartons from the US to our fulfillment centers in Canada, Europe, and Australia.

Now in 2026 we have over 250 SKUs, ranging from games to expansions to accessories, promos, and more. Not only have we grown, but so have our fulfillment partners: They employ dozens of people to service a number of companies. They process hundreds of orders every day using robust inventory management systems that require every item in an order to be scanned. These are massive warehouses filled with thousands of different products.

Every product needs to have a barcode (either integrated into the packaging or printed as a sticker and applied by the manufacturer). Every product also needs a production quantity, and then that production quantity is split between our 4 fulfillment centers and distribution/retail based on our best-guess forecasts. Every product needs a listing on our 4 Shopify webstores, and every product requires ongoing inventory and webstore management.

Basically, it’s a huge logistical challenge to produce and stock even just one product. Each additional SKU is exponentially more complicated, both up front and on an ongoing basis.

This is why games are sold as they are: One preset package, not a dozen different components that you can pick and choose from. Look at any game on your shelf, and there are probably a few components in it that you don’t use (maybe based on player count or modular preferences), but that’s okay. It’s much more optimized–and more cost-effective, which carries over to the price you paid–to combine those components into a cohesive product instead of selling everything ala carte.

Why is this on my mind today? Duel of Meloch, our new game (which is also an expansion for Scythe and Expeditions), has a lot of components. Scythe components, Expeditions components, overlapping components specific to the duel, etc. One of the most common questions I’ve heard so far is if someone can buy just some of those components but not others; as explained above, the answer is no.

The game also has two optional add-ons available for the July 15 webstore launch, despite the logistical complexity of extra SKUs. We split off the plastic airship miniature because it isn’t used in the duel format and would have increased the price (both for the component itself and the increased box size). There is also a metal mech pack (4 metal mechs for Scythe and 1 for Expeditions); due to the factors described in detail above, we can offer them combined at a better price than if there were two separate metal mech packs.

I mention all this because it’s an interesting area of customer service. On the surface, it might seem like we could best serve each customer by enabling them to buy only the precise components and elements they want. But in reality, ala carte makes it much harder to serve everyone, and it makes things more expensive for everyone.

Please note that I put ala carte in a completely different category than replacement parts. If any of your Stonemaier products have missing or broken components, it is our job to fix that problem. We consider our replacement parts system essential to serving customers despite it being a suboptimal, money-losing endeavor.

Also, just like most products, Duel of Meloch is more than just a sum of its parts. For example, you might buy it primarily as a Scythe expansion, but along the way you might discover that you love the duel mode (which can even be played Scythe vs Scythe if you already own Scythe or the Invaders from Afar expansion) or that you enjoy Expeditions.

Are there other industries where it’s common to request individual components instead the entire product?

Also read:

• Board Game Supply Chain Basics
• The Current State of Worldwide Fulfillment (2026)

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

In mid-2024, I had a hankering to design an asymmetric dueling game. However, I was daunted by the task of essentially designing two different games that existed in the same world and could have meaningful overlapping tensions. I quickly realized the obvious: Scythe and Expeditions are already different games that exist in the same alternate history and already have overlapping elements.

I then got really excited about the idea: The kid in me who debated which superheroes would win in a fight now wondered the same thing about Scythe’s engine building, hordes of units, and combat focus vs Expeditions’ hand management, 1 single giant mech, and abundance of actions. Who would win in a duel?

However, there was a branding problem: We make games that scale from at least 1-5 players at Stonemaier Games. We’re missing players 3, 4, and 5 in a 1-2 player dueling game.

Fortunately, we’ve had some experience in that realm thanks to Wingspan Asia, which is a 1-2 player standalone game that also expands Wingspan. Its position as an expansion solves the player count branding issue.

Duel of Meloch is a 1-2 player standalone game, and it expands both Scythe (including its new faction and player mat, completely new deck of 60 combat cards, 3 new Factory cards, and 6 new encounter cards) and Expeditions (including its new mech, character, companion, and 30 new discovery cards).

Wingspan Asia also accomplishes something more subtle: If you own other Wingspan stuff, you already own expansions to Wingspan Asia. We’re adding utility to products that customers already have.

Could we do the same thing with Duel of Meloch for two different games, both Scythe and Expeditions?

As it turns out, we can! All existing Scythe factions, player mats, encounter cards, and factory cards are compatible with Duel of Meloch, as are all existing Expeditions mechs, characters, companions, and discovery cards (items, meteorites, and half of the quests). There are only 10 locations in Duel of Meloch’s smaller map, so if you’ve shuffled in your Expeditions cards and draw a quest for locations 11-20, you just discard it and draw another.

In this way, if you already own Scythe and/or Expeditions, you already have a bunch of expansion content for Duel of Meloch. You don’t need any of that–everything you need to play the game is included in Duel of Meloch–but it adds more utility to stuff you may already have. Plus, if you have Scythe, you can even play Scythe vs Scythe duels (same with Expeditions vs Expeditions).

The only sacrifice is that I couldn’t add any Scythe components that specifically reference elements unique to Expeditions (like corruption), and vice versa (like objectives). Fortunately, there’s a lot of overlapping iconology between Scythe and Expeditions, so even with that design constraint there are many areas of tension in Duel of Meloch as you race to place 4 stars:

The Map: I wanted the map to be small enough that players would almost constantly play cat-and-mouse with each other (while still having a little space for engine building). So I designed two map layouts, each set in a new region–specific to the new characters–with 10 locations and 2 lakes. It’s a natural rubber playmat that fits perfectly in the game box.

Triumph Track: I love tug-of-war elements in dueling games, and my version of this is in the new double-sided Triumph Track. Each side has 8 categories like combat, coins, power, etc, along with some that are related but not exactly the same between Scythe and Expeditions (e.g., upgrades vs melded meteorites). So while the Scythe player is racing to, for example, reach 10 popularity, the Expeditions player is racing to solve 3 quests. If you see that I’m pulling ahead in a certain category, you may try to get in my way or bluff that it’s important to you, or you might just let me pursue that category while you focus on others.

Encounters: Scythe and Expeditions use encounters in different ways. There are 9 map tokens in Duel of Meloch, with 6 random tokens used each game. If Scythe gets to a token first, they use it to draw an encounter card; if the Expeditions mech gets there first, they flip it over and gain the benefit on the back.

Other Tracks: Both players might see a few cards (encounter or discovery) that force the opponent to decrease each token on tracks by 1. The Scythe player has a popularity and a power token on a track; the Expeditions player tracks power and guile on their mech mat.

Combat: This isn’t purely a combat game, but fights can break out! Scythe has the upper hand in that they can play 1 combat card per combat unit; however, the Expeditions mech (which can only play 1 combat card) has a movement range of 3 locations, so they can swing in for an unexpected combat. The combat cards are also much more versatile now, with combat abilities that create parity and non-combat discard benefits.

Meloch Cards: When one player places a star on the Triumph Track, the opponent gets to draw a Meloch card and gains a small bonus from it (a choice of two). They actually place the card on top of previously revealed Meloch cards to gain 1 or more small bonuses. In this way, if you’re somehow running away with the game, I get bigger and bigger boosts as I try to catch up.

I’m really excited about the versality and cross-compatibility of Duel of Meloch, and I’d love to hear your thoughts about the concept. It will be on our webstore on July 15 with shipping to follow later in July (along with copies at Gen Con and a retail release later in August).

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

The biggest reason Stonemaier Games hasn’t returned to crowdfunding is the gap between asking customers for payment and actually delivering the product to those customers. Even if a game is 99% production ready leading into the campaign, roughly 6 months are needed for pre-production, production, and freight shipping.

So I’m always fascinated when publishers employ creative methods to close that gap in service of their customers (and also as a marketing tool). Some publishers offer a demo version of the game digitally, Earthborne Games and Covenant offered free preview decks of Hubworld Aidalon, and the recent campaign for The Old King’s Crown started production on the first reprint before the campaign via Gamefound’s “express crowdfunding” option, allowing some backers to receive the pre-printed games just a few months after the campaign’s conclusion. There are also the options to demo games at conventions and even game stores before their release or to offer partial print-and-play copies of the game for people to try at home.

Let’s jump forward to early May 2026, when I saw a Facebook ad for an upcoming crowdfunding project, Cataclysm Arcade. It featured some intriguing mechanisms, so normally I would have just clicked the prelaunch “follow” button and waited for a launch notification (especially as a trading card game).

However, Cataclysm Arcade combined two elements in the ad that made me pull out my wallet: One, it offered curious customers the option of buying a few booster packs before the campaign for $5 each. Two, as long as each player has a booster pack, that’s all you need to play a game of Cataclysm Arcade!

I want to call this “try before you buy,” but it isn’t exactly that, as I literally spent $10 to buy two packs. It felt that way, though. The real hook for me was the ability to play a full game using just 1 booster pack per player. Cataclysm Arcade accomplishes this by using a modern deckbuilding mechanism: If you run out of cards in your deck to draw, simply shuffle your discard pile to form a fresh deck.

Not only was this a player-friendly sneak preview, but it was also great marketing: It had me actively thinking about the game before the Kickstarter project, it showed that the game was fully designed and ready to print, it gave potential backers a chance to try the game before backing it, and it gave content creators a timely way to talk about the game (as I did on our channel).

As I mentioned in last year’s article about free preview decks, this method won’t work for most games. Small packs of cards are incredibly cost-effective, so you need a cards-only game where you can play the game with a small subset of the cards while still leaving players wanting more. Yet it’s a pretty cool tool to consider during the design and marketing process.

Do you have an example of a game you were able to try on the table well before crowdfunding fulfillment? How did it impact your experience with the game? Did you end up backing the project?

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

In the 9 years since we launched the submission form on our website, we have received nearly 3,000 game submissions, many of which were eligible based on our guidelines.

Alan reviews all submissions and shares some with me, and if I’m intrigued, we request a prototype and interact a little with the designer to see how they communicate. Finally, if we both think the game could be a Stonemaier game, we share it with the rest of the team (conceptually and on the table) to make sure we’re not overlooking anything.

Of those games, how exactly do we decide which games to publish?

It boils down to a series of questions we ask ourselves:

• Will this game bring joy to tabletops worldwide? This is our mission statement. It’s a broad question, but it helps us try to picture the game on different types of tables worldwide.
• Do we love the game? We spend a lot of time, energy, and resources on every game we publish, so there’s a high bar for how we feel about it from the start.
• Does it feel like a Stonemaier game? There’s a certain vibe captured by our games, largely described in the 12 tenets. Just because we love a game doesn’t mean that it feels like a Stonemaier game.
• Do we already publish a similar game (mechanically or thematically)? If someone submitted a winemaking game to us, even if we really liked it, it would be incredibly difficult for us to decide to publish it since we already make Viticulture.
• Has another publisher already made a close facsimile to this game? Or, asked another way: If this game shares a core mechanism with another game (but with a twist), would we choose this game over the existing game?
• Does it have the potential of being a big hit with evergreen potential? This is, in some ways, an unfair question. There are many games I love that have only sold a few thousand copies. But given that we average less than 2 game releases per year and that we invest heavily in every game we make, we want it to have the potential of being a big hit. This question includes the value proposition (the game’s estimated price versus what price it would need to have to be successful).
• Are we excited to teach and share this game over and over? Something I learned in the early days of Stonemaier Games is that I don’t actually get to play the published versions of our games all that much. Instead, most of my involvement with our games is teaching them and talking about them. So even from the start, we try to envision ourselves doing that over and over to ensure this is a game for which we can maintain a high level of excitement.

Importantly, these questions also apply to games I try to design. There are multiple checkpoints throughout my design process when I share the status of a design (through video and playtests) with my team, and if we don’t answer the above questions affirmatively, the game does not get published.

Keep in mind that these questions are in addition to all the guidelines and tenets listed on our submission page. Many games check the submission boxes, but in the end it’s a very subjective decision. We’ve passed on games that went on to be successful with other publishers, and I’m always happy to see that they found the right home.

Also, in full transparency, I think we’ve been “wrong” about some games we’ve published in that at least one of the answers to these questions wasn’t as much of a full “yes” as we originally thought. I don’t regret publishing them, but those misses are a good opportunity for me to evaluate the process and the questions asked along the way.

What do you think of these questions? If you’re a publisher, how exactly do you decide which games to publish?

Also read: How to Pitch (and Not Pitch) Your Game to Stonemaier Games

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

When I’m scrolling through Facebook, there’s a specific type of image that frequently catches my eye. It’s used the most by digital game news outlets: An evocative image plus a few descriptive lines of white and orange text on a black background.

I like this format so much that I recently decided to apply it to our games. In fact, I made two versions for each game: One using art and thematic vibes; the other using a photo of the game on the table and a few stats:

Despite having an active Facebook page for Stonemaier Games, I rarely use it to post about our games. So I’ve started posting one of these images once per week.

While I would prefer to equally showcase each of the two images per game, I think this type of image has the biggest impact when it’s alone. So for the first 25 posts I’ll use the thematic image and post the photo version in the comments with a link to the game’s page; after I get through every game, I’ll switch the two.

The most surprising result after doing this for Vantage and Apiary is the number of people who have commented on the posts (despite there not being a question or prompt). Some have shared their love of the game, others have asked questions. A rare few have even decided that this is the right place to share how they dislike the game.

But I love that a simple image has generated conversation and sense of community outside of our Facebook groups. Given that, I may also post these images on Instagram and Bluesky in the future.

What do you think about this approach? Are there other eye-catching image formats on social media that pique your interest (without being clickbait)?

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

For years I’ve written a cautionary tale about the pros and cons of being the face of a brand or company. Yet it wasn’t really until this year that we started to act on the potential perils–more on that in a minute.

This topic came to mind because I recently received an email from Emily in marketing at Alkem Gear (which I mentioned in this article). A lot of what Emily shared was centered around Tim, the founder and creator of Alkem, yet I saw very little of Tim on Alkem’s website or the Kickstarter project. So I asked this:

“How does Tim remain closely connected to the campaign despite partnering with others–like you–for public-facing roles?“

Tim himself wrote back with a detailed answer; here are the two key quotes:

“One thing I believe is really important as a founder is understanding my own limitations. My background is in engineering and product development, not marketing, so I’ve always believed the best way to build something meaningful is to surround yourself with people who are genuinely better than you in certain areas. My role is to help set the vision, establish the values behind the brand, and make sure every decision stays aligned with the kind of community we want to build.

At the same time, I’m intentional about not making the brand revolve around me personally. I’m happy to do interviews, demos, podcasts, or community discussions, but my goal isn’t to become the face of the brand. I want Alkem to have its own identity, one built around service, humility, quality, and community. I want something that can outgrow any one individual.”

This is a really solid answer. I’ve talked in past articles about the power and appeal of a creator sharing themselves with backers during a crowdfunding campaign (opposed to outsourcing to other people or marketing services); see links at the end of this article. However, as someone with 7 coworkers, I also understand the value of delegating to people who are far better at their jobs than I am (or was, as I once wore nearly every hat here). I admire Tim for wanting Alkem to have its own identity.

Despite that, it’s still me (Jamey) writing these articles, replying to questions on social media and email, posting on Instagram, writing newsletters, recording the podcast, running the livecast, and recording YouTube videos. There’s plenty of upside to this personal touch, but the downside is that if you don’t like Jamey, if Jamey is hit by a bus, or if Jamey is no longer part of Stonemaier Games, it would be an abrupt transition to suddenly see someone else appear in my place on social media.

So a few months ago I talked to my coworker, Erica, to see if she would be interested in joining me on some YouTube videos. Not only does it put another face to Stonemaier Games, but you also get to hear from someone else who cares passionately about the tabletop hobby. Our latest video just posted yesterday, and it delves into a subject that was dear to Erica when she worked at a local game store.

Also, I would be remiss to point out that I’m far from the only face or name you’ll see if you have different experiences with Stonemaier Games. If you attend a convention, you’ll probably see Dave or Alex. If you’re a retailer, you’ve probably talked to Susannah. If you’ve had a customer service request, you’ve likely corresponded with Joe. And if you’ve submitted a game to us, you may have heard back from Alan. There’s also Christine (graphic design), but that’s truly a behind-the scenes role.

There’s still room for more versatility, but I really appreciate Erica for joining me as another friendly face on the YouTube channel. She’s also very active in the comments of our shared videos. She and Susannah have also stepped up for the livecast when I’ve traveled (I think Alex may have been on one of those too).

What are your thoughts about the delicate balance between making a company approachable, personable, and relatable without putting all your eggs in the same face?

Also read:

• Cult of the You
• Who Do You Root For?
• Should You Hire Someone Else to Run Your Crowdfunding Project for You?
• The Psychological Benefit of Showing Your Face
• What’s Your Hit by a Bus Plan?

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

“Stonemaier Games does not, has not, and will not use any form of AI to replace or augment creative work. If we’re creating something, we want it built from the ground up by talented people from different backgrounds, perspectives, and cultures, not an algorithm.”

I wrote this in April 2024, and after 2 more years of the generative AI onslaught, I thought I’d revisit the topic to see what, if anything, has changed between now and then.

Thanks to most of the science fiction I’ve read and watched over my life, leading up to the modern era I actually had an optimistic view of AI as something that could solve the problems that humans are unable to solve (or would otherwise take hundreds of years). Cure cancer, invent teleportation, end world hunger, and so on.

Maybe that’s where it’ll eventually lead–I’ll hold onto that optimism. In the meantime, instead of achieving the impossible, generative AI seems has become an output device to replace creative endeavors that are already quite possible. Enter a prompt, and the machine spits out an article or image.

Now, if you’re passionate about AI, I’m truly not here to shame you. I try to keep an open mind as the world changes, which is why I’m revisiting this topic today.

There are even elements of AI that aren’t as bad as I thought: For example, check out this episode of Science Vs about the water consumption from data centers. I’ve personally found AI summaries to be unavoidable when searching on Google, though I always try to look at the sources. Also, as much as I loathe the idea of AI replacing humans in any capacity, that’s somewhat inherent to technological advances (e.g., the excellent movie Hidden Figures shows how humans literally were computers until machine computational capacity improved).

In fact, I’ll admit that I accidentally used a logo for our podcast that was generated by AI (not by me). I didn’t realize it at first, then I realized it and wasn’t comfortable saying something, and finally I just decided to pay a graphic designer to create a new logo. I feel much better about it now.

Here’s my truth: I continue to not be interested in generative AI. The process of creativity is key to me as a person. I want to write these articles and film my videos from scratch. I want to come up with my own game ideas and put in the work to bring them to life. I want to read, research, think critically, and seek out sources, not rely on AI summaries. I want to embrace the process. I want to learn from my mistakes and share those lessons with you.

Likewise, I’m more passionate than ever about working with creative people and paying for their time and talent. The only difference now is that it’s in our contracts for artists, designers, third-party accessory creators, and digital developers that we don’t permit the use of generative AI. Similarly, we’ve added “human made: no generative AI” to the back of our game boxes, as we seem to have reached a tipping point when people are unabashedly quick to assume you are using AI unless you specifically indicate otherwise.

Last, I support creators and companies that pay my fellow humans for creative work. I’m only interested in games (and other media) that were designed by people, written by people, and illustrated by people. At the same time, I’m not going to spend my time, energy, or social currency shaming or bashing people who use generative AI. I choose to elevate, not denigrate.

I know that this is a sensitive topic, so while I genuinely want to hear your thoughts in the comments, I ask that you approach the conversation with an open mind and respect for your fellow humans. Let’s be good to each other. If you have hot take, please support it with a specific example or evidence. Thank you!

UPDATE: I realized after writing this article that even though I talked about being open-minded, I didn’t actually revisit the 2024 quote to see if it has changed in mid-2026. While I’m not interested in generative AI, it is possible that there will be uses of ethical AI in the future as related to Stonemaier Games that do interest me–we’ll see!

Stonemaier Games does not use, has not used, and does not plan to knowingly use generative AI for creative work (text, art, videos, etc). If we’re creating something, we want it built from the ground up by talented people from different backgrounds, perspectives, and cultures. We believe that the process is integral to our output, and it allows human creativity to shine. We do not actively use other forms of AI in our workflow either, but it is becoming so engrained in common technology that we acknowledge its passive use may become unavoidable.

Also read: Generative AI? Not for Us!

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

If you have a missing or damaged component inside your English-language Stonemaier Games product–no matter where or when you bought it or how long you’ve been playing it–you can fill out this form and we’ll send you what you need.* We use software called Jira to manage this process, as we have 7 replacement parts helpers in 5 different regions around the world.

Serving our customers this way is incredibly important to us, but we can serve them even better if replacement parts (and replacement parts requests) aren’t needed in the first place. Recently I talked to a few people connected to this process at Stonemaier Games, and we compiled a list of product design mistakes that resulted in quite a few replacement parts.

We learned these lessons the hard way, so I’m hoping this will help you avoid these mistakes from the start. Some of these are as simple as packing components in a way that makes them easy for the customer to identify.

1. Meeples and Minis with Protrusions: Some of our most common requests are for broken meeples or mechs where we got a little too detailed, and those little details snapped off in transit or gameplay. Whenever I get sample meeples or mechs, I try to snap off any protrusion–if I can, I either remove it from the design or bulk up its connection point.
2. Missing Tokens and Clasps: It is common when we’re including either a lot of the same type of token–50 glass beads or clasps for dials–that 1 is missing in production or 1 goes missing later. So we often include an extra token, but we list the lower quantity: We make 51 tokens but say that there are 50. So even if 1 is missing, you still have the “correct” amount (though, honestly, for these types of tokens, it’s incredibly rare in gameplay that the full quantity is needed).
3. Matching the Insert: In Libertalia–a 6-player game where each player has their own deck of cards–the cards are packed in 5 card bricks. When opening a new game, you see 5 bricks of cards in 5 of 6 slots in the insert, and 5 of the 6 player colors happen to be visible in each brick. This leads to assumptions that the entire green deck is missing before opening the cards. Something similar happens in Scythe, a game that can only ever feature combat between 2 players, so we only included 2 combat dials–players assume the other 3 are missing (partially because the 2 included dials have specific faction colors).
4. Matching the Trays: The first few printings of Wingspan included 4 clamshell trays (2 for an assortment of eggs and 2 for an assortment of food). There’s no need for each type of food token to be kept in a separate compartment, but we soon learned that many people assumed that the trays were only for food and that a tray was missing (there are 5 types of food in the core game and only 4 trays).
5. Packing Choices: We hear from customers that they think they’re missing the action cubes in Wingspan Asia, as those cubes are packed in the same bags as larger tokens of the same color. Similarly, some customers struggle to find the gray temporary worker in Viticulture, as it’s packed in the same bag as some of the player tokens (it previously came in a separate bag with the first player token).
6. “Missing” Cards: In the solo mode for Libertalia and Scythe: The Wind Gambit, there are “missing” cards that aren’t actually missing. For example, there is no Automa card 37 in Libertalia for design reasons. This is explained in the rules, but when looking through the cards, it’s a common mistake for people to see cards 36 and 38 and assume they’re missing card 37.
7. “Missing” Components: In Scythe: The Rise of Fenris, there’s a big warning label when you open the box that tells people not to look inside the spoiler tuckboxes. However, it happens all the time! One of the tuckboxes has a “missing” component that’s actually in one of the other tuckboxes–oddly, people seem to open that tuckbox but not the others; if they did, they would find that “missing” component.
8. Dents in Boards and Mats: I learned early on with Viticulture that if sharper components (like meeples) are packed next to a board or mat, they might press into the cardboard over time, leaving lots of little dings and dents. Instead, we now pack them elsewhere in the box or we fold the mats inward, with the gameplay elements on the inside. However, this also leads to the occasional confusion from customers who don’t know the mats are folded–they see the faux leather illustration on the outside of a Wingspan or Wyrmspan mat and think they received a misprint.
9. Card Sorting: It’s inevitable that customers will lose or damage cards over time if they play a game frequently, and we’re here to help. With Wingspan, we originally didn’t have any type of card sorting system, so if a customer requested a Peregrine Falcon, our replacement parts helpers had to look through every card to find it. In reprints we alphabetized the cards, which significantly sped up this process. In games where cards don’t have a name, we number the cards and sort them as such.
10. Publisher Assumption: When we were working on the Pie in the Sky expansion for My Little Scythe, I didn’t go through the component list with the right mindset, and it resulted in me never asking our manufacturer to include faction-specific tokens for the 2 new factions (everything else was there, including the minis). This was before we sent pre-production copies first to the designer and to my coworker, so no one caught the mistake until everything was printed and shipped. We tried to fix it after the fact by making a pack of the missing tokens for our webstore, retailers, and distributors, but we still hear from customers all the time who buy the expansion from a retailer and don’t get the tokens. It was an important wake-up call for me to never assume anything and to add as many checks-and-balances as possible during the pre-production process.

Hopefully this list will help you avoid the same mistakes; there are even some we still need to address better at Stonemaier Games. If you have any insights about replacement part requests, please let me know in the comments!

*Box Dings and Dents: If you ordered a game from Stonemaier Games and the box arrived with dings and dents, we’re truly sorry. You paid for a mint-condition product, and we didn’t deliver. That’s on us. For some people, a dented corner won’t impact the fun they have playing the game. For others, it will. A replacement box for a dented corner is actually a replacement for the entire game, a process that involves having you send your game to a reviewer of our choice–we provide the label–and we send you another copy of the game. If you would like to go through that process for a game ordered from our webstore, please email your order number to contact@stonemaier.com. Photos of the packaging and damage help us share feedback with our fulfillment centers.

Also read:

• Replacement Parts
• Replacement Parts: Why Would (or Wouldn’t) a Company Offer This Service?
• 10 Production Secrets for Tabletop Games

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

For a game I rarely play, I think a lot about Magic the Gathering. It’s particularly been on my mind recently due to a combination of the new Covenant podcast/livecast, the excellent Distraction Makers YouTube channel, and some correspondence with the creator of the Alkem series of gear and bags designed to hold trading card games.

Magic recently opened sales for a Secret Lair Goblin Storm Commander deck with special art by Dakota Cates. Within 34 minutes, the entire print run had sold out (I’ve only seen speculation as to the quantity made, not confirmed numbers, with estimates ranging from a few thousand to 50,000).

I can see why people are really frustrated by this. They’re passionate about a game, and they want a chance to buy that game. This is why I’m so against crowdfunding exclusives: If you’re making a game to withstand the test of time, why would you limit your ability to make and sell any portion of it to the first few people who learn about it?

However, rarity and scarcity are also core to Magic’s existence. The reason they can consistently sell 15 slim pieces of cardboard for $5 is because of the chance a card is worth a lot more than $5 on the secondary market (whether or not you actually sell that card). This is why it’s exciting to open a booster pack or even to own a limited edition goblin art pack.

I’m not justifying this model. At Stonemaier Games, we’re specifically not selling scarcity. If a product is out of stock and there appears to be demand for us to make more, we’ll happily make more. This is how we serve our customers.

What’s interesting to me is that because Magic is inherently about selling rarity and scarcity, I can see how they believe they are serving customers by making a limited quantity of Goblin Storm Secret Lair sets. I also understand that they, like any publisher, have to make production quantity decisions many months before they know how many people will actually pay for the product.

I think there may be a better way, though, even within Magic’s constraints of selling scarcity. In discussing this topic on yesterday’s livecast, @redwlfjsc shared an idea that I modified just a touch: Magic could make, say, 10,000 units of a Secret Lair and put them on their webstore for 3 weeks. If the product sells out within that time period, their order system switches to preorders for a single reprint of that Secret Lair on which they will start production after the 3-week period ends.

This is exactly what Gamefound offers with Express Crowdfunding. It serves those who want the product right away while leaving a limited door open for those who are willing to wait a bit. It respects collectors and players without losing control to bots and quick flippers.

Magic’s model is so successful that entire brands have been created specifically to serve those who play Magic and other TCGs (casually, at local game stores, and at tournaments). I heard recently from the team at Alkem Gear about their product launch Kickstarter. Our conversation led in a few different directions that you’ll see in some upcoming posts, but I wanted to briefly mention it today because it demonstrates both the value of user-focused design and that even 30-year-old games still have room to improve.

This is from Tim Heck, the founder of Alkem:

“After moving to Riverside, California, I became deeply involved in communities centered around D&D, board games, and trading card games like Magic: The Gathering and Pokémon. One thing I noticed immediately was that people were carrying thousands of dollars’ worth of cards and gear in setups that felt like an afterthought. A lot of the products marketed toward TCG players seemed to be repurposed camera bags or generic storage solutions. That was really the starting point for Alkem.

Our products are intentionally built around the way gamers actually travel and play. The backpack, for example, was designed specifically around deck box dimensions and gaming accessories. The vault section fits six deck boxes or roughly 1,200 cards, while the upper compartment can hold an additional 1,800 cards. At the same time, we didn’t want the bag to only serve card players, so the internal geometry is intentionally square and structured to also accommodate board games, D&D books, dice trays, playmats, notebooks, snacks, and other essentials people bring to game nights and conventions.”

After spending time designing flexible storage solutions like the Wingspan Nesting Box and Viticulture’s Wine Crate, I have a high level of appreciation for what Tim has created at Alkem.

Just so it’s perfectly clear, Alkem has not sponsored this post and I have no connection to them other than a pleasant and informative email conversation. I hear from creators all the time, and if they share interesting stories that are relevant to topics I’m covering, I sometimes include them in these articles.

What do you think about how a company that sells rarity and scarcity in a game like Magic can best serve customers?

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

My favorite way to market our products is to facilitate and encourage them to get to the table more often. Your table, my table, the tables of reviewers, ambassadors, etc–any table will do. The more our products get to the table, the more they’re exposed to people, and hopefully the more fun people can have with them.

One of my favorite ways to accomplish this goal is through play-and-win donations for game conventions and 100+ person gaming events.

Play-and-win is a convention concept where people can check out a game, play it, and then enter their name in a lottery to win that specific game at the end of the convention. If I donate a play-and-win game to a convention, it can be experienced by dozens and dozens of people in a short amount of time. Only one of those people will win it, so if other people liked the game, they’re now informed in their decision to purchase it later.

The play-and-win room at the recent Geekway to the West convention was a bustle of activity right until the end of the convention. Geekway solicited and invested in over 140 different play-and-win titles, each with multiple copies. In total, these games had nearly 15,000 reported plays over the course of 4 days.

Geekway does play-and-win exceptionally well, but they aren’t alone. There are over 250 conventions listed on the 2026 tab of the play-and-win Google Sheet I maintain, so publishers have lots of options when choosing events to target. But which games should you send to these conventions?

Geekway play-and-win coordinator Jeff Hiatt was very kind to send me the data from the Geekway 2026 play-and-win, and he gave me permission to share and analyze it. The sheet is here. I’ll focus on the first four columns, but you’re welcome to contribute your thoughts to any data in the comments.

I’ve highlighted the most-played games in blue (1-30), the highest “desire to win ratio” in yellow, and the crossovers in green.

Number of Plays

The top 5 games that were played the most were Hot Streak, Magical Athlete, Bomb Busters, Moon Colony Bloodbath, and Hummingbirds. All of the games in the top 10 were released in the last year.

For this and the other categories I’ll discuss, I’m hesitant to draw blanket conclusions or stretch to find commonalities among the top 5. For example, there are 2 racing games here, but not every racing game will garner 250+ plays at a convention.

Average Player Count

Around half of the games with the highest average player count are among those that reported high numbers of plays: Hot Streak, Magical Athlete, French Toast, Bomb Busters, Trinket Trove, and Spooktacular.

However, sorting the data this way doesn’t seem to indicate that higher player counts equate to more convention plays. I think player count flexibility is more indicative of a game’s popularity at an event like Geekway–if you grab a game off the shelf, it’s nice if you can just play it with one other person or if you can invite a few others to join too.

Desire to Win

I calculated this by dividing the number of player who wanted to win a game by the total number of plays, indicating that people had a great time with the game. The top 5 were Hot Streak, Magical Athlete, Pinched, 12 Rivers, and Spooktacular. Some games with fewer plays but a high level of desirability were Sprocketforge, Mission: Red Planet, Rebirth, and Pergola.

The main pattern I see here is great table presence, whether it’s component hooks like in 12 Rivers or Sprocketforge or eye-catching art.

Rating Delta

This is perhaps my favorite data point. Which games rate significantly higher at a convention than their BoardGameGeek rating suggests? I think this is so important to pay attention to, as the top-rated games BGG would lead us to believe that people value heavy, complex, long games over everything else. But a vast variety of games bring joy to tabletops, including lighter games.

The top 5 rating delta games were French Toast, Purrramid, Tembo, Australis, and Catan.

Granted, the boisterous environment of a convention is atypical for gaming. Some games shine at events and may not have the same luster when it’s just you and a few friends at home. Also, you might take a look at the games that actually left a worse impression at Geekway than their BGG rating would indicate. Those are the types of games a publisher might avoid contributing to play-and-win (I mostly see longer, heavier games here).

Anecdotal Analysis and Conclusions

Here I’ll look at the games with the both the most plays AND the highest desire to win ratio:

1. Hot Streak
2. Magical Athlete
3. Bomb Busters
4. Moon Colony Bloodbath
5. Trinket Trove
6. Formaggio
7. Fate of the Fellowship
8. 12 Rivers
9. Spooktacular
10. French Toast
11. Sanctuary

• ease of learning: Most of these games skew towards easy to learn and teach.
• game length: Most of these games are played in under an hour.
• game weight: Most of these games are on the lighter side.
• price: Most of these games are less than $50.

Overall, the types of games I see exceling in play-and-win are those released in the last year, have player count flexibility, feature great table presence, and are on the lighter side.

Despite those patterns, I still think it’s completely fine to send a variety of games to play-and-win conventions. Take a look at the Google Sheet and you’ll see games of all shapes, sizes, weights, prices, player counts, etc. I think this speaks to the diversity of gamers at events like Geekway.

What did you learn from this data? Are there certain types of games you seek out at conventions?

***

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

Yesterday I heard some huge news from Panda Game Manufacturing: For the next 12 months, they are accepting submissions for indie game designers to win between $2,000 and $20,000 in manufacturing credits.

I’ll break down this opportunity today, but first a disclaimer: I’ve worked with Panda, a Canadian company with their main facility in Shenzhen, as the sole manufacturer for Stonemaier Games over the last 14 years. I consider them a close partner. However, I have no connection at all to p20–I learned about it yesterday just like anyone else. That said, I probably wouldn’t write this if I couldn’t personally vouch for how great it is to work with Panda.

Here’s the deal: If you have two or fewer tabletop games published, you are eligible to enter exactly one game as your p20 submission. You own the game, not Panda. It’s free to enter, and it’s open to anyone worldwide.

Crucially, you have an entire year to make your submission. I think this is a really smart choice by Panda. Game design, playtesting, and development take time. This is a great chance to actually do something with that game idea you’ve thought about.

However, it’s also important to note that there is a critical gap between game design and manufacturing, and that gap is bridged by a publisher (whether it’s an existing game publisher or you as a self-publisher). The intent of p20 appears to be for the designer to self-publish the game (the submission form reads, “I am, or intend to be, the self-publisher of this game.”), which involves a lot of responsibility beyond design.

Panda confirmed with me that the manufacturing credit could potentially be passed on to a publisher, though the credit stays specifically with the designer and the game they submitted. The FAQ says this about signing with a publisher during the design process, “Tell us. We handle it case by case. We’re not in the business of penalizing good news.”

At the very least, p20 seems like a no-risk chance to hone your pitch. Panda asks for a sell sheet, a short video, and a blind playtested rulebook. These are all things you would need no matter how you seek to publish your game.

I’ve reached out to Panda to get clarity on my one other question: What if you also want to crowdfund your game? It seems reasonable that a new, indie designer looking to self-publish their game would use a crowdfunding platform to market the game, build community, improve the game, optimize freight shipping, and gauge demand. The game needs to be unpublished at the time of submission to qualify for the manufacturing sponsorship, so I’m guessing the crowdfunding campaign would need to happen after the final selections are made (Gen Con 2027).

UPDATE: Panda responded to say, “Yes, someone can submit for p20 and also run crowdfunding, as long as the crowdfunding happens after they apply for the program. As far as timing – it would be preferable if these campaigns ran later in the year/early next year/closer to the end date of the p20 program, but as long as they keep us informed of their plans, it is no problem to run a crowdfunding campaign especially if it is party of their larger marketing plans for their game/start up publishing company – we like to see what their vision is for the future.”

One other highlight of p20 is that there isn’t just one winner. Instead, twenty indie game designers will win! That’s huge. To put these credits in perspective, a typical minimum order quantity (MOQ) is 1,000 units, and a basic card game like Flip7 costs around $2 to manufacture (e.g., a total minimum cost of $2,000). If you’re looking to make a more complex game with custom meeples, trays, dice, etc, you’re probably looking at the $8-$12 range and a potential increase in MOQ to 1500 units (e.g., a total minimum cost of $15,000). This doesn’t account for all the other costs required to make a game (art, graphic design, freight shipping, etc).

Overall, if you’re interested in self-publishing a game you’re passionate about, I think p20 is an excellent opportunity. Even if you’re not one of the twenty winners in the end, it’s still a motivation to do the work and make your game idea a reality over the next year (and learn how to effectively pitch it in the process).

I’d love to hear what you think about Panda’s p20 sponsorship. Are you going to try it?

***

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

I spent the last 4 days at Geekway to the West, an absolutely incredible game convention in St. Louis. Today I’ll share some of my highlights and observations through three lenses: Jamey as a publisher, designer, and gamer.

Publisher Jamey

Stonemaier Games participates in a few ways at Geekway: We donate a lot of games to their play-and-win section, which has proven year after year to be a great way to share our games with people who haven’t tried them.

We also have a booth in their vendor hall (Geekway primarily focuses on casual gaming, but they do have vendor space too) run by my coworker Dave and staffed by an amazingly generous demo team. Our main intent at the booth is simply for people to have fun and learn about our games, and it’s a nice bonus if we sell some games too (this year it looks like our booth revenue was around $16k, and people could also place orders on our webstore and pick up their order at Geekway since our warehouse is located in St. Louis).

I like that Geekway provides publishers a lot of different options. You can have a booth if you want, but you could also have a demo table through Double Exposure, you could just put games in play-and-win, or you can just wander around and connect with people (or scout games to potentially publish).

I’ll also add that having several years of t-shirt and hoodie sales provides a really nice way for me to look around any room at Geekway and identify people who know Stonemaier Games. The warm hoodies were particularly helpful, as the main hall at Geekway was quite cold this year.

Designer Jamey

There are two sides to Designer Jamey at conventions: past and future. For games I’ve already designed, it’s immensely gratifying to see people playing them. I don’t think I’m alone, as I saw other designers checking in on people playing their games (this happened to me while playing the card game Oopsy Poopsy). I taught and played Euphoria Essential and Origin Story, and I had a great time learning the game Dark Heists from the designer, Moe Poplar.

Then there are the games I have yet to to design. I love playing a variety of published games at Geekway to learn from them. This year I played 14 new-to-me games and 6 games I already knew (it’s nice to revisit games to look at them from a fresh perspective).

Geekway provides several opportunities for designers to get feedback about unpublished games, including the clever Playtest to Win area.

Last, I’m so grateful for everyone who either played a game with me or just came up to me to say hi. Those moments and that time means the world to me. As someone who has social anxiety about approaching people, seeing others do it to me gives me the courage to do the same for others. Thank you for the inspiration!

Gamer Jamey

While Geekway is part work for me, it’s also part play. I love playing games with delightful people, and Geekway is full of them. In total I played 20 different games at Geekway (plus a round of disc golf) with around 60 people. I spent most of my time in a smaller ballroom in the first floor of the connected hotel–it was a much quieter in there (and warmer) than the main convention hall. Thanks to everyone who took the time to play with me!

I appreciate play-and-win as a gamer too, as it helps me narrow down which games to play out of so many options (though I did also check out both Blood Rage and The King Is Dead from the main library to revisit them). Without play-and-win, I wouldn’t have discovered the delightful game 3 Chapters, experienced the whimsy of the cat game Oopsy Poopsy, or delved into the strategic cleverness of Galileo Galilei.

While Geekway does have a few events people can sign up for, the vast majority of the convention is casual gaming. This, I’ve found, is my preferred structure for a convention, as I like the fluid nature of going from game to game at my own pace, remaining flexible as to what I play and how long I play. I’m grateful to Geekway for embracing this format, and I’m always open to suggestions for other similar conventions!

***

If you were at Geekway to the West this weekend (or you’ve attended a gaming event in 2026), I’d love to hear a few of your highlights!

***

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

I feel like I learn something every day from another game publisher, whether it’s game design, operations, product design, marketing, etc. Today I thought I’d highlight some of the things our panelists love about other publishers–the types of things they want to see more publishers emulate.

Also, before we hear from our panelists, we just launched two major products on the Stonemaier Games webstore! Finspan: Sharks & Reefs and Euphoria Essential Edition (or the update pack if you already have the game and expansion) are ready to ship to you now: https://store.stonemaiergames.com/collections/latest

***

Plaid Hat Games (Dillon’s pick): I like how Plaid Hat’s games often have either a subscription or continual, mostly optional content, for their game systems. It’s basically just a living card game model, but it keeps me engaged with the games. In terms of what I’d like to see others emulate, it doesn’t necessarily need to be constant new content, but in the hobby, it can often feel like we’re constantly hurrying to check out what’s new. So something to keep a game feeling alive is valuable. As a side example, I think Stonemaier does this in a different way by representing their games as different “Worlds” and by keeping their amount of releases fairly lean. [JAMEY: I previously highlighted some things related to this that Plaid Hat is doing with print on demand.]

Restoration Games (Garrett’s pick): While our hobby is often fixated on the new, I’d love to see more publishers emulate Restoration Games’ mission of breathing new life into forgotten or underrated classics. It’s incredibly refreshing to see a company look backward to ensure great legacy designs get their well-deserved flowers, combining modern production quality and mechanical updates with genuine reverence for the past. Even though this is Restoration’s core business model, seeing other publishers take a stab at this could increase the output of lovingly remastered titles that honor our hobby’s history. [JAMEY: I also think 25th Century Games does this well.]

Stonemaier Games (Aryn’s pick): I went back and forth on this a lot. But, ultimately, I’d be picking nits if I chose another thing a publisher does that I wanted other publishers to take note. So here I am writing to other publishers, take note of what Stonemaier Games is doing. Hire a team to craft a solo mode for your games. I understand not all games can have a solo mode. It’s hard to have a party game for one, for instance. I also understand this costs money, but please consider it. Stonemaier Games’ relationship with The Automa Factory is why I got into Stonemaier Games. I can play all these wonderful games that Stonemaier puts out without having to worry about another person’s availability. I can dive into the design of a game more in depth when I am able to get it to the table more often. Am I about to teach a game? I play the solo mode to further enforce the rules before I teach the game to others. [JAMEY: I am truly grateful for Automa Factory’s involvement over the years.]

Kaitlyn also chimed in with a general comment that she attributed to Stonemaier Games, but honestly I see other publishers doing this better. Check out Endeavor Deep Sea by Burnt Island Games for a great example of how you can achieve high quality with fully sustainable components. Kaitlyn says: I love seeing publishers use eco-friendly packaging. I think Stonemaier does their best; I first noticed it with Wingspan, but I think most, if not all, Stonemaier games are packaged in an eco-friendly way.

We’ll close with Skiler, who mentions several publishers and examples.

I love consistent components throughout many of a publisher’s games.  For example, I believe Garphill Games offers custom metal coins designed specifically for the North Sea, West Kingdom, and South Tigris trilogies. Instead of unique currency for every game, the coins are compatible across every title in a series. I would love to see this with resources and other components in more games. They also often have consistency with their iconography across their games which makes learning new games by them way simpler. I really appreciate this!

I love the trend of missions in games, that are not legacy, but have optional progression. For example, Deep Sea Endeavor (Burnt Island Games): I absolutely love that we can play through different missions, but not feel constrained by the parameters that a legacy game inherently comes with. This isn’t necessarily new, but it feels more common and I welcome it!

I love the trend of cozy games with great art. The gameplay still very much matters, but a cozy theme with great art will get me every time. More please! (Examples of this would be Harmonies by Libellud or Creature Comforts by Kids Table Board Games.)

I love that learn-as-you-play tutorials are becoming more common. (An example of this would be Stonemaier’s Quick Start cards in Wyrmspan.)

***

Huge thanks to Dillon, Garrett, Kaitlyn, Aryn, and Skiler for sharing these things they love about a variety of publishers. One thing I’ll add to the list is that I have a continued and growing appreciation for publishers who focus on one game at most every year or so. That level of focus and time spent getting it right is a luxury that not everyone has, but I admire those who are able to do it.

What’s something a publisher is doing that you love (and would like to see others emulate)?

***

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

On the final full day of our recent Ireland trip, we walked across Dublin to the Guinness Storehouse self-guided tour experience. You start at the base of a massive circular interior (it’s shaped like a pint of Guinness) and work your way up level by level, learning about Guinness–the beer, the company, and the brand–as you go. Here are a few standout business insights I learned along the way:

Quality Control (and the Veneer Thereof)

Before we even entered the building, we saw a van parked outside that read, “Guinness Quality Team: Dedicated to delivering beautiful Guinness everytime everywhere”. Right from the start, Guinness was communicating that they have a continual focus on providing the best version of their product. This is later reinforced during the tour when they talk about the “smellers” who ensure the barrels are working optimally.

This really got me thinking about more ways we can improve quality control at Stonemaier Games and how we can share the variety of systems we have already have in place, as I always want the first printing of any product to be perfect.

Branding Is Constantly Evolving

I associate Guinness with a specific can, so I was struck by the sheer variety of bottles displayed at the beginning of the tour. While the label has stayed mostly the same over the years, the size and shape of a Guinness bottle has vastly varied.

This made me think of game boxes. There really is no standard game box–modern manufacturers can make any size. While I understand the visual appeal of having games that align cleanly on a shelf, the box is ultimately a delivery vehicle for the contents within. I never want to limit what a game can be (or make a box that is much too big) based on box size consistency.

Longevity Is a Selling Point

The current Guinness label has “EST. 1759” on the iconic harp. It was interesting to see that most of the previous harps didn’t have that date, as it seems like a huge selling point to convey that the product is so good that it has lasted nearly 300 years.

Recently I’ve thought a lot about how longevity is such a great selling point for Magic the Gathering. It isn’t just about Magic lasting over 30 years; it’s also about how they tie old cards to new sets, adding depth and nostalgia to the world they’ve fostered for so long. I think there’s huge value in having a singular, long-lasting product that reminds people of its history.

It’s Okay to Revisit a Tried-and-True Formula

When I think of the Guinness beer, I think of a dark brew topped by thick foam. I assumed that was always the case, but that’s apparently not true: The “creamy white head” wasn’t introduced until 1959.

There’s constant innovation in nearly every industry and we’re always learning, so I don’t think there’s anything wrong with revisiting older games to apply those innovations and lessons learned over the years. That’s what I tried to do in the upcoming Euphoria Essential Edition.

The World Isn’t Stagnant, and Neither Are We

Prominently featured at the Guinness Storehouse is Guinness 0.0, an alcohol-free version of their beer that tastes remarkably similar. I asked a Guinness employee about this version of the beer, which was released around 3 years ago, and they said that it is already a success in reducing drunk driving in Ireland and beyond. It also has a positive impact on public health, as alcohol can lead directly to liver disease.

I think there’s something about human nature that can make us a bit stubborn about changing our worldview, but the world is always changing. I know so much more about accessibility and environmental sustainability than I did a few years ago, and while meaningful sustainable change takes time to implement, I believe it’s worth constantly pursuing.

Those are just a few takeaways from my experience at the Guinness Storehouse. I’d love to hear your thoughts about Guinness or similar behind-the-scenes tours. How do they apply to the tabletop game industry and community?

***

Read about my customer service experiences in Ireland.

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

I’m constantly trying to learn about customer service practices so I can better serve our customers at Stonemaier Games. I spent the last week traveling across Ireland with family, and I thought I’d share some quick notes about customer service (mostly very good).

• Tullamore Distillery: We walked in here with only around 30 minutes to spare, which we mentioned to the person working the main desk. Within seconds, she offered us a 30-minute whiskey tasting, and we had a wonderful time learning about Tullamore from her.
• Sean’s Bar: The proprietor sat down with us for 5 minutes to share the history of Ireland’s oldest bar and the story of Irish coffee. He later gave a similar speech to a bigger group in the same room, and I noticed he intentionally changed the wording since we were within earshot.
• Linnane’s Lobster Bar (Newquay): We got a little messy eating crab, lobster, oysters, and mussels here, and an attentive server–not even our primary server–noticed and offered us a bowl of water with lemon to rinse our fingers.
• Oscar’s (Galway): We had a late dinner, and the server was keen to alert us to the exact remaining quantity of a specific dish before it was gone.
• Sheridan’s Cheesemongers (Galway): The person behind the counter was incredibly helpful in recommending three made-in-Ireland dishes that complemented each other (two cheeses, one cracker, and chutney).
• Midleton Distillery (Midleton): The young tour guide frequently invited questions and called back to previous questions, yet he kept things moving along.
• Manna Cafe (Killarney): Each of us ordered a different coffee drink at breakfast here (which was ample and delicious), and to help us tell the difference, each came in a different type of glass with a unique design on the foam.
• Table 45 (Dublin): When we arrived fairly late in the evening, the manager warmly let us know that the kitchen was only open for 25 minutes but that we were welcome to sit down and order tapas (which we did).
• Sweet Salt (Dublin): When we showed up at this highly rated cafe for 6 coffee orders, multiple members of the team swiftly shifted into barista mode.
• Guinness Storehouse (Dublin): This is a superbly designed self-guided tour that consistently moves people from one area to the next (with the one exception at the end of the tour where the free pint of Guinness takes people so long to drink that the room is very, very crowded).
• Fish Shop (Dublin): We ended up here after searching for the best fish and chips in Dublin, and despite initially being told that we needed a reservation, the owner invited us back inside after seeing scrambling on our phones to find an alternative.
• Gamers World (Dublin): After hearing my American accent, the person working the register discounted the game I bought by 10% (not because I’m American; it’s something related to taxes and duties). Also, it was neat to see them carrying many Stonemaier games, for which I thanked them.
• Cafe Nero (Dublin): I ordered a ristretto without knowing what it was, and after seeing us puzzled over meager contents of the cup, the manager offered to give us any other drink. We assured him it was fine–I wanted to try something new, and now I know! (It’s a very condensed shot of espresso.)

Many of these experiences are small, but they can have a big impact on the overall experience. What’s a minor-yet-impactful positive customer service experience you had recently?

***

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.

I recently had an excellent, candid, meandering chat with Peter Vaughan (Cardboard Alchemy), facilitated by Will from the Hungry Gamer YouTube channel. Peter highlighted some really important reasons that publishers–even experienced publishers–consider crowdfunding, including a revelation about changes in distribution and localization.

I believe that crowdfunding remains an incredible tool for all types of publishers, especially newer creators, established publishers who are undergoing an important change, and publishers who want to offer super deluxe version priced beyond the limits of retailers. Here’s a quick checklist of considerations for new creators considering crowdfunding.

There isn’t just one way to serve customers, and I love seeing publishers trying and refining different methods to accomplish that goal, even if their methods are different than ours (we wait until our products are ready to ship before launching them on our webstore, like with the upcoming Finspan: Sharks & Reefs and Euphoria Essential, both on May 13).

Feel free to check out our 35-minute chat if this is a topic that interests you or that you’ve been debating. I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments!

***

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.