Preface: I am not talking about something fishy or fraudulent. Under normal circumstances, writing a review about ones own game is rightfully frowned upon. But I am not talking about a finished game anyway. This is about a mental excercise and design tool.

Imagine, you have an idea for a game. Maybe it is still a bit nebulous, maybe you have a few things decided. A setting premise, a core conflict, a rules detail about skill use or spells, a core mechanism. Enough to get you going and say, yes, this could have legs.

As a mental excersise, or to get yourself hyped up, write a review of that game.

• What does it look like when it is finished and out in the world?
• What would you like others to see in your game?
• What would you like others to praise about your game?
• How would you wish a reviewer would react to your game?

This text is for you only. It is not meant to be published - ever.

You can go crazy with this review. Write it in the style of your favourite magazine or website (Dicebreaker, RPGnet, White Dwarf). Or write different versions. By taking the stances of different audience's media you may learn a thing or two about your game.

Then, when you work on your design, check back occasionally to see if you are still following your vision, or if you stray from it and lose yourself in details.

Use this review as your beacon.

And if you find that your design strays from the course but gets better because of it - write a second review about your new direction! Imagine this as the second edition of the game. Describe, as a reviewer, which rules changed from the first iteration, and why. ("The players never liked fixed damage.")

Did anyone ever do such a thing?